DocOctober
DocOctober
About
- Username
- DocOctober
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Rebel_Raven said:
You're not entitled to the 4th kill.There's ways to stop hatch plays cold, like slugging the last 2, knowing where the hatch is and intercepting, and such.
The killer is more responsible for opening the hatch than the survivor.
All it takes is one DC from a Survive With Friends team and there's absolutely nothing the Killer can do about it.
The Survivor also isn't entitled to the Hatch escape.
-
@powerbats said:
@DocOctober said:
@Peanits said:
@DocOctober said:
That's not the problem. The problem are Survivors that insist on going through the Hatch and keep the Killer hostage.Mutual stubbornness is not holding the game hostage. Either side can just opt to take the loss and move onto the next game.
You won't change my opinion on that. The Survivor has other means to escape and end the trial at that point, the Killer does not. If the Survivor insists on going through the Hatch with the Killer inevitably losing if they do anything other than standing atop the Hatch, it is holding the game hostage in my opinion and I frankly don't care what the moderators think of it. I know that at least some of the devs share my views in this regard.
@azazer said:
Found hatch in barn, corner of the map.
Went to stand on top of farm equipment in the middle.
Survivor comes right to me thinking I'm camping the hatch.That's what I usually do as well, but in my recent case of Hatch stand-off, the Survivor knew exactly where the Hatch was as their SWF team mate disconnected after I downed them pretty much atop of it.
Oh yes blame it on the survivor and say they have other means like doing 1-4 gens, yeah that'll happen against a Billy/Nurse/Doctor/Spirit/Hag.
The only one holding the game hostage is the killer camping the hatch and that's a fact, you can go patrol, you know actually hunt for the survivor and not camp. You haven't earned that 4k no matter how much you whine about it.
The survivor has to actually find the hatch and actually make it in,, if you want that 4k then earn it by killing that survivor. If I get 3k i'll go patrol looking for that 4th person and quite often I'll give them the hatch if they played hard.
But if you're going to do a hatch standoff that's your own fault.
What exactly is there to patrol if the Survivor is RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME? As I pointed out, the Survivor knew about the Hatch's location. It was located in a jungle gym and the Survivor hid behind the wall when I downed their SWF team mate who then disconnected. Right as the Hatch opened, the Survivor came around the corner and the stand-off began.
There's nothing to patrol or hunt in that scenario. That's the same stupid response given to camping Killers in case of hook-swarming Survivors.
And you say that I'm not entitled to the fourth kill, but why is the Survivor somehow entitled to that Hatch escape? Huh?
Stop trying to make up scenarios you haven't witnessed.
-
@Peanits said:
@DocOctober said:
That's not the problem. The problem are Survivors that insist on going through the Hatch and keep the Killer hostage.Mutual stubbornness is not holding the game hostage. Either side can just opt to take the loss and move onto the next game.
You won't change my opinion on that. The Survivor has other means to escape and end the trial at that point, the Killer does not. If the Survivor insists on going through the Hatch with the Killer inevitably losing if they do anything other than standing atop the Hatch, it is holding the game hostage in my opinion and I frankly don't care what the moderators think of it. I know that at least some of the devs share my views in this regard.
@azazer said:
Found hatch in barn, corner of the map.
Went to stand on top of farm equipment in the middle.
Survivor comes right to me thinking I'm camping the hatch.That's what I usually do as well, but in my recent case of Hatch stand-off, the Survivor knew exactly where the Hatch was as their SWF team mate disconnected after I downed them pretty much atop of it.
-
Dreamnomad said:
@DocOctober said:
That's not the problem. The problem are Survivors that insist on going through the Hatch and keep the Killer hostage.Nobody but the killer can keep the killer hostage in a hatch stand off. All you have to do is hit the survivor to end the stand off. If anyone is keeping someone hostage, it is the killer. In response to the OP, the killer probably just went AFK. Working gens if the killer is literally standing on the hatch refusing to move is the right thing to do, but when you pop a gen there is always the chance that the killer will try and catch you before you can get the hatch.
Wrong. The Killer has one objective, to sacrifice the Survivor and in that situation only one way to achieve it. Giving the Hatch is not it.
The Survivor on the other hand has an alternative way to achieve their objective: repairing gens and leaving via the gates. If they don't do that and insist on getting the Hatch, they are holding the Killer hostage. -
@Diana_Alina said:
interesting. then manufacturers should fix this. anyway, I tried as a survivor and none of the team got the trophy. I tried as a killer and I took it, I tortured a lot because it was the last trophy to take the platinum trophy.As I said, it's been bugged for 2.5 years. You think they'll still fix it?
-
That's not the problem. The problem are Survivors that insist on going through the Hatch and keep the Killer hostage.
-
I'm sorry, but YOU getting it as the Killer is an immense bug.
The Achievement is for Survivors ONLY and can only be obtained by all 4 Survivors leaving the game through the Hatch within the timespan it is open (30 seconds). It's an Achievement that has been bugged since release.
-
@Peasant said:
@George_Soros said:
Peasant said:Just finished 1.0.2, I have -3 for survivors and +2 for killers. Survivors got: (Botany and healing nerf, sprint burst nerf, We'll make it nerf.) Killers got: (Stillness crows added, Spies in the Shadows buff.)
Not to be a downer, but whatever the final numbers are, they should be interpreted with keeping original state of balance in mind.
That said, please go on. Properly done Excel sheets are incredibly sexy.Yeah, I'm currently on Patch 1.0.5 and it's a slew of killer perk buffs and nerfs, can't wait to calculate this out!
Sounds like you're doing the exact same thing as OP: valuing quantity over quality, which is not how you go about these things. Please correct me if I'm wrong with that sentiment.
Also, I suggest that you don't go purely by Patch Notes. Patch Notes have left out multiple shadow changes, even a QA dev admitted that they are usually incomplete as they can't remember everything they change.
-
Oh almighty alchemist, please show me how you turn wooden pallets into steel bars.
-
With how tightly their roadmap is, Events are immensely stressful times for the devs.
-
Why is it a good idea depending on the circumstances?
If they are altruistic Survivors, it's basically a free win. Why should I go search for Survivors if I know that they'll come to hook anyways? Survivors are usually so fixated on hook rescues, that they often make a whole lot of stupid mistakes in the process, leading to hook grabs and slugs, winning me the game quite easily.
-
@ShyN3ko said:
I will explain this item for you,ok?
You go in a game with this key and after a few gens, just leave the game.
I understand the hatch.
I dont like the hatch, but i understand why its in the game.
BUT I dont understand this item.
The KEY is literally a legal ragequit.
This game gives you a ragequit item.
WHY?
Was the game designer ill or drunk?
A ragequit item shouldnt be in a game and if you ragequit you should be punishment.
Can someone explain me, why this item is in the game?You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means.
Ragequit is done by pressing ESCAPE, then clicking on Leave The Game.
-
@ChesterTheMolester said:
I like how fixes are included.
Clown was unintentionally nerfed during the vault changes but you let that out for your convenience, but then added the FIX as a buff to your list to skew data even further, if anything it was a temporary +1 for survivors.You did the same with the Huntress cancel, it was broken after Pigs release but you added it as a buff.
And thats just the first thing i noticed
This happens literally every single time Survivors try to claim that they got more nerfs than Killers. Those Survivor mains are dishonest, deceiving pitiful human beings, as the only way to get a list that fits their agenda is by editing the facts with a ######### ton of bias, as facts state that they are wrong with their premise from the very start.
As it stands, Killers got more nerfs both in quality and in quantity, if the list is done properly and without bias, something Survivor mains like Radiant can't do.
-
Fair enough, fair enoughWolf74 said:@DocOctober I know, I just keep talking about this for other people to read. Sometimes you have to argue with biased stubborn survivor mains, just for others to read, so that their crap doesn't go uncommented and other read take it for truth.
-
Save yourself the trouble, OP will simplyWolf74 said:I think we could go over the whole list in details and rip it apart.
Example: "Noed improved" , when it is a true quantitative view that would count as "0", because the lower tiers got the exposed effect, but lost speed improvement.
ignore any picking apart albeit stating so otherwise, just as they do in the same thread on the Steam Forums. -
Why don't you just ignore that biased Survivor main troll? The list is useless as quantitative changes are utterly meaningless.
Self-Care received several nerfs, considering direct and indirect ones, yet it is still the go-to meta Perk for Survivors.
Save The Best For Last got gutted in a single nerf and went from a meta to an unused Perk for well over a year until its recent buff made it valuable again.
According to OP's logic, Self-Care was nerfed harder as it received more nerfs, yet as we all know, that is not the case at all. It has been a meta Perk for 2.5 years now. -
@Dreamnomad said:
@Entità said:
@Dreamnomad Not more perks' tiers, but the same rarity system used for items, add-ons and offerings. Your perks shall remain of the upper tier, of course.That is exactly my point. The perks are separated according to rarity and then alphabetically. If some perks ended as ultra rare then that means once you reach the end game all your perks are separated into 3 different categories. Ultra rare, very rare, and rare. That means if I'm trying to find a perk I have to recall which rarity it is adding unnecessary time. It's already annoying trying to remember "Is bamboozle rare or very rare?"
Well guess what, that's how it used to be and it wasn't a hassle.
-
Since I unfortunately do know that movie, I don't even want to imagine the Perks. Yikes.
-
Only when you went to conventions around the globe where DbD had a booth.
-
What is this ridiculousness of a thread?
-
Not sure what you mean here exactly, but looping wasn't a thing back when the Nurse was released and 360s were very uncommon.DarkWo1f997 said:I mean, it’s long overdue. How is the killer supposed to be scary if he isn’t strong? You just have to hide. You need to learn to really utilize your hiding capability as a survivor with that third person view.
If you want ro blame anyone, blame the 360 loopers that are the sole reason the nurse was created, and also the reason for all the buffs. The game wasn’t designed with 360’s in mind, but the devs liked the strategy so much that they have been carefully tweaking the balance around 360’s and their potential to control the killer, so that it becomes a natural part of the game’s core mechanics. -
It wasn't Wolf not reading things properly, but you using the wrong terminology. High ranks are 5-1, low ranks are 20-15.powerbats said:@Wolf74 said:
@powerbats said:
The game is survivor sided except at high ranks where it's heavily killer sided to the point of being op yet killers don't complain about it.
lol
That one is the showstopper for me.^^
High ranks are killersided?? Plz tell me you made a mistake typing this.^^You apparently didn't read it well enough since as you've pointed out high ranks aka 15-20 are killer sided and you tell survivors to get to rank 1 where it's the opposite.
Whereas the most of the forum goers that're experienced, you included refer to ranks 1-5 aka red ranks as low ranks.
-
That's false, see my earlier comment or Orion's.Master said:@Slayer said:
People who calls for buffs and nerfs left and right should not be able to write at all. Like recent change for spirit . We get new killer and in 2 weeks or so she gets buffed / nerfed whatever like why really? Is 2 weeks enough to know how to play against / as some particular killer.She never got nerfed.
She was just designed as a horrible killer frmo the beginning (the nerf was a bugfix actually), so the devs buffed her now because noone plays her -
Yes, because as Orion pointed out already, they weren't buffs as such. The only actual "buffs" she got were a cool-down reduction to 15 seconds for her Powers (instead of the former 20 seconds) and the Prayer Beads Bracelet to eliminate all phasing sounds. Everything else was intended from the start. The sole reason it wasn't ready then was that the sound interactions with the Terror Radius turned out to be more complicated to program than the devs anticipated.
-
Afflictions do not stack. Period.HellDescent said:@ChesterTheMolester said:
HellDescent said:@ChesterTheMolester said:
Orion said:
16 m. 32 by default, -8 from M&A, -8 from the add-on.
What if you stack both calm addons?
It says they don't stack
Only the afflictions (the effects of madness) dont stack, the passive bonuses like TR changers, shock and radius madness increasers actually do stack, im just not sure if its additive or not, which is a gigantic difference.
That part always bothered me, since I was never 100% sure about tr stackable bonus they need to make it more clear. And they don't specify which addon afflictions are gonna be active if you use both. It would make sense to be a better one. Wish they'd give us actual numbers and see how they change when you equip certain addons.
The Terror Radius is not an affliction, hence why it stacks between Calm Add-ons.
The stronger affliction will always trump the weaker one.
-
@MuttonChops said:
MhhBurgers said:No ur just too bad to use pallets dude.
With nearly 2k hours that comment is laughable.
So you played almost 2000 hours and still can't drop a pallet at the right time?
Git gud.
-
It's Benedict's Journal, confirmed by the devs: all new Lore if not stated otherwise, is written down by Benedict.XxAtomicAlfiexX said:i doubt its Benindect because he doesn't write in his journal anymore.and the trapper mask isn't metal and he has a human face with little to no deformity.i think its a different killer who we haven't seen.the trapper might have come as a later experiment because of the descriptions of the Halloween skins list them in a sort of order of experimentation.
And the video is basically the Hallowed Blight Lore in movie form, it is the Trapper. -
The Perk is fine. It's a challenge Perk like No Mither.
-
@Johdude said:
@Mister_xD said:
killer attacks: the game marks an area of effect in front of the killer. if a survivors hitbox is within this area, the survivor will get hit.
with other words, you were in this marked area, so you were in range.And the area of effect is apparantly also behind him
No, it isn't. But Killers can turn during the lunge, you know.
-
There's some sense to why certain Perks have the adjectives and others have numbers. Take Brutal Strength and Predator for example. Brutal Strength stating that it breaks Pallets x% faster makes sense, you can visualise that in your head rather easily, since deducting a percentage from a time span is simple enough. Now imagine Predator having that. It saying that scratch marks spawn 20/30/40% closer together (not the actual numbers, just made rhem up), could you visualise that for yourself? Not really. Slightly/moderately/considerably closer together however makes more sense here as that is easier to visualise for yourself.
-
Sorry, but both those things seem rather obvious.
-
Easy, try to actually lose the Killer instead of being a noob and abusing loops.
-
@powerbats said:
@DocOctober said:
@powerbats said:
@DocOctober said:
@powerbats No, I wouldn't say that. Not in this case. There is no getting good against Decisive Strike. Unless you down a Survivor close to a Hook, there's no other option as taking the stun and losing your caught Survivor. It's a mechanic that should never have made it into the game. The Perk in its current form is broken. I'm still a proud never-user of DS, I consider it the worst crutch there is.I'm trying to point out to the op that there's things they can do, simply removing it because hey don't like dealing with it isn't a solution. Once they fix it to where it's simply a stun it won't be such a big issue but it they remove it might as well remove instant downs from killers.
Yet there isn't. There's nothing a Killer can do about Decisive Strike unless given very specific circumstances (proximity to a Hook).
Quite honestly, as far as I'm concerned, DS and NOED can be removed from the game. Both reward bad players for screwing up.
Well you can run Enduring and Iron Grasp which a lot of killers do especially at ranks 1-5. I do agree they could remove both along with Whispers hopefully so I can go back to being immersed and evading instead of having to try and endlessly loop.
I'm sorry, but do you consider those counters? If so, re-read the definition of said word.
Enduring doesn't prevent the stun from happening, neither does Iron Grasp. And really, leave Iron Grasp out of any discussion that doesn't at least involve its counterpart Boil Over. It only adds 1.92 seconds to the wiggle time on Tier III.
-
@powerbats said:
@DocOctober said:
@powerbats No, I wouldn't say that. Not in this case. There is no getting good against Decisive Strike. Unless you down a Survivor close to a Hook, there's no other option as taking the stun and losing your caught Survivor. It's a mechanic that should never have made it into the game. The Perk in its current form is broken. I'm still a proud never-user of DS, I consider it the worst crutch there is.I'm trying to point out to the op that there's things they can do, simply removing it because hey don't like dealing with it isn't a solution. Once they fix it to where it's simply a stun it won't be such a big issue but it they remove it might as well remove instant downs from killers.
Yet there isn't. There's nothing a Killer can do about Decisive Strike unless given very specific circumstances (proximity to a Hook).
Quite honestly, as far as I'm concerned, DS and NOED can be removed from the game. Both reward bad players for screwing up.
-
@powerbats No, I wouldn't say that. Not in this case. There is no getting good against Decisive Strike. Unless you down a Survivor close to a Hook, there's no other option as taking the stun and losing your caught Survivor. It's a mechanic that should never have made it into the game. The Perk in its current form is broken. I'm still a proud never-user of DS, I consider it the worst crutch there is.
-
I get 4 kills without being a dick
-
ceridwen309 said:
@lunarjenacide said:
Why are the spooky items so hard to get
Please can you make them appear more?I believe them to be "Artifact" quality. Which is the highest rarity. They should be available every year....but be very hard to stockpile.
They are of the Event Rarity. Artifacts are unique Streamer cosmetics. -
The game indeed takes different floors into account, but that doesn't count for hills or elevations, only actual floors of a building.
-
20? A Hook stage takes 60 seconds.
-
Any chance the early-development game mechanic of climbing might come back into the game?
-
Then it perfectly fits what this game is: an asymmetrical horror survival gameExciter said:@kisfenkin said:
@Exciter said:
I haven't had a single good game as survivor since the event started. It seems like there's a killer bias due to their event points coming from hooks, something killers do already, but survivors have to go out of their way and focus on an extra objective for nectar instead of it coming from generators, which makes more sense, no?
Plus I'm getting really annoyed at the little event window that comes up after every game after getting some nectar, and the post-game lobby seems to be a bit buggy now.I couldn't agree more. The killers will definitely have an easier time if even one of the survivors is focused on nectar. It is totally unfair the they get progress towards what they were already doing.
In my opinion, the flowers should have ONLY been on hooks. If survivors sabotaged a flowered hook they get their nectar, and actually gain something that would be at least slightly useful.
That's actually and interesting and way more fair concept, having to fight over nectar with the killers. Either way, this is a HUGE killer bias. Asymmetrical AF.
-
Bone Clapper makes it a global sound queue
-
@nolageek said:
@DocOctober said:
I put tons of my spare time voluntarily into keeping the Wiki up-to-date and accurate.
Regarding the wiki - I couldn't find a way to msg you directly. I'm confused about the wording of Teachable Perks. It seems like the wiki implies that teachables only have one Tier and cannot be tier'd up by other survivors. Is this true?
Yes, because that's not how those flipping teachables work. They are NOT Perks as such, it's clearly mentioned in the article. They are like keys and only unlock the ability for the unique perk to spawn in all bloodwebs.
-
In the second data-mined video, it is shown that the Trapper was the one who got shackled.
-
@xmenfanatic said:
@MichaelAMyers said:
@TheLegendDyl4n1 said:
@MichaelAMyers said:
@TheLegendDyl4n1 said:
@MichaelAMyers said:
@TheLegendDyl4n1 said:
i didnt say you had to leave i said you should since there is no reason for you to be here except to constantly tell me im wrong for wanting this so again why are you here whats the reason other than to bother me? just go away please.
- I do have a reason for being here and that's posting
- I never said you were wrong
- No one is bothering you and you playing the victim card because no one agrees with you? how old are you? 12? Like listen man I stated my opinion and clearly the majority agrees with me and even a user who is gay agreed they don't care.
a reason for being here is not to just post it states in the rules of the fourm you are not aloud to de-rail the post which you are by not even participating in the question i asked, also yes you said we shouldnt add a LGBTQ character since it isnt necessary. and yes you are bothering me and i am not playing the victim card since multiple people on here agreed with me and want this, i am 17, you can state your opinion all you want but you dont need to contantly post on this thread because of the sake of posting and the majority is not just agreeing with you its about 50/50 and not everyone has posted here. just because one gay person agreed with not adding this its probably because they dont like labels and i understand that but if your like me you take the label Gay and you make it you, it enpowers you and you say it with pride. if you dont say that your gay because you dont like labels then you probably arent sure that your gay or you went threw some kind of trauma that caused you not to want to label yourself. so again for like the 4th time just go, there is no reason for you to be here if your not going to participate in the thread and basically say no im not when i say you are. i say your bothering me and you sau no your not. i say you have no reason for posting here and you say your reason is to post. I say you stated that this is wrong and you say no you didnt.
You are the only one derailing it and I don't care for the rest of the things you said here now like I said no one really cares for a trivial concept such as "sexuality" for characters in such a video game if you care so much write a fanfic or something because I said "it doesn't really matter."
then if you dont care about it go away from my post theirs no reason for you to de-rail it any longer. and yes multiple people care about the concept of sexuality for characters in video games. look again i say he is de-railing it and he provides on proof and says i am. also i say there are people who care about a LGBTQ+ character being added and he says no one does. see guys? this is the exact definition of a internet troll. and i will just be igrnoring his posts for now on until they add the block feature to the fourms
YOU ARE THE ONE DERAILING IT! Stop quoting me back here! I'm not even trolling you just butthurt because everyone isn't agreeing with your "I need to force my sexuality to feel empowered!" Concept and yes block me! Jeeez for a 17 yr old you act like a 5 yr old.
this poster has plenty of people supporting their desire to talk about queer characters being in the game.
Since I knew that that statement is bullshit, I had a look at every single comment in this thread again and noted down if the people who posted them were pro OP, contra OP or either undecided or had an "off-topic" comment.
Excluding OP, there are only 4 people so far who support OP's request for an LGBTQ character to be added to the game.
9 people were undecided or didn't contribute to that question.
But a big fat majority of 15 people are against adding an LGBTQ character for the sake of having one. That's almost 4 times as many as are for adding one. Of at least 3 of those people, I know that they are gay or bisexual themselves.
Stop talking crap and don't call 4 people "plenty".
-
@ToolboxMotley said:
Speaking as a gay guy...You're being goddamn shallow. Quit begging for "representation" in the form of such a completely trivial character trait. Take pride in your personality, not your superfluous, immutable characteristics.
I'd much rather read about a character's chosen profession and last moments than who they prefer to bone. And most other people who have been raised to see themselves as a person rather than a checklist feel the same way.
Couldn't have said it better, that's exactly my opinion about any requests like what OP does. I don't want to be represented just for the sake of being represented. I'm proud of who I am and don't need video game characters that are LGBTQ in order to confirm that. A persons sexuality is pretty much the least relevant thing they could add to a character's bio in Dead by Daylight.
-
Before healing nerf:
12 seconds + 75 % = 21 seconds
After healing nerf:
16 seconds + 70 % = 27.2 seconds
6.2 seconds more than before the nerf. Wow!!! (sarcasm off) -
Seems like you guys are all newcomers, more or less.
Artifact is a very old rarity, it's a shade brighter than the Ultra Rare pink and is used for the Streamer exclusives (those that weren't in the Charity Case and the original versions of those that were). -
Bye, please never return unless you can be bothered to git gud first.
-
@xmenfanatic said:
@Dwight_Confusion said:
Talk about overthinking something.There's no place in any video game for something like that. It doesn't mean anything. It defies logic and nature.
It is someone's personal choice, and that is fine. It doesn't bother me... however, pushing that in a survival horror game would just be pushing an agenda... and personally would make lots of people angry.
They are doing things just fine now. No political agenda is being pushed... just normal story and normal fun stuff.
To make a character and them being gay? Why?
It doesn't add anything to anything at all. It is UNNECESSARY. We've got millennials trying to bait and ask things that make no sense.
I don't play a video game wondering is someone is straight or gay. Who cares? DbD has stayed clear of that. you millennials can think Nea is gay, or whoever else.
That's on you. Behaviour doesn't NEED to cater to the minority about a controversial topic. Some people don't like it.
I think being gay is wrong. I think it is a sin, and I think that it is a personal choice someone makes. That is fine. I have to hate against gays, but I also don't have to agree with it. That is my right.
Putting gay stuff in this game would ruin it. It isn't needed.
Leaving it as it is... as it has been for over 2 years is fine...
Changing things around or adding a new gay character doesn't do anything. It will just please a few millennials and piss off a lot of people like myself.
So before this gets twisted badly....
Being gay is okay. I don't agree with it, but do whatever you want people. Just don't bother me about it.
Having gay characters in media in which there's no history of anything gay... WRONG.
They've stayed away from that, smartly. It doesn't matter is Dwight was gay before he was killed... who cares man. What does that do? It doesn't do anything good.
You say who cares but then very clear state you don't want it because you care about not having a gay character in it. You say it's wrong and then later say it isn't. You claim its a choice, which it isn't, which shows you lack the knowledge to properly address the issue because that is ignorant as all get up.
No matter what action you chose to take, someone who is gay is gay, whether or not they embrace it.
It's not wrong to involve queer characters. How would making any of the characters gay ruin it? How? Give me a specific example.
It would hurt his heteronormative view of the world.