Dreamnomad
Dreamnomad
About
- Username
- Dreamnomad
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,633
- Last Active
Comments
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776240#Comment_3776240
It was probably more like
BHVR: "Great, glad we finally have a deal in place."
FNAF: "Cool, we want to announce it during our 10th anniversary."
BHVR: "Sure, that's fine."
I think you're way overthinking this. As much as you can say the hype will override Castlevania, this also has a lot of eyeballs looking at DbD who can say 'and, guess what we have coming up right now!'
And sure, the possibility that this could be leaked might be an influence, but I highly doubt that they learned a leak was going to happen and that perfectly lined up with the FNAF anniversary. FNAF announced at the end of July there was going to be a collab announcement on August 5th.
Ahh, I didn't know FNAF made an announcement of an upcoming announcement. That does tend to support your theory. But if all that is true then I have to seriously call into question BHVR's marketing strategy and leadership. That seems to be a horrible choice.
-
@BlackRabies said:
I say a bit of both. Being the owner of FNAF he's free to announce that there's a collab between FNAF and DBD, but he can't give even one detail about it since since it'll DBD related.
He's only free to make that announcement if it was either agreed to in their contract or there was no explicit agreement either way. One would think that there would be a NDA clause in the contract so BHVR would have more control over a situation that effects their company's bottom line. Making the announcement now vs making it in 8 months could make the difference in millions of dollars.
-
@DredgeyEdgey said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776240#Comment_3776240
Who knows. probably with thought or maybe he's just using this to get attention for the anniversary. Isint there a stream? Update it allready happened. 3 days ago it seems
Looking at the other thread talking about 25million views, it was Dead by Daylight that made that announcement. Did FNaF creator make an announcement prior to that?
-
@DredgeyEdgey said:
Or maybe because the creator wanted to reveal it now because th 10 anniversary is soon
So you think FNaF creator made the post with or without BHVR's consent?
-
Belongs in Feedback and Suggestions.
-
I really don't care for this either. It is counterintuitive and annoying.
-
I hadn't thought about the hackers but that is a good argument. Also, 20 dollars isn't much of a barrier. I'm sure there are sales offered regularly too. So I doubt money is a barrier keeping people from playing DBD.
-
BOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Sad day for DBD imho. But we'll just have to wait and see what it'll look like now. It's either that or quit. Those are the only 2 choices we have as a consumer at this point.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3773993#Comment_3773993
Personally I think the hatch should be removed all together. I don't mind too much because im happy with the 3k and don't mind slugging. But my issues with the hatch are
1. It encourages slugging which most people hate. Even if I down last survivor before they find the hatch, I tend to just slug them, look for the hatch to close for the extra BP then hook them.
2. In many of my games it's lead to a stand off where the last 2 survivors know they can't do the gens so don't even try and they both hide hoping the other player gets killed so the hatch opens.
3. It can lead to 1 survivor essentially sabotaging the team by avoiding gens, doing nothing the whole match or even deliberately trying to get teammates killed so hatch spawns. (I have seen this a few times, they usually go into the match with a key for this purpose)
4. Spawn locations are insane, they are no where near random enough. There has been times the hatch spawned at the killers feet and other times it spawns at the survivors feet.
From what I can see, the only advantage to the hatch is it gives a potential free pass to the last survivor which gives them incentive to come out of hiding at the end of the match.
That is a really poor understanding of what the hatch is about. There are killer players on these forums (and you are clearly one of them) that fail to understand that the hatch is a mechanic is in the game for the killer as much as the survivor. Its purpose is to end the game in a reasonable amount of time. You brush the subject when you mention "In many of my games it's lead to a stand off where the last 2 survivors know they can't do the gens so don't even try and they both hide hoping the other player gets killed so the hatch opens".
Now imagine a game where there is no hatch. When it becomes apparent to the survivors that winning by conventional means is impossible and working gens is pointless then what do you expect the players to do? When there are only 2 survivors left and there is more then one gen left to be completed then it is literally impossible for the survivors to escape by completing gens unless the killer goes AFK. Without the hatch, then the only thing the survivors have left to do is waste the killers time. And that is exactly what they do. If you think it sucks searching the map for 2 survivors that refuse to work gens then trust me when I say it is so much worse looking for one survivor that refuses to work a gen and there is no hatch to end the game.
-
This wasn't what I expected when I saw the thread title. Figured it would be another thread complaining about survivors ruining the match for everyone when they quit the game at the start of the match. Which is a fair complaint and one that should be addressed. Just make it so if you make more than one self unhook and/or miss more than one skill check while on the hook during the first 5 minutes of the match then it counts as a disconnect for penalty purposes.
But your complaint is at the end of the game when there are only 2 survivors left and you hook one of them that the player shouldn't be allowed to leave to give the last survivor a chance at the hatch? What is wrong with you? Does your ego need 4 kills so badly? If so then why wouldn't you just slug the second to last survivor? You already have the tools available. There is absolutely no valid reason to make a change based on your complaint.
-
It's interesting to me that guide has highest win rate. Kind of makes sense though. Finishing gens is how to win.
-
I wouldn't assume too much. Wait and see. That way you don't make an "ass out of u and me".
-
Anyone that can look at this game objectively knew that Weave Attunement (or possibly Franklins Demise) would be nerfed at some point. It is inherently unhealthy for the game for this combo to be meta.
-
@sinkra said:
I really don't understand, many players are having the most fun in years and the devs are going to take it away from us so soon without any plan to reimplement? The devs need to start listening to the players because we want 2v8 to STAY.
2 v 8 isn't ready to be a permanent mode yet. It still has quite a lot to be fleshed out not the least of which is how they are going to balance out the wait times. I'm personally tired of being shoe horned into playing survivor or waiting 10 minutes for a match. Neither of those are acceptable for me.
-
IMHO, Doctor Nemesis, Dredge, and Unknown don't need any tweaks. Like, maybe fix Nemesis zombies so they don't get stuck on terrain or at least have the ability to free themselves if they do get stuck. But outside of that, I don't think time should be wasted on these killers as they are fine as is.
-
@plattenpanzer said:
Increasing hook phase from 60 to 70 seconds. Thanks for punishing those who do not camp and tunnel. Amazing, really. It only makes me want to play only survivor or stop playing altogether.
I fail to understand your logic. If you aren't camping or tunneling then this will have no impact on you what-so-ever. Hell, increase it to a hundred seconds and it would have the same impact. The longer a survivor just sits around on a hook, the longer they aren't working generators. If you aren't camping then the survivors will likely unhook long before the time limit is up anyway. So what is the problem exactly?
-
Nope. This is a different game mode. Introducing perks would only complicate things unnecessarily.
-
@AchlysShadeslayer said:
Well, I can tell you having 3 m1 killers, 1 insanely difficult character, and then huntress. So unless you play huntress the 100,000 pallets make the game a nightmare
You're doing it wrong if you commit to chasing a decent player around pallets/windows. Wraith is all about hitting and running and finding people that are vulnerable. Trapper is about trapping and trying to funnel survivors into your traps. Hillbilly is about speed and positioning. You didn't mention nurse but obviously she ignores pallets too. Don't forget you have a team mate too. It is not optimal to stay in close proximity to the other killer but that doesn't mean you can't take advantage of the other killer. Pay attention to what the other killer is doing and take advantage of them when reasonable. Just don't over commit. With 8 survivors, there are probably 6 that can't run the killer worth a damn. Worry about the good survivors when the bad survivors are dead.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3770531#Comment_3770531
they have already seen impact of other modes like chaos shuffle. that is already tried and tested. maybe they could only allow certain amount of lobbies for this mode? i am not sure.
These two things are not comparable. Like at all. There is nothing chaos shuffle could teach them about 2v8.
-
I don't think a down should automatically send a survivor to the cage. I actually enjoy the act of stomping on survivors. But I do think survivors should be able to heal themselves back to an injured state to prevent slugging as a strategy.
-
If BHVR has any brains, in the future they will make it so that all of the event tomes can be completed as a survivor with like 2 being optional as a killer.
-
@Starrseed said:
I would play it more if there was a single killer I actually like to play as.
The problem is NOT a lack of killers. You not playing a killer is a good thing for the rest of us. So if you only want to play as killer but don't like 2v8, please, feel free to take the next couple weeks off.
-
I honestly think the game mode is more balanced that players give it credit for. I think survivors haven't really figured out their end of things but killers seem to have figured out that split pressure is the way to go.
-
I think it is a mistake to make this a permanent mode at this time. There is a huge disparity in number of players that want to be killer compared to survivor. It wouldn't be so bad if the damage was limited to 2v8. But to help incentivize players playing as survivor they have given a 400% BP bonus (which still apparently isn't enough). Now if you actually wanted to play survivor then which queue are you going to play in? The one with 4x rewards with honestly an easier chance to escape or regular mode with 0 bonus? Of course you choose 2v8. What happens to regular game mode then? Killers have excessively long wait times there too. Now maybe some of this problem would naturally resolve itself over time when the newness wears off. But even then, I don't think the game mode is fleshed out enough to be permanent. I think the smarter plan is to pull it out every 2 months and make some improvements and tweaks to it each time. Once it is polished enough and hopefully the new factor has worn off and players start to equalize then it can be permanent.
-
Anyone else have an idea for new class?
-
There isn't enough map variety in 2v8 as is. There aren't enough maps for one to be kill switched.
-
This is a pretty good argument for 2v8 not being a permanent mode.
-
From my experience, this game mode isn't nearly as survivor sided as people on the forums make it sound. Yeah, sure, if survivors are smart and focus more on gens and less on rescues/heals then they will finish the gens and escape. But survivors don't do that. They run around like chickens with their heads cut off. The game mode doesn't need extra gens to complete to be fair. Besides, if you haven't noticed, there is a huge queue time for killers as is. There is no reason to incentivize more players to play as killers. When you have a 400% bonus to BP for playing as survivor and you still don't have enough players wanting to play survivor then that should tell you something. So all the killers talking about this game mode being survivor sided and want to quit playing as killer are more than welcome to.
-
@YamamuraVideoRentals said:
I've seen survivor be at +400% for quite a long time now. Doesn't look like this is changing anytime soon.
This is reflective of a lot more demand for survivors that needs to be filled in. If you want very fast queues, play as survivor with your friend. Literally it will take like 5 seconds to load into a lobby, and probably 30 seconds tops after that for the game to start.
That's great advice… if you want to play as a survivor.
-
@Inosennatoki said:
Killer need more buff in this mode.
Killer queue times are insanely long. No need to incentivize players into playing as killer. So no. They do not need a buff at this point in time if for no other reason than that.
-
"it feel less like DBD and just a new game."
You say that like it's a bad thing. The entire point of alternate game modes is to make the game feel new and different again. If it isn't an experience you like and you prefer the base game then there is nothing wrong with that. Play the base game. It is still there. But trying to turn the new game mode into the old game mode with extra players isn't the answer.
-
@Pulsar said:
I don't think we should be using 2v8 to justify balance on anything in the base-game.
This should be the end of the thread right here. Nothing in 2v8 can be used to justify anything in regular games.
-
Lol, then do everyone a favor and don't play as a killer and get all those free wins as a survivor. The queue times for killers is the one that's backed up. If it is so easy to win as a survivor then go nuts.
-
Demogorgon will need something to make it so survivors can't break its portals. With that many survivors, there is no way you'll keep them intact.
I don't think Plague should ever be an option in 2v8.
-
If they really want to help with killer queue times in 2v8 they should give guaranteed 25k bloodpoints plus 400% BP earned during the trial. 400% of 5k still isn't worth the time as a survivor.
-
This isn't really surprising is it? Of course more players are going to want to play as killer compared to survivor in this game mode. You could give survivors a guaranteed 20k bloodpoints plus 400% bloodpoint bonus for bloodpoints earned during the match and you will still have a discrepancy.
-
Sorry OP, but it is not as simple as you make it sound. Whether or not a survivor should leave requires a more complex decision tree than just "Is door open? y/n if yes then leave". You need to factor in how many survivors are still in the trial. If one player is being chased and there are 2 or 3 other survivors still in the trial then the polite thing to do is to wait near the door and body block for the survivor if they make it that far. If the survivor gets hooked, then the remaining survivors should heal up and attempt a rescue. If there is one survivor being chased and only one other survivor left in the trial, then yes, the correct play is to leave so that survivor has a chance at finding the hatch since a one person rescue is pretty impossible if the killer stays near the hook.
-
I'm actually shocked that I've never run into this before. Lord knows this game inspires trolls to do troll things. And this is the trolliest thing of all.
-
This feels like a reply to another thread. Who are you even talking to?
-
@Shroompy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3764947#Comment_3764947
Ok but their powers are still very similar in chase which is where most of the fun is as its where both sides have the most interaction.
The other aspect of his power being tunnels are also fairly similar to other killers who teleport, such as Demo who arguably better since its less map dependant and doesnt rely on RNG.
He also has a direct counter to his power built into his kit which is much worst than Nemesis' since at least he has access to it at all times, and he can break pallets.
Now that being said I do think Xeno is cool, but its power is fairly underwhelming when you really think about it
I do take issue with you saying Xenomorphs tunnels are arguably worse than Demogorgon's portals. Yeah sure, Demogorgon can put his portal entrances wherever he wants. But that is exactly the problem with Demogorgon's portals. You have to waste a bunch of time running around the map and placing the portals which can be destroyed by survivors once used. Even if Xenomorphs tunnel entrances are pre-defined and RNG based, they will always be placed reasonably close to generators which is generally where you would want the portals to be if you were playing as Demogorgon anyway.
Plus Demogorgon's portal power has a cool down and once you commit to taking a portal, you are locked into that decision. Xenomorph has no cooldown on his tunnels and can freely change direction to a different tunnel exit if it so chooses. This doesn't even take into consideration that Demogorgon has a global audible when using his portals which ruins the element of surprise a lot of time whereas Xenomorph is undetectable while in its tunnels and can track survivors footsteps. When you take all of these factors into consideration, Xenomorph has the superior map traversal ability compared to Demogorgon. I don't think it's even close personally.
-
Doctor and Plague are my least favorite killers to play against. I just find both annoying and obnoxious.
-
Btw, just for reference, let's list all the similarities and differences between Nemesis and Xenomorph.
Similarities:
Close to mid range attack that can hit over pallets, vault locations and short objects.
Licensed killers.
Differences:
Xenomorphs power can be disabled by turrets placed by survivors. N/A to Nemesis.
When Xenomorph's power is active, Xenomorph has a reduced terror radius. N/A to Nemesis.
Xenomorph can travel through a pre-built tunnel system. N/A to Nemesis.
Any access point can be traveled to through any other access point. N/A to Nemesis.
Xenomorph has full control while in the tunnel system and can change course at will. N/A to Nemesis.
Xenomorph has no terror radius while in the tunnels. N/A to Nemesis.
Xenomorph can sense survivors running nearby while in tunnels. N/A to Nemesis.
Nemesis's power is always active but starts out weak and progressively gets stronger as he successfully hits targets. N/A to Xenomorph.
Nemesis's power can break pallets or breakable walls once it hits stage 2. Xenomorph's power can never break objects.
Nemesis's power has extended range once it hits stage 3. Xenomorph's power has fixed range while active.
When Nemesis hits a survivor with his power, it infects survivors. Infected survivors will take damage from future hits with his power and be covered with blue substance and cough loudly making them easier to track. N/A to Xenomorph.
Nemesis auto generates zombies that patrol the map and will chase and hit survivors. N/A to Xenomorph.
Nemesis can gain knowledge on survivor's positions by observing zombie's auras. N/A to Xenomorph.
When you break it down, these two killers have far more differences than they do similarities. It is disingenuous to dismiss Xenomorph as "bad Nemesis".
-
If you like Nemesis then play Nemesis. When Xenomorph was announced, I remember some people describing Xenomorph as "What if Nemesis and Demogorgon had a baby?". While I don't think that is completely fair or accurate, my response even if it was would be "Is that a bad thing?". If Nemesis lost the zombies and got Demogorgon's tunnels, that sounds pretty fun to me.
Saying Xenomorph is an off brand Nemesis is kind of like saying Trickster is an off brand Huntress. Sure, there are similarities. But there are plenty of differences too. And it's okay if you prefer one over the other. That's kind of the point. When there are as many killers in the game as their currently are, there will naturally be similarities between some of them. Personally, I'm impressed that we have the variety of killers that we do.
-
@Jay_Whyask said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3763255#Comment_3763255
"this sounds pretty ridiculous, given that there are literally no map resources for the killer to 'use up' anymore."
There was one hook I could use at main building, the fact it regens doesn't matter when the survivors can break it during my pickup animation.
"hooks are now broken permanently the first time they're used"
Works for me, at least there will be hooks I can use. Would the hooks be broken permanently if they got sabo'd?
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3763312#Comment_3763312
My complaint literally is "hooks are too spread out" and "pallets & windows are not spread out at all".
Spread the hooks the same way pallets & windows are.
Read the title of your thread. It isn't "hooks are too spread out". You are making a crazy comparison between hooks and pallets. The two have nothing to do with each other. You are only weakening your argument. If your goal is to reduce hook distances then you are failing to achieve your objective.
-
This is an ill conceived notion. These are two separate topics. I shouldn't have to say this but hooks aren't pallets. They are not equivalent objects and should not be viewed as such. If your argument was simply, "hooks are too spread out". Then I might be inclined to agree with you. At the very least on certain maps it really can be an issue. The Game map in particular has been a problem for me in the past. But it would be absolutely absurd for there to be an equal number of hooks as there are pallets on that map.
-
I was thinking about this recently on the topic of 2v8 game mode. After watching the devs vs fog whisperer matches, it seems apparent that the gens pop really fast and most survivors will escape. I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing in and of itself. But I do think it might be healthy for the killers to have tools to slow the game down just a little. While thinking about that, the idea occurred to me that killers in this game mode should have some kind of gen slow down based on the number of living survivors.
I don't hate the idea of applying something like this to generator perks on the live format either. Instead of maybe an all or nothing approach, what if gen related perks were 50% less effective for each survivor killed? That way killer perks aren't completely useless after the first kill but it does ease the pressure on remaining survivors somewhat. I do agree though, when there are only 2 survivors left then the killer doesn't need any gen perks. The game is basically over at that point anyway. I would even go so far as to say that when there are only 2 survivors left, they should get an innate bonus to gen repair speed.
-
I think some killers need to shift their expectations. This game mode is not meant to be a brutal murderfest where you grind 8 survivors to dust. It's meant to be more of a fun game mode. If 2 killers team up on a single survivor then chases should be extremely short. The game is not built or balanced around 2 killers chasing one survivor. The survivor has zero chance. As such, if this game mode is going to be successful then the experience needs to be fun for survivors too. Otherwise killer queue times will be abysmally long.
With all of that said, this is not going to be the final iteration of 2v8. Consider the first experience as a 'beta' or 'alpha' version. If the balance is too broken one way or the other then things can change in future versions. The gen speed might just be too fast. I think there are better solutions then adding more gens that need to be completed. For instance, what if all gens lost a small amount of progress whenever killers send a survivor to a cage? Or perhaps, killers could gain "charges" whenever they send a survivor to a cage and when the killer kicks a gen the killer spends all charges to do damage to the generator?
-
Some quick math tells us that 5.4% of traps placed on survivors result in a kill. I find that interesting and an accurate reflection of my matches.
-
You say that like it's a bad thing. This isn't meant to be a super competitive game mode. If 2 killers are chasing the same survivor then the chase should last more than 10 seconds. With no real counter play for survivors in a chase, this game mode would be dead on arrival if survivors didn't have other advantages. The whole cage system is a tie in terms of advantages to both sides. Killers have no travel time to hooks and survivors can not rescue downed survivors. Survivors have easy rescues and no camping.
Gen completion time might be an issue but bear in mind this is the first iteration. There will no doubt be some changes. I think it would be a good idea if gens lose .5% progress for each living survivor when a survivor is sent to a cage. The numbers might need tweaked but considering how fast survivors should be getting downed, 4% lost progress per gen seems a reasonable amount to extend the game length a little while keeping the focus on killers chasing and downing survivors.
-
As someone who enjoys Myers, I disagree. I wouldn't mind being slowed less, but the whole point of "stalking" something is to take your time and observes its behavior. You can't run and stalk something at the same time. It makes about as much sense as sleeping while you run. About my only real beef with Myers is having a stalk limit. I think the amount of stalk you have on a survivor should slowly reset over time. That's all Michael needs imho.