Eelanos
Eelanos
About
- Username
- Eelanos
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,939
- Last Active
Comments
-
@ACleverName4Me said:
So the devs said when reworking dead hard that they saw how it was being used as a third health state and they didn't want that. So they made it to where if they got hit they get... deep wound...a third health state.
This perk is in every lobby, every game and it's still annoying. Why make dead hard be a third health state? Seriously... dead hard needs to go under the knife to make it as pointless as new hex: ruin. Yeah I'm serious.
This perk is still making matches frustrating because I'm still having to wait it out, getting constantly body blocked (even when I'm not tunneling) and the ones who run it thinking they are gods should actually get their heads checked. 2 hits per survior is a fair game make that 3 though? Makes the game a headache and a chore.
The two main complaints people had with Dead Hard was the perk was dumb easy to use and that it was being used for distance which was against what the perk was meant to do.
They addressed both of those with the rework. It is literally a 0.5 second extra health state. If you're eating it, you're getting outplayed.
-
· DS stun lasts 5 seconds and the perk can activate once per hook state. It deactivates in the end game.
· DS stun lasts 3 seconds and the perk can only activate once per match. It doesn't deactivate in the end game.
Personally, I think these are the easiest ways to buff it just a tad and still make it fair. I don't understand why people want it deactivated in the end game in its current state and compare it to Off The Record. Off The Record has way more value throughout the game, which is why I understand the perk deactivating in the end game, but DS is a single use perk with a time limit after the conditions are met. Deactivating it in the end game when it's at its most valuable seems counter intuitive to me, and very unfair.
@dannyfrog87 said:
play killer and say that tunneling isnt viable or needed. also ds punished the killer for doing their job. ds basically gave survivors a free escape with no counter its why it got changed so no.
Tunneling is viable, and it's actually ridiculously effective, but it isn't needed. Also, if DS ever procced, the killer made a mistake, as it's essentially one to four less perks on the survivor team if the killer doesn't tunnel. The killer greeded an early kill and got hit with an anti-tunnel perk. That is the killer's fault.
People keep saying stuff like "Nooo, but the game should reward the killer for spreading out hooks, but as it is right now the most effective strategy is tunneling someone out of the match early!". DS was the perk that disuaded killers from tunneling. It isn't a baked in mechanic, but its existence when it's threatening did more than enough for killers to second guess themselves whenever they thought about tunneling, because if you didn't tunnel, you essentially removed every DS slot from the players' loadouts. That was the reward.
If people want the perk disabled in the end game, the perk has to be threatening throughout the match. Otherwise, you can't complain if a survivor held onto the perk all the way to the end game and made use of it the one time that little 3 second stun had any value, because as it currently stands, a one use 3 second stun barely has any value. You're not getting away from the killer, and you're not surviving off of that. At best, you can buy time for your team mates by delaying your death, but it's not enough of a deterrent for killers not to tunnel.
And I've experienced this both ways. I no longer use it as survivor because it does nothing for me, and as a killer I just sigh and go through a 10 seconds extension before downing the poor sod that decided that that was a good perk to carry.
-
It does f* all nothing against facecamping bubba which is the one thing people wanted to shut down. He just vroom vrooms you the moment you get close enough to use reassurance.
People were like "This perk is so busted! It essentially negates any pressure from the killer! You can't do anything to counter it! It will make the EGC last 6 hours and 35 minutes if all survivors have it! Trust me, I did the math! The game is doomed!" so they nerfed it.
I have yet to see any value from reassurance. Whenever someone uses it, it's usually when they're right next to the hook and they immediately unhook anyways because the killer is not camping, so it's essentially making players run with one less perk for normal matches, which are, like, 80% of them. It's extremely situational. And even then, it's not that good in the situations where you're supposed to get the most value due to how close you have to be to proc it.
I did, however, notice a sharp drop on face camping the first couple of weeks after being released.
-
@Springey said:
Mori cosmetics would give killers advantages if they happen to be shorter, or disadvantages when they are longer.
With the finisher mori, they can add mori customization with no problem since it can be as long as they want them to be without the problem above.
And talking about the mori changes, I think it would have been cool if they added mini-moris, that all have the same length, to all killers, which then are used for perks like Devour Hope instead of changing it to an instant hook sacrifice for example.
To be fair, survivor cosmetics and some killer cosmetics also give some advantage or straight up are a hindrance. There's a massive difference between a survivor dressed in dark clothes trying to hide and a neon pink survivor trying to do the same. There's tons of memes about this.
People often do not care about taking a small disadvantage if they're looking good, and people that want to min-max will still ignore any cosmetic that would give any sort of disadvantage, just like right now some people avoid survivors and killers that would reduce their win rate even by a 0.1% screaming "Trash character! Trash perk! Literally a newbie trap! Rework! Rework!"
I'm 100% sure there would be entire guides on how to win in 2 minutes with X perk, Y cosmetic and Z mori and people would still buy the ######### out of cosmetic moris that are ridiculously over the top and take 5 seconds longer than the standard mori.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3222981#Comment_3222981
Not only are killrates not possible to accurately track in this game (due to a variety of reasons,) they are going to vary between skill levels, as others have mentioned. Below a certain MMR the stats might as well not even be tracked, because how to kill is simply more self evident than how to escape. "do gens" is obvious, but being efficient at doing gens apparently takes some people thousands of hours before it clicks somehow, which is why there is such a massive kill disparity across skill levels.
Even if you ignored all of that, you would want more than 50% because you would want more 4ks than 4e's, since the latter is the outcome of least interaction. A 4E can have anywhere from 0-8 hooks, and yet the killer did not secure a single kill within those interactions, making their impact very minimal, comparatively a 4K means that 12 hook states had to be achieved, with 4-12 hooks having been secured and pressure created between the two sides at the very minimum.
Lastly the 1 has to work a lot harder than the 4. Individual input is considerably higher, and there are no fallback teammates to rely on to carry you. There is a tremendous amount of metadata that either side can keep track of, but for killers it is much more mandatory to do so by comparison. The game purposely obfuscates a lot of key details that makes life harder, and they get considerably less "free" information (not knowing how many stacks your power has on someone vs being told exactly what hex you're affected with the second it activates, for example.) Between those three factors the kill rate is supposed to be higher than 50% by design because that is how asymmetrical balance works.
4 escapes being the "outcome of least interaction" is kind of a lie, and that has been the basis for a lot of arguments against camping. You can get 6 hook states (2 kills, not spread out) and enter a tie with very minimal interaction, yet you can lose a match where you've tried to apply pressure and managed to spread all 8 hook states.
Killers having less information than survivors isn't meant to make killers work harder, but it's actually a side effect of being the power role. It's the entire reason why survivors play on third person while killers play on first person. For the sake of fairness, you cannot ask to be the power role and expect the same treatment as the team at a disadvantage.
4Ks and 4Es should be around equally as uncommon. An average killer should be able to get around 2 kills per match, and an average survivor should have roughly a 50% escape rate. Lowest and highest ranks should never go much further than a 45%~55% kill or escape rate. They will naturally have an imbalance in the extremes, but that should be what needs to be rebalanced to be kept in line to the 50%. Every single game does this, where the balancing adresses both ends of the player skill spectrum.
This is also the reason why some people advocate for things like base kit kindred. To push up the win rate of the lower end. In theory, giving the lower end (mostly solo-q) the same tools SWFs have should close the gap and make balancing easier. If doing this decreases the kill rate, follow-up buffs for killer should come into play.
Asking, like some people in previous comments (this part is mostly for those), to not balance for the 50% because "well, but what if high level killer is like 30% kill rate??? do you want to nerf them???" is like saying Sadako doesn't need any changes because Nurse and Blight exist. If there are outliers, you rebalance them to be put back in line. Saying "No, because what about high/low rank" is the lazy way out.
-
Because oh look it's Legion again. Oh? Ah, he bounced off 3 people and managed to down me. And now there's 3 people self-caring on the corner of the map at 5 gens. Oh, well, better luck in the next one.
-
@Shroompy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3222716#Comment_3222716
cant do anything against them eh?
I think thats more of a skill issue tbh
Do people purposefully ignore the issue here or are they genuinelly dense.
Losing because you lack skill isn't the problem. The other team using every tool in their arsenal to get on your nerves so it's easier to win is the problem.
I'm all for losing matches if we all have a pleasant experience, but if people turbo-flashlight my ass or teabag me to annoy me because that's their concept of "fun", that's where I draw the line.
I've won matches against teams like those and still I find them the worst experiences I've had in the game. If I could exchange a 20% win rate for a life not having to face asshats, I'd take it on a heartbeat.
But then you say you want ######### banned and of course they come out of their holes like cockroaches and immediately go like "I think you're taking the game too seriously lol". No, man, I just started the game to have fun and someone decided to bring psychological warfare as if their entire worth as a human depended on winning that match.
-
When I get tired of getting spawned in front of the killer, left to die on the hook or I had an awful streak of team mates, I run Sole Survivor, Lightweight, Distortion and Calm Spirit (yes, I know people hate it, but it helps a lot preventing any value from scream perks like Iron Maiden and entirely counters the Doctor's power)
If you see me running this, I'm sorry but I'm tilted off the face of Earth. I will try to be a proper team mate, but if I see you doing stupid 💩 like the team mates in my last 10 matches, you're on your own.
-
@Chocolate_Cosmos said:
Because Its 1vs4? It's not 1v1.
Even if it was 1vs100, if a single character is able to kill 50 out of the 100 players, that's already the power role, as a single individual is able to take down 50 of the teamed up characters.
Heck, even if the single character has enough power to kill only 10 out of the 100 other players it would be a power role, but it wouldn't be balanced. It would be heavily skewed towards the team rather than the single player.
Just because the game is asymetrical it doesn't mean you have to ignore the 50% win rate rule, otherwise it's imbalanced.
-
@DemonDaddy said:
"Boring" describes the survivors responses more than the killer's actions. Learn to counterplay or abandon teammates and move on.
Yeah. The most effective counterplay would be to just all agree to suicide on hook and beef up camper kill rates to over 90% and hope to God BHVR notices. It's, essentially, the most optimal strategy that takes 0 consideration for the opposing side's fun.
Funny, fighting fire with fire.
-
@foxsansbox said:
Looked fine to me. Does the killer need to be riding you like a prize-pony before he's allowed to hit you?
There's no need to be like that. There's clarity solutions that could solve this issue without any buffs or nerfs, like slightly changing the animation to make the fist move further forward to reduce these... probably laggy hits looking like they were dealt straight from a connection from Saturn.
After all, decieving animations lying about the hitbox size is a legit complain.
-
Going against him is usually fun, but I've already encountered a couple of Dredges trying their best to make games insufferable.
For the most part, Dredge is cool. The Nightfall thing is disorienting, but I mean this in a good way. In a "I'm uncomfortable I don't know what's going on" kinda way. A little less happy about the incredibly loud BAOWN sounds when I'm playing in the middle of the night. Up there with survivor screams on hook when we talk about sounds I specifically have to change the volume for when I'm staying up late (I can't use headphones due to health issues)
I can't talk about how it feels to play as because I still haven't unlocked him.
-
@Rizzo said:
No, it applies to those characters that satisfied the requirements when the patch 6.1.0 was released.
So this is for dumb people like me who didn't quite understand how the system worked and ended up having a truckload of 50s unprestiged and then realized how majorly they messed up.
This is kinda a blessing and a curse, to be honest. A bunch of my characters will get free P3s, but then again, some will get some excess levels that I wish I gave to other characters.
Ah, well. At least I won't need to put any more BPs on bubba 😄
-
The single thing people were angry about old dead hard was the fact that the killer couldn't do anything to prevent players from doing their ridiculous two-steps-faster dash that could grant them enough distance to extend the chase for a while longer by reaching a far away palet or window. Every single comment, and I mean *every single one* I read was about how broken it was that you could discount-sprint burst mid chase, a.k.a "dead hard for distance" and that's what the rework was set to fix.
Disabling the perk or any other normal gameplay interactions like dropping pallets every time the user is close to something that could further extend the chase is about as stupid as disabling a one-time use perk like Decisive Strike in the end game (which is still probably one of the most stupid decisions they've made and I'm still baffled it made it to the live servers), because it's not about being "fair", you just don't like losing.
Besides, something isn't more or less skillful just because you say so. Old DH could freely be used to extend the chase at any point, which requires less skill. New DH has a tiny 0.5 window of effect where it does anything and can be wasted, it requires more skill to effectively use.
The fact that the timing on when to use it could potentially cause a lose-lose scenario to the killer only makes the play more skillful, and still requires a sprinkle of luck and some game knowledge to correctly lead the killer to the pallet and land exactly to the right spot to force the lose-lose situation. Arrive too early and you may lose distance trying to force the situation. Arrive too late and you just used DH normally and the killer can essentially wait it out.
So, what you're talking about is a very specific situation that, if a player has managed to successfully execute, requires more skill than any other use old dead hard could have had.
-
@Nihlus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3214045#Comment_3214045
I ask "for what?" You cannot sell this collection. At some point, you will even lose access to it. The grind tricks you into feeling like you *need* to keep playing to reach the next milestone. I myself have only about 10 survivors left to take from P1-P3.
But the actual gameplay? Cancer. Just horrible cancer. Every game now is just the most sweaty, awful killers acting as toxic as they possibly can. I can't even play three games in a row without logging back out, irritated by how many killers abuse every cheap, easy tactic to get their kills asap, regardless of whether or not it ends with everyone sub 10k bp.
Every patch makes this game worse and it's been this way for years now. They keep trying to make it more and more "competitive", but it has not, will not, and cannot ever be fair enough to be competitive. There's way too much RNG. The variety in maps, tile placement, add-on strength, perk strength, killer chose , it's all just too much to ever make the idea of a "fair" match possible. People say GG at the end, but it's almost never a GG. It's almost always a blowout in one direction or the other.
It's a wacky party game and they should learn back into that. That's what made it fun. There were a dozen things or more utterly broken on either side and everyone just accepted it. Yeah, you had your three iri hatchets, but after you got two, the three gens we managed let us pop the hatch and peace out. The BS was everywhere. Have the crazy clown guy in his elephant mascot costume chase a Dwight elf around the wacky circus with the demon horse. Let it make no sense again.
To be fair, you can say that about every single game in existence. The grind rewards are only as valuable as you percieve them.
You may have had fun in the past and considered these rewards proper goals to supplement the core gameplay, but if you feel the gameplay is now awful the value of said rewards get lowered dramatically.
No one really plays for the rewards themselves. People play until they stop having fun, and whether we like it or not, a lot of us have a frustration threshold that keeps us here. For now.
I personally have started playing way less because the game is starting to be more frustrating than I can tolerate, but a single good update could easily make me go back to playing daily.
-
It's kinda like playing League Of Legends. You know the game is essentially fun, so you play and play and play until you stop getting matched with a 5000 hour player in a smurf or the game stops having massive matchmaking brainfarts, trying to find that one golden match that is a fun back-and-forth to the point that the result doesn't really matter because the match was gratifying and no one in the match was a massive asshat using frustration as a weapon to win.
And then when you're just about to quit, you finally find that match and think "... You know what? I think I could go for another one like that one.". And so the cycle continues.
-
The match would have been 2 minutes long if she hooked someone instead of greeding the 4th down and the survivors are the ones getting blamed for "bullying" her and not trying to close the match? What kind of backwards logic is that?
She permanently had 3 on the floor and slugged from first second in a situation she clearly didn't need to. Survivors have 3 hook states and she's trying to skip all of them at once.
She won playing like that and people are still defending that this change is "too much" and survivors are "too strong" when this change was introduced to prevent this same scenario and still fails at it.