ElusivePukka
ElusivePukka
About
- Username
- ElusivePukka
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@fogdonkey said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573564#Comment_2573564
Ponzi scheme is:
Invest in my company and then I will give you profit. But the profit actually does not come from company business but from new investors.
Bitcoin is not really that.
There are many things that don't have real value and their value comes only from what people are willing to pay for it. E.g. paintings.
All crypto is exactly that description of a ponzi scheme. "Invest in [cryptocurrency of choice] for a chance at some big dividends! Ignore that the profit only comes from market interest (and thus new investors) and has no tangible backing beyond that promise" - that part about no tangible backing, by the way, being an intrinsic selling point to the rubes who believe in blockchain.
-
@fogdonkey said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573443#Comment_2573443
You say that it is a scam, because it can be mass produced. It would be a scam if you didn't know about it and someone would sell you while claiming the opposite.
Btw I guess even if a lot of NFTs can be created for the same stuff, most likely the first one will have the value for people. But I am not an expert on this.
Note: I would also not buy NFTs, I am not interested in them.
Crypto, and by proxy NFTs, are a ponzi scheme. They only have value if there's someone to sell to, and they're not goods which accrue real value. The mass production is not the true issue from an economic standpoint - it's the intrinsic volatility of unbacked intangibiles. However, the ecological impact of a single Bitcoin is a cost, and one we as a community ought to be against.
-
@kate_best_girl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573494#Comment_2573494
Go educate yourself on cars, clothes, electronics in general etc etc. I don’t care about ethereum ms thang
Then you don't care about the mountain of evidence that you're provably, laughably wrong. An allergy to education isn't a good look, kiddo.
-
@Exxodus21 said:
NFT's or some version of them are the future. The technology will rapidly improve. Etherium is supposed to be switching to something greener. And other blockchain tech is actually carbon negative.
NFTs and all crypto are just the future of ponzi schemes, the technology will likely improve, ethereum is switching to something greener (meaning each unite will be 98% of the current carbon output), and no - there's no current blockchain which is truly carbon negative.
Buzzwords, promises, and projections don't change a current reality.
-
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573384#Comment_2573384
You're honestly trying to suggest that the energy consumption of 1 NFT transaction is greater than the total energy consumption of the entire mobile phone industry?
While technically no, 1 NFT being created is roughly equivalent to 500 miles of diesel smog, sans transactions and storage, at minimum. The NFT industry as a whole has eclipsed that of contemporary automotives in equivalent timeframes by orders of magnitude.
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573410#Comment_2573410
You mean the asinine question that was irrelevant to the discussion?
Honestly you're not arguing on good faith here and it's getting a bit tedious repeating myself so I'm going to bow out. Feel free to bring me back in if you've anything new to add.
Nothing of value was added by your irrelevant and ignorant commentary anyway. Come back only when you're willing to present anything in good faith and appreciable understanding, which have been represented in exactly zero of your responses.
-
@fogdonkey said:
I am just wondering why I didn't see such an outrage when the boss of a certain electric car company was promoting cryptocurrencies. Maybe I just didn't read the correct forums. Anyway... the car sales didn't drop.
Musk has pretty dedicated 'hate clubs' - you gave your own answer there. Tesla stock, though, provably dips most times Elon talks crypto.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2573000#Comment_2573000
"Guaranteed" on all four survivors is irrelevant when the odds of that happening are insignificantly small. Even assuming all four survivors start right next to a box, which by itself isn't likely, and assuming all four are uninterrupted for 12 seconds while opening that first box, which again isn't likely, the odds of all four getting their trap off on that first try is only 1 in 256.
Assuming that you're only getting the bare theoretical minimum amount is folly. You're not. Whether you accept the math or not is up to you, it doesn't change the numbers.
That's a lot of numbers to say you didn't read what I'm saying and prefer your narrative to good faith argumentation.
-
"We live in a society you think should improve, yet you participate in" just isn't the galaxy-brain take people here think it is.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2572922#Comment_2572922
"Guaranteed" isn't as relevant as "average". You're talking about four different survivors, it's extremely unlikely that literally all four of them will find a different box within 2-3 seconds of the game starting and all use them for 12 seconds to remove their trap on the first try. It's even extremely unlikely that all four would do gens for a bit and each, when they chose, get off their gen, go to a box in 2-3 seconds, and use that box for 12 seconds to remove their trap on the first try.
12 seconds per player is a woefully unrealistic underestimate of how much time the perk actually forces survivors to spend removing the traps.
'Guaranteed' is all you're absolutely going to get, whether you want to acknowledge that or not. The average will be affected by a number of factors, up to and including the known disrespect toward RBTs as a threat by a large proportion of the playerbase. In real play, sure, there's the potential for even up to a few minutes worth of slowdown: but at no point is the Pig in true control of that.
Unreliable slowdown is just that - unreliable. Plenty of ifs, whens, mights, coulds, but nothing is guaranteed except that 15 second window - and 'considerably' good slowdown isn't good enough lingo these days. Whether you want to engage honestly with the reality of that is on you.
-
The dishonesty of this take is hilarious.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2572085#Comment_2572085
"15 seconds" is a gross underestimate. It takes a minimum of 12 seconds for a survivor to use a single box, and it will take them a minimum of 3-8 seconds to find a first box at the start of the match, so absolute worst case a survivor will spend a bare minimum of around 15-20 seconds getting off their trap at the start of the match assuming they succeed on the first attempt. Of course the chances of success are only 1 in 4, so in reality the average time wasted getting the trap off per survivor is about 43 seconds per survivor (ie. 2.5 * 17.5 each).
I don't have an opinion on whether 43 second slowdown per survivor at the start of the match is good or bad, but either way it's definitely more than "15 seconds".
15 seconds of guaranteed slowdown is what's supported by your own maths, per RBT. Anything else, including the RNG of second, third, or forth boxes, is not 'guaranteed' - unreliable numbers for an inconsistent power.
-
Anyone who says this isn't a nerf doesn't play Pig to a significant degree, and anyone saying "it's like a Pig-exclusive Corrupt" has no idea how survivors or RBTs behave. A trap is around 15 seconds (divided among 4 survivors) of guaranteed slowdown, and often not significantly more. That's one reason you want to spread them out as the game progresses - multiple survivors not on gens is nice, multiple survivors working on removing that slowdown at the same time is not as nice.
-
@Underdawg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571703#Comment_2571703
sigh
You strike me as a fairly intelligent individual. I get the feeling, however, that without a representative from BHVR present you want to paint me as some BHVR shill to have someone to be the antagonist in your verbal sparring session. 😐️
"While I'm sure some people are acting surprised, I'm not, and most people here aren't. BHVR is a pretty scummy company that operates with no real competition in their niche. Pretending that 'people are just in their feelings about this' is textbook disingenuous projection."
You are misquoting me. I don't know if it's intentional or not, so I'm not going to assume either way. I'm not pretending people are in their feelings, people ARE in their feelings. They FEEL outraged. They FEEL disappointed. You said BHVR is a pretty scummy company, is this something you already knew from before? Or is this something you are just now realizing due to this whole NFT ordeal?
To be absolutely clear, the 'in their feelings' phrase came about from my personal observation that a lot of the outrage seems to be coming from people who made assumptions about two tweets - and when their own personal assumptions were proven incorrect (or incomplete) decided to act as if they were the victims of some Machiavellian lie.
Recently there’s been some talk about NFTs, so we wanted to clear some things up: When we work with our licensing partners, we provide them with in-game models as well as Chapter keys. They are free to use these however they see fit as the rightful owners of these characters.
To be very clear: There is no exclusive in-game content linked to these models when they are distributed outside of the game in any way. We hope this clarifies some of your questions and doubts.
Nowhere in those tweets do they say that they weren't supporting NFTs. Nowhere in those tweets did they say they didn't work with them. They gave a non-answer to the question. Maybe they just didn't feel like we had a right to know. Maybe they didn't care. Maybe they legally couldn't say anything else. Who knows. My only point is that people read what they wanted to read into those tweets, ran with it, and then went on to say they were lied to. As if BHVR outright said "We have nothing to do with this" and then later said "We did this." If you have some source where BHVR outright lied to us (e.g. the people who buy these NFTs get to unlock the voice for Pinhead), I will gladly stand corrected.
This is simply a non-sequitur, and a non-starter as far as a cogent response or assessment. Contracts are agreements: they get reviewed, edited, revised, and generally agreed upon. In this case, the purported price was access to the Pinhead license, and the cost was either larger than BHVR execs realized, or they knew what was going to happen which is what led to this ass-backwards media spin because they chose obfuscation over true deniability.
Fair point. I gave them too much credit on the contractual side. Maybe they knew or maybe they didn't realize the extent of their contractual obligations. Either way, they agreed to it and are liable for all of the blow-back. They put their bottom line first - like most companies do.
Whether you want to be honest about it or not, BHVR was talking through both sides of their mouth about this entire debacle - their PR team spun and misled people, and people within the company itself are feeling betrayed, whatever you say to yourself.
Again. They weren't talking through both sides of their mouth - they barely talked at all. The little scraps of information we did receive were non-answers.
The general pretense in both your posts that people are just blowing hot air is just dishonest. Some of the most diehard devotees of the game are leaving - this is the first time boycotts are seeming serious, and in the wake of a substantial loss in playerbase following the release of SBMM.
Scummy companies will do scummy things. The majority of companies put money before morality, and this is what we get.
I've seen "gaming boycotts" before. I remember when people were going to boycott Left 4 Dead 2 because of something Valve did (I can't quite remember). Then on release day, the most vocal people who were screaming about being outraged were screencap'd as all playing the game. If this boycott is serious, then GOOD! I'm all for it. Companies don't react to outrage unless it hits their pockets. I hope everyone who posted saying they were done follow through. If you don't, you only prove them right, and make them less concerned about whatever their next scummy move is. If you don't follow through, then yes, you were only blowing hot air.
I'm not misquoting you at any point, kiddo - and while I thank you for your candor and consideration, I'll be the first so say I'm not intelligent. Don't give me too much credit :P
Yes, people are in their feelings. I paraphrased your (continued) insinuations that people are just in their feelings - that the outrage isn't something of tangible value here, through your initial disparagement to your current "what can you do?" rhetoric.
Yeah, I knew BHVR wasn't great before all this. It was never this level of bad, to my knowledge, but their practices and policies have never been consumer-focused - which even shills for unfettered capitalism (not saying you are one, to head off that potential miscommunication) can often agree is a red flag. Consumer and feedback-oriented companies tend to survive and adapt better to changing market values and market value, even with an eye to their bottom line.
Those tweets, however, aren't any absolution for BHVR. The initial response is a clear distancing maneuvre, regardless of those who would prefer to take it literally and ignore context. Yes, it's a non-answer, but it's a directed non-answer, and a fairly transparent ploy to anyone who's worked in or around marketing. The most recent tweets, which probably were contractually obligated to a degree, are an official stance supporting and advocating their partnership and work with Boss - even if BHVR could be said to have done no wrong, that positive association is a damning one.
On our pithy initial comments - I was honestly having fun, and you were the target of a generalization. I maintain the generalization, while hyperbolic, carries truth - but the personal implication wasn't inherently necessary. Sorry if offence was taken.
I do think many gaming boycotts fall through. I know some do see success. I don't know which way this'll go, but I'll not have my Hope Devoured just yet.
I'm sincere about my own (and whatever level others can feasibly support) boycott. I can reasonably deny them my money, and I refuse to deny this issue my time.
-
I think "why would anyone use sommat other than premium?"
If you're gonna give a game mechanic a downside, there needs to be an associated upside. The design behind Putrid gets it, Eye Watering could get there with some tweaks, but it seems like Volatile, Viscous, and Empty are just bad - could there be a benefit to them?
-
@gendoss said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571815#Comment_2571815
So you just mostly cared that BHVR didn't announce it right away?
No. I care about both aspects, but there's reasons people who might otherwise butt heads on the forums are banding together over this - from pretty much any honest angle, BHVR did wrong.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
What's hard to understand? People are morally opposed to NFTs because of their environmental impact, and the Hellraiser license apparently came with the caveat that BHVR's assets would be used as NFTs. People don't want their money going towards that.
Even aside from the environmental concern - we have some people laughably opposed to communal concerns here - BHVR still misled their playerbase.
-
This company isn't worth money.
-
@Underdawg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571615#Comment_2571615
I see what you did there. You took what I wrote, then you projected your own feelings and assumptions about my beliefs into it in an attempt to mock me. Wow. Aren't you just creative!
This is capitalism. Just because I'm not getting outraged that a for profit company is screwing over the environment to pad their pockets doesn't mean I agree with them or pray to "Lord Profit" as you oh so brilliantly wrote. Get over yourself.
If people are going to flame BHVR, at least don't be disingenuous while you're doing it. BHVR never lied or misled you. They simply never cared to include your in the process. This is true of most companies. With a lack of information, people formed their own conclusions, and when they proved to be false they got into their feelings and looked for someone or something to blame.
I am all for people protesting this game if you believe the company no longer stands in line with your beliefs. But please stop acting surprised that a for profit company makes decisions with respect to their bottom lines and not their moral compass.
Fun lil hypocrisy in both your posts so far :P
Let's break the first one down: "For profit company does (most likely contractually obligated) deal for profit. Consumers outraged. More details at 6."
"For profit company does ... deal for profit" - While I'm sure some people are acting surprised, I'm not, and most people here aren't. BHVR is a pretty scummy company that operates with no real competition in their niche. Pretending that 'people are just in their feelings about this' is textbook disingenuous projection.
"most likely contractually obligated" - This is simply a non-sequitur, and a non-starter as far as a cogent response or assessment. Contracts are agreements: they get reviewed, edited, revised, and generally agreed upon. In this case, the purported price was access to the Pinhead license, and the cost was either larger than BHVR execs realized, or they knew what was going to happen which is what led to this ass-backwards media spin because they chose obfuscation over true deniability. Whether you want to be honest about it or not, BHVR was talking through both sides of their mouth about this entire debacle - their PR team spun and misled people, and people within the company itself are feeling betrayed, whatever you say to yourself.
The general pretense in both your posts that people are just blowing hot air is just dishonest. Some of the most diehard devotees of the game are leaving - this is the first time boycotts are seeming serious, and in the wake of a substantial loss in playerbase following the release of SBMM.
-
@Kebek said:
Changes from PTB
The Deathslinger
- Add-on - Wanted Poster: Decreased movement speed while aiming to 2.5% (was 10%)
- Add-on - Jaw Smasher: Decreased movement speed while aiming to 1% (was 5%)
Ok so all the feedback unfortunately did nothing. I had hope but alas, it was exptected that they wouldn't back down on some of these terrible changes or god forbid, give some meaningful buff in return to B tier killer.
Slinger isn't dead or useless just far less fun to play. Survivors who hated him before still won't be able to react and dodge well aimed harpoon as if he has time to ADS (which he still almost always does) he's got full control over landing it or not. The changes are placebo to make it feels a bit more like you're dodging but in the end, you won't ever be able to react to 40m/s spear, only predit where and when he'll shoot, just like before the chanes.
Pity, I'll miss the fluent gameplay of his. Oh well, maybe even longer break is a good idea or looking for some other fun killer.
At least this patch is good overall but this part just stings.
I will say for both before and during the PTB that 40 m/s spear is dodgeable, but the PTB made it much more easy. One of the most interesting scoring events I consistently get is the Near-Miss for Deathslinger - knowing there's a moment of clipping when you pass over pallets, having enough reaction time to crouch when I hear the bang (most DS aim for center of mass), and just a good ol' 360 so he outplays himself, it's a wild ride: but only when I'm at least 12m out :P
He does feel a lot more clunky now, though, and I'm sorry for my fellow killers to see him go the way of the Hillbilly.
-
@latinfla4 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2566653#Comment_2566653
I am trying to think what other passives they would give existing killers 🤔
Doctor could get a Madness passive which slowly fills Survivor's meters.
Spirit's passive is her phasing.
Trapper could get a passive involving trap camouflages or trapped pallets.
Nurse could get 'shadows' that blink toward players - recognizably not Sally herself, but visual noise and enough movement/sound to distract a player.
Legion could have the other 3 members not being played hiding in lockers, blocking those 3 off.
Pig could get in-game accolades for adorability - or be able to look down/up more than most killers, due to the height differences and potential for Assassin's Creed moments :P
-
@Underdawg said:
"For profit company does (most likely contractually obligated) deal for profit. Consumers outraged. More details at 6."
"Consumer pretends that a contract can't be disagreed with, objected to, or protested, while praying to Lord Profit. More details pretty much every second."
-
Twitter is as toxic as a Facebook rabbithole, I wish you luck in that hive of scum and villainy.
-
As a survivor, there are some glorious games and some times I sincerely wish the other player cared about playing more than securing a kill.
As Bubba myself, I nearly always have a good time.
-
@Shaped said:
I love to put people on hooks.
There's applications for that passion both in and out of game! You just need to go to a special shop for the latter.
-
@Anara said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571553#Comment_2571553
Boycotting = massive fired of employees.
Im not that person sorry, Im here for workers.
Union-busting rhetoric from a bad faith actor doesn't work on a digital consumer-base, kiddo.
-
@Anara said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571538#Comment_2571538
But you all try to boycott the company right ?
If a company lost players and money, they will just fire employees and survive.
So whats the point ?
Boycotting is useless. You just make the employees life harder.
Support the employees of Behaviour that are against NFT by playing the game. So they can do something in the company. As players we cant do something against Behaviour, we can just support the workers.
Support the employees of BHVR that are against NFTs by boycotting the game, so that dishonest people like Anara can be shown that consumers can, in fact, have an impact on company policy and practice - as shown through a long, worldwide history of successful boycotts.
-
@Anara said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571496#Comment_2571496
Thats what I was thinking, you have no argument except "Im boycotting because im woke"
I dont care about the company, I care about the game, the devs, and the players.
But maybe your wokeness cant understand I dissociate workers and companies :x
It's okay. Your dishonest and superficial takes are just further proof of what I said.
To spell it out for the audience: our money went to supporting NFTs, which are an environmental disaster on par with the smog produced in entire countries. To boot, BHVR lied about it. Employees at BHVR are outraged, customers are outraged, the larger communities of horror and games are outraged - the only reason not to view this as a bad thing is self-interested, head in the sand obstinance.
If you truly cared about the game, the devs, the players, anyone but yourself, you'd try to be on the side of fixing what's broken, rather than whining about 'woke culture'
-
When someone is blaming 'woke culture' in the wake of something going wrong, it's a pretty strong indication they're not someone worth taking seriously.
-
For people who want some data more specific to NFTs and their specific ecological impact in the Ethereum network: https://github.com/kylemcdonald/ethereum-nft-activity
NFTs are not, have never been, and are unlikely to ever be divested from the ecological impact of mining and storage on the blockchain. It's an intrinsic part of the model, and any claim otherwise is either ignorance or made in bad faith.
-
@Dino7281 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571453#Comment_2571453
I just like to have correct terms.
Bitcoin transaction doesn't take more energy than Visa.
Problem is that mining bitcoin takes ######### tons of energy, Visa doesn't have that issue.
NFT is just about transactions. Crypto currency is about mining.
So why is everyone bitching on BVHR using NFT?
Like they will stop playing dbd for it? #########
NFTs are crypto: they're based in the blockchain, which means crypto mining.
We have a squares and rectangles situation: all NFTs are crypto, not all crypto are NFTs.
Any NFT based on what BHVR developed in conjunction with Boss will be supporting the ponzi scheme of crypto, and thus supporting that blockchain-based environmental impact.
The separation between the steps here is superficial, though, and a deliberate spin by BHVR to seem less liable - and it's unlikely that is even for our benefit as consumers.
-
@Dino7281 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571422#Comment_2571422
"It does so by estimating how much income miners possibly spend on electricity"
I don't know about you, but what they are talking about is not transaction as an simple action.
They just add how much it took, to get that bitcoin with mining.
So yeah, bitcoin takes ######### tons of energy to get, but not really transfer.
But feel free to correct me, I am just old kid that is trying to understand the ######### storm around here :)
You've been corrected, my fellow kid :P
There's a carbon cost tied to the history of any blockchain transaction, which adds up, and an individual miner can outpace the negative output of a small country. The wallets people keep the datachains in also have continual costs to keep running.
"Transaction as a simple action" is an overtly dishonest take on this.
-
@Jasonisanicefella said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2570930#Comment_2570930
unfortunately no, we are too many on the planet already. Caring about the environment is directly connected to a massive population reduction. But no one wants to do that.
I will happily play dbd if the game works (fingers crossed I am on ps4) and the event is funny
Ecofascist nonsense: "Humans are too many, we don't have enough resources"
Genuine understanding of the situation: "We actually have enough food, water, and shelter for the entire population many times over, but operate in socioeconomic strata and systems which thrive on forced and superficial scarcity, coupled with an understanding that people are too lazy and selfish to bother to educate themselves on the situation"
-
@Dino7281 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571396#Comment_2571396
And where did you take that BS number?
It doesn't make sense. Bit coin transfer is peer to peer.
"online receipt to say you own a copy of the thing"
Oh, right. Like game accounts and skins etc., where you don't really own it on most systems, League of legends for example, where selling your account is illegal practice. You just got access to it, but don't own it.
Steam is little different, you can trade content (skins etc.), but you can't get your money actually back, you can only trade for different things.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/881541/bitcoin-energy-consumption-transaction-comparison-visa/
Sit down, kid.
-
@Dino7281 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2571374#Comment_2571374
I don't get why does it make people upset. I couldn't care less.
Everyone that does is just hypocrit imo. Using systems that take a lot of energy, but cry about this one, just because they don't own any crypto currency.
Crypto's a ponzi scheme designed to screw over the people already socioeconomically disenfranchised while couched in 'for the people' rhetoric, and is an existential threat to the sustainability of the planet. Whether you personally care is irrelevant - it does have an effect upon your life, whether you want to be honest about its tangibility or not.
-
@_NIGHTMARE_ said:
VHS.
Identity V.
Friday the 13th, the game.
Predator Hunting Grounds.
Last Year.
Home Sweet Home Survive.
Pacify.
I can't think of any others, but I'm sure there's more...
Don't get Identity V if you're boycotting, they're partnered with BHVR.
-
I'm a mite greedy, what can I say :P
A lot of these are interesting, and I like them all - but I want something to show for it afterward. Not as a thing to flex on others, but as something I can utilize and say "I earned that" - even achievements in DBD don't really feel that way, save maybe Evil Incarnate, they're just grindfests themselves.
-
I'm not indifferent, I'm not angry, I'm not confused, I find this all extremely believable, and I lost trust in BHVR a long time ago. I dislike this, I'm disappointed to be proven right, but this behaviour is expected of BHVR.
-
Well, now we know what The Fog is: Cote's been burning rainforests personally on the sly, cackling like a Captain Planet villain.
-
@Rey_512 said:
Many people here would have you believe Hold W meta isn’t a thing.
Many people here are maliciously dishonest, so I believe that.
-
Honestly, just give a hook version of Thrill of the Hunt. Maybe that could be the rework/buff Monstrous Shrine needs: sabotage and unhook action speed penalties per Scourge Hook, plus Scourge Hooks counting as basement hooks.
Just refluff the Monstrous Shrine perk as being "An extension of The Entity's hunger, you feel the cold of the depths reach out and ensnare you even when you thought you were safe"
-
@JawsIsTheNextKiller said:
In the old system, new killers would face 1000+ hour red ranks and 4-person SWFs as soon as they hit green ranks.
Now if you are good, you face good players. As it should be.
In the current system, new killers are facing 2000+hour SWFs. 20 hour survivors are being paired with 200+, 1000+, 2000+ survivors. There's no difference between a blendette and someone competent who escapes, while griefers who get teams killed and facecampers are being 'rewarded'
A win streak, in the current system, is being classed as "skill" - in a system with no accounting for loadout, map RNG, individual killer types, add-ons, or participation, there's no honest way to pretend that the system is truly balanced.
-
@ChiSoxFan11 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2567523#Comment_2567523
You don't know what my MMR ranking is. Neither do I. I do know that the majority of my killer rounds, prior to implementation, ended in 4K or 3K mercy hatch games. Not all -- because I'm not god-tier by any stretch, but I'm guessing I'm wasn't at some abysmally low SBMM ranking either since, as I said, prior to SBMM, I played a small handful of killers and did so very well. The games I played with the killers I didn't do well with numbered maybe a total of maybe 50 out of every 1000 -- I rarely played them for the reasons described above-- so they weren't exactly dragging whatever my rating was down. I'm well aware what has been reported regarding the differences between ratings for killers that are played and ones that aren't, but I also think that a hidden element that's affecting matches are a prioritization of quick lobby times over the matchmaking itself, something I did see in those matches I've described as aberrations (where I found myself playing someone I usually never play and did poorly with, like Trickster, but still ended up against ruthlessly efficient teams that blew through gens like their lives depended on it.
Whatever your experience is I won't question. I do know that I'm still seeing super-tough lobbies with my "mains", but I was seeing them before due to Rank, so any difference just isn't apparent. And I'm still not seeing how a change back to the old matchmaking -- which was often a fiasco in itself and didn't promote "casual" play either, is going to change anything. I'd rather see the devs work on improving what they've put into place than go back to an old system that people endlessly complained here about nearly daily.
We can make educated guesses now, knowing what we do about how it works and that for a couple months before Escape-Based Matchmaking was implemented they were collecting your results to give your account a base MMR - so your select few were probably mid-high, like a lot of us had. Nothing "drags your overall rating down" - nothing reduced your baseline for killers you didn't play during data collection for the onset, it was always 200 below your highest if data didn't place it higher.
Some people are getting good results, like you - I won't deny that either. There's a reason most social media indicates general dissatisfaction, though. I'd honestly be happiest if they went to an Emblem-Based Matchmaking system, so the parts of the game which prove actual skill and participation were rewarded - coupled, ideally, with an update to emblems and scoring in general - the rank system definitely wasn't up to snuff, but the kill-based idea was proven to not work ages ago.
-
@ChiSoxFan11 said:
Was it really, though?
I play a ton of both killer and survivor, and I have usually been at Red Rank/Rank 1 while doing so. Prior to SBMM going into effect, almost every lobby I faced as killer was also filled with Red Rank survivors, most really good, many part of multiple-person SWF groups all (or most) running meta-perk builds (which is fine, since I'm not a hypocrite -- I would and will run them as well).
Since SBMM, while I'm still running into those survivors with the killers I play the best with, the killers I struggle playing, the ones I have only started learning how to play, and the ones I need to improve with, I've seen a definite difference between the caliber of who I end up matched against. I've actually gotten a chance to play killers like The Twins and Deathslinger -- ones I'd never have attempted to play against those Red Rank lobbies before (since prior attempts to learn them usually ended in 0-1 hook, 5 minute matches) -- and gotten to practice with them and learn how to use them without being stomped into submission by stupidly good opponents. I've had competitive matches with those killers I've wanted to learn, and I even managed to snag Adepts on a number of them (something I never would have been able to say prior to SBMM). Instead of playing just a couple of killers I know I could compete with, I've branched out and now play almost every killer on the roster, because the matchmaking -- at least for me -- has helped in doing so and feeling like most matches (not all -- there are still exceptions) I stand a chance, regardless of who I'm using.
The previous system, if you were a killer who did well and ranked up, was largely putting you into matches against tough competition anyway, regardless of what killer you played. While the current system could be improved and tweaked to take into account more than a kill/escape metric -- you'll get no argument there from me -- people who think the previous matchmaking was more casual was some utopia of fairness or "casual" play is looking though rose-colored glasses. The players who "sweat", for the lack of a better word, are going to do so with or without SBMM in place.
So your MMR isn't particularly high overall, just on a main or two. Thing is, if your MMR on multiple killers was pretty high at the start, even killers you've never touched would also be pretty high - the (reported) max differential at the onset was around 200 points below out of wherever you main was compared to 1900.
A lot of us, thus, never got to have those easy practice games, and most of us are seeing MMR as a punishment for success: "Oh, you did well? Have some games where you're going to get thrashed." and are experiencing not so much a 'settling into where you should be' as a rubber band between extremes.
-
It's a global game with people who use VPNs to spoof regional servers. Night and day mean nothing T.T
But yes. This is a thing.
-
Nurse, Pyramid Head, Cannibal, and Cenobite are the most balanced killers in the game imo
Definite tier differences, but the most balanced overall when used to their fullest.
-
So, fun bug: entering this code while in a SWF completely borks your lobby and game until you restart. All three of us ended up having to do so :P
-
@C3Tooth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2566711#Comment_2566711
They have average size (10.000) but because the map is playable at the edge (there are some safe vaults there with totems and Gen) makes the map seems large.
Mean/average map size (not counting RPD) is 9,235 m², but you're right: the population and distribution of objects on swamp maps is what feels oppressive compared to other maps. Best thing going for those two is easy call-outs and lanes for SWF and killer respectively.
-
Survivors don't need to be nerfed. Killers, most of the roster in fact, need to be buffed in order to be able to keep up with the meta.
Killers need to be able to feel like each their perks is worth 3 survivor perks - not 4, because that would be oppressive, but 3 would bring their "perk power" to 12. Their powers need to be able to maintain 1v4 and 1v1 potential. They need to be incentivized to participate in the game, rather than feeling punished for doing so as so many do.
-
@snek said:
who tf wants a charm :D
Not me, with the 11 pages of esoterically sorted charms I already have, only 7 total charms of which I use. Still, some recognition would be nice. Preferably blue legacy, but that's only because I'm a lil bit head over heels for that aesthetic.
-
@Nayru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2566948#Comment_2566948
low-end whataboutism, 'thing that shouldn't happen has happened' is not the epitome of anti-cheat but it's a decent low effort system to flag games to be looked at
Don't bring up the fallacies. Certain posters breathe the things.