Emeal
Emeal
About
- Username
- Emeal
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
The issue with having two modes is that it divides the player base, leading to potentially longer queue times. Additionally, it lacks enforcement on playstyles, making it challenging to differentiate between casual and competitive play. What might be considered competitive play for one player could be casual for another who's just chilling. I also don't think it's a good idea to remove or lower the DC penalty for different modes.
-
I don't find this idea preferable because patrolling generators is much easier than finding a Survivor during the Endgame, its just not a manageable request to ask Killers to find a new target when all the gens are done.
-
@Snowbawlzzz said:
I can't have seperate buttons for switching and reloading clown bottles because that would be OP or something
God please, I want this so bad. its the main reason I dont use the yellow bottle.
-
I share the view that the Camping System aimed to address a particular problem, and it successfully solved it as it existed at the time. However, in response, the problem has evolved, leading to players who camp from outside the range or skulk around near the hook. I believe bHVR could consider additional adjustments to the Camping System to address these evolving strategies. I believe you can easily detect such a Camper so here is some suggestions
- When Survivor is on hook track a Camper by cone of vision, looking at the the hooked survivor much more than normal.
- When Survivor is on hook track a Camper on their movement through the map, that being that they don't move far.
- Increase the size of current system slightly.
- Implement a way for a full Camp Meter unhook to activate anti-tunnel perks for free.
-
I like that idea, but I rather wish bHVR to make running animations for all Killers/ survivors to show them running faster.
Bottom-line is players deserve to see that the speed changes of the characters, be it FX or new animations.
-
While I don't entirely agree with your overarching conclusion that the game is tilted toward either survivors or killers, I do find merit in certain aspects of your perspective, particularly:
- Tunneling is an issue which bHVR ought to do something with, I think the best solution is to give Survivors better counter play.
- The Camp Meter is a good change to Face-camping, but new strategies have evolved in response and they need addressing too.
About slugging we desperately need that Slugging update, the best solution I have seen on this subject is allow survivors to pick themselves up based on how many times they have been hooked. That way early game slugging is way harder, that would be great and what we are looking for I think.
-
I believe the addition of this mode is one of the most frequently suggested ideas. It consistently appears under almost every response bHVR gives, and it's a common topic across various social media platforms. The message is clear, this IS the future of the game and im sure someone at bHVR is busy making it a reality every day.
-
I agree, I was just talking about this to a friend to other day. Its something that is missing and that t-shirt looks great.
-
Do you mean this tattoo on her stomach side?
I agree; it's unclear, especially compared to a clear signal that a tattoo typically provides. To understand it fully, you need to get up close. The question arises: is this a deliberate design choice or a decision by Mikaela herself? While I'm not well-versed in character lore, Mikaela seems to have a big interest for the fantastical, making an elaborate multicolored tattoo seem fitting for her character.
On the other hand, when you're attempting to murder someone, you don't learn much about them. Perhaps this tattoo is a metaphor, suggesting that we shouldn't judge a book by its cover. I'm a videogame murderer, not a philosopher.
-
I hope bHVR can find some time to give this nice perk a touch-up, especially considering the many new gameplay options they are adding regarding the basement in the new update. It would be a good consideration to address before allowing this potentially useful perk for this update to fade into obscurity, only to be revisited for the game in a couple of years.
-
I honestly liked Map Offerings better when they were small and it was a chance to go to the map, not a flip of a switch.
My fav update would be re-introduce the addons that give slight chance to go to a place in the place of current map offerings.
-
No, no thanks.
-
This idea has merit, and it could be relatively straightforward for the developers to implement. While Dead by Daylight is a horror game, it's important to consider individual preferences regarding graphic content without forcing anything on anyone.
Example: Youtube will demonetize some moris if they happen to be reported for violence, limiting the funds that can be gained.
I believe a Mori involves a series of animations and camera angles. If we alter the camera angle to focus on the Survivor's legs or feet during specific violent moments, it could make the Mori less graphic for those who prefer that without changing the mori's specific animation and potentially improve YouTube monetization prospects for the gameplay. That's how it could be done I think.
-
@MaTtRoSiTy said:
Myers is one of my favourite killers to play and while I think he is otherwise fine, I have always felt the Tombstone mechanic should have been retired long go.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3654184#Comment_3654184
Myers most definitely does NOT need a nerf! Tombstone needs to go though imo
Myers will get a touch over and probably have his addons changed but probably later.
-
@SkeletalElite said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3654191#Comment_3654191
It doesn't do anything that you don't get by being in a discord call even with a casual team, "im (not) getting meter" is a very simple call out
While the option to use Discord to coordinate and disregard certain aspects of the game exists, I don't believe BHVR should feel compelled to eliminate those elements for all players. In my view, it's a personal choice, and the understanding among general players could benefit from clarification by BHVR. Could you please elaborate on why you believe some users using Discord should entirely replace those aspects of gameplay for all players?
-
I'm not in favor of this concept, as it would essentially reveal the Killer's location at any range. A more suitable alternative might be to display the camping meter to fellow survivors when they are within 32 meters of the hooked survivor. This way, they can see the meter freezing when they are in close proximity. This would be much clearer and easy to understand.
-
Everyone can acknowledge that Myers may need a nerf,
but it should be considered independently of any adjustments made to other Killers.
-
4/16 perks to fight 1/4 as killers, ill take those odds.
-
What specific builds or strategies are you employing to trigger the 3 Gen system and successfully block a generator?
I've yet to witness its activation in my own gameplay.
-
I don't perceive the need for a buff to this perk, as it serves a broader purpose beyond just being an anti-tunnel perk. The ability to take a protection hit for a teammate 10 seconds after finishing healing, especially when combined with perks like For The People, adds strategic depth. Could you provide more details on why you feel the current chance to take a protection hit and gain haste isn't sufficient? Elaborating further on this aspect could help in understanding the perceived need for a buff.
-
@SolidRazo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652032#Comment_3652032
I would gladly explain my reasoning for a Flashbang rework and why I think it’s weak in terms of value
Flashbangs are no doubt a very fun but that’s all that it is fun, it’s actual value and effectiveness is shoddy for a perk slot. The truth is Flashbang has a lot of downsides for it being so fun, as someone who uses it religiously it has 2 major issues that keep it down
1: the fact it has only one charge makes it extremely hit or miss. With Flashlights you could use your flashlight to blind the killer 4x to 8x in a single game. I find that to be unfair considering flashlight is an item while Flashbangs is a whole ass perk slot that requires you to do generators before you can use it. Hence why I think having multiple charges wouldn’t be so bad. In fact it’s already been tested in the game during the Flashbang glitch that allowed you to hold multiple at a time everyone liked it as far as I knew. At the time and I never actually saw any killers crying about it either it honestly just felt balanced from the looks of it.
2: Flashbang deafening on Blind. The thing about Flashbangs effectiveness is that it’s good at saves albeit hard to do but the perk isn’t just for saves because you can blind killers in chase and I think that aspect of the perk could be stronger. the biggest issue with this perk in chase is that even when you blind the killer he can still track you extremely easily through sound. Making the item that you worked for do basically nothing I think that’s unfair
considering a flashlight it makes sense that the killer can still hear after being blinded by a flashlight but a Flashbang? That doesn’t make sense in my head especially when they’re harder to use. Which led me to thinking of deafening as a buff for this perk you check off 2 things with deafening. Deafening killers wouldn’t do anything during saves but during chases it could potentially knit you some clutch plays that you otherwise wouldn’t be able to get because the killer would have simply heard you and just follow you.
im saying like it’d be op but in reality it wouldn’t when you still account the fact killers can look up and away avoiding the blind entirely and the deafening wouldn’t do anything because their not blind. Making this perk a high skill ceiling type of perk similar to Deadhard because you have to learn how to time it and such to make the perk work in chase.
combining both extra charges and deafening would make the perk a lot stronger in chases. Giving you 3 chances to blind and all of which have the potential to extend your chase it would make a pretty strong perk that would still be balanced because it’s hard to use and the killer can avoid it.
Thank you for providing such a thoughtful response. I appreciate your perspective, and you've raised some valid points. I'm uncertain about whether Flashbangs are intended to 'replace or be equal to' Flashlights, particularly when players have the option to equip both simultaneously. Personally, I find the prospect of encountering three Flashbangs in a single chase to be beyond my own limitations.
However, I really like your idea of deafening the Killer. While I'm unsure if it would be added to the Flashbang, it's certainly something I'd be interested in using in conjunction with the Flashbang in the future.
-
I've experienced this issue primarily while playing as Demogorgon, and the frustration is through the roof. It's disheartening to realize that this issue, which affects at least three Killers, has not been addressed yet. This could imply that the roots of this problem run deeper than any other contemporary bug awaiting resolution.
-
I appreciate the concept,
but I would find it even more appealing if completing the Tome unlocked all its challenges as Daily Rituals for the player.
-
While the concept of rewarding positive behavior appears appealing in theory, it's crucial to consider who is responsible for the evaluations. BHVR has already established guidelines on acceptable player behavior. Implementing a system for players to judge and potentially hold rewards over others could lead to a negative impact on the gaming experience.
Community rewards have potential, but it's essential to acknowledge the risk of fostering rude and harsh player behavior.
Regarding tunneling, I believe the Entity should prioritize rewarding fresh hooks over recent ones. I personally hope to see this consideration reflected in the game eventually as perhaps a part of the steps bHVR wants to take if any, against too much tunneling.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652110#Comment_3652110
Ahh, sorry. I didn't refresh the page. So I didn't see that.
I am not sure the developers have ever specified exactly how MMR works (besides MMR gain) but they also never refuted what information we have from content creators who supposedly worked with data miners. They even said some things, which imply the legitimacy of these information. I cannot point you towards any specific post anymore because digging them up would probably take me hours or days. I understand, that this may sound convenient but looking through every comment the devs made over the last 2 1/2 years is a bit more than even I am willing to do.
A softcap is technically every number that divides the MMR brackets that we have in this game. It's the upper cap for a MMR bracket because once you reach it, you are considered a higher MMR player and the pool of players that you're matched with changes. These numbers can be considered "soft"caps in so far that it's not permanent. Just because you crossed the cap once, doesn't mean you can never drop down again.
However, in general we, the players, only consider players that are between the highest softcap and the upper hardcap (absolute maximum value of MMR) to be high MMR. Again, I cannot point you towards one specific post on this but because most of the information we have comes from the same source, this is pretty clear. The devs know that. So it wouldn't really make a lot of sense for Mandy to express herself in that way, if she didn't mean the highest softcap, would it?
This is a video that explains MMR in detail and it's what most other content creators and as a result the players have adopted when talking about MMR:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fsHR0siSY8
I am in no way accusing you of lying and I assure you that last sentence in my previous comment was genuine.
Thank you for the thoughtful response, I certainly can recognize that if the community has a general definition that they use and that bHVR moderators use those. I might not be working from the same context, as I do not read most of community responses nor do I watch all the content creators. It would greatly help if BHVR could address this concern by writing a blog post for clarity, considering my limited exposure to community discussions as I tried to address this issue from reading textbooks on Game Design instead.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651726#Comment_3651726
With the general context of this, it seems rather obvious she was saying that only few players are above the softcap to high MMR, which also checks out with an old post from Peanits, who said the MMR distribution of players looked like a bell with only few people in low and high MMR. After all the term softcap in general is almost exclusively used when it comes to high MMR.
I'm not sure how else you would interpret what she said.
Above your comment, I just responded to the same query. But I don't recall ever having seen posts from the developers properly defining these terms. So I would like to know what is the source for your general context and general use?
I looked through quite a few definitions of and it seems to me soft cap in terms of mmr would be what separates the beginners and regular player base. But people just seem to come by to say, "Oh you are lying or twisting" without providing a definite source they just post a sentence which could have different valid reads.
-
Not twisting anything here, its a perfectly valid read of the sentence. I even made the choice to dig up how game developers usually makes MMR in Videogames, my interpretation is based on that. I think that is a pretty valid assumption.
In an MMR system, players below the soft cap experience a phase with more lenient MMR adjustments, allowing room for skill improvement and relatively straightforward rank advancement. As players approach or surpass the soft cap, MMR gains become more moderate, necessitating a higher level of consistency in performance to continue progressing. Those just above the soft cap find themselves in a transitional zone, where the challenge intensifies, requiring more substantial victories for further advancement. Meanwhile, players pressing against the hard cap confront a skill ceiling, where MMR gains are minimal, indicating a high level of proficiency within the system and presenting a formidable climb for further ascension.
I don't know how bHVR does their mmr categories, as you know bHVR do not share much about the innerworkings of the MMR system, but based on responses and with general knowledge of such systems idd predict something like this:
- New-players => Soft Cap => Low-MMR => Mid-MMR => High-MMR => Hard cap
-
The ideas you have here are mostly welcomed changes to perks that could have a place in the meta.
But could you elaborate further on why you believe there is a need for a Flashbang Rework. Personally I would have thought, Flashbang stands between the best valued and well working perks, but Im curious to understand more about your perspective. Could you elaborate on why you believe the current availability flashbangs is not sufficient? And that it needs a 3 point counter to fix said issue?
-
What does playing Sweaty mean and why is it bad that you have to use all strategies at your disposal as Killers to get adept?
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651548#Comment_3651548
Huh? That's not at all what she said. She said the bulk of the playerbase is low to mid MMR, and a small percentage of players are above the soft cap i.e. high MMR.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651586#Comment_3651586
What does Nurse have to do with this? Is everyone ok? What is happening on the these forums?
She did not specify what was above and below the softcap.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I believe Mandy commented in another thread that "high MMR" in this instance means players above the matchmaking softcap.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3651396#Comment_3651396
Why would they invest resources into nerfs to a 9% escape difference that still equates to a loss for one side at the end of the day?
Thank you Edgar, You are correct about Mandy spilling us some beans, but your interpretation is incorrect.
It would seem low mmr, mid mmr and high mmr are all above the soft cap.
-
Indeed, while the addition of this feature is a possibility, it's important to note that it falls into a very niche category. As a result, the implementation of such a feature might take a considerable amount of time. Because to relocate relevant resources (people) to work on this it would have to be evaluated towards all those other features bHVR would like to add to the game too.
What it would consist of is: if Emetophobia Mode is on do this:
- Replacing Plague's relevant audio files with neutral ones.
- Putting a black box above plagues head when Survivor.
- Changing the color of the liquid to something else.
- Putting a black box over the Plague's Mori.
-
I don't believe it's worth correcting individuals who may engage in bullying behavior regardless. It's often more constructive to focus on positive and respectful interactions rather than trying to change the behavior of those who may not be receptive to correction.
-
@CammyChameleon said:
Honestly Survivors Ask for A Secondary Objective to do other then Gens. Then Behavior adds them with Killers like SM, Singularity, Alien, Dredge, Wesker. Then the survivors continue to ignore the objectives given and treat them like they are optional and choose to rush gens. Then they mostly lose because they ignored the objective of the killers power.
Aka Survivors ask for it, don't use it, lose. Then don't even try to learn it AT ALL. I lose a lot of my Duo Queue games because my two other teammates don't think the killers power is needed to interact with. Then they all come here asking for nerfs instead of trying to learn.
Perhaps more info on killers could be given, but it is given in the patch notes that nobody reads I guess.
It's important to note that survivors who request a secondary objective are not necessarily the same individuals struggling to make progress against these killers. Each player has their own preferences and playstyles, and it would be unfair to generalize based on a single aspect of gameplay or request people ask the developers for here.
-
I don't believe a tutorial would be effective, as it would entail a considerable amount of work. Moreover, if a perk changes the playstyle in the future, it could render the tutorial obsolete. Although there are loading screen tips, how many of us remember what those say about the Skull Merchant? Like Trapper is much more simple, "don't step in the traps." But Skull Merchant feels a lot more like "dont tapdance with your foot in your mouth when approaching a drone" The inconsistency in encountering different Killers is a broader issue. Memories on how to deal with specific Killers haven't had the time to solidify, and in some instances, I don't even recall my last game against a Skull Merchant.
Personally, when it's game time, I find the idea of being asked to complete a game tutorial quite unappealing. The prospect of diving into the actual gameplay is more engaging and enjoyable for me.
-
I may not be the biggest Survivor Main here, but..
Have you ever noticed the need for precise timing when hitting Killers with a pallet after they complete the pick-up animation? If the Survivor successfully executes it, an audio confirmation is heard, but the Killer does not drop the Survivor for the hook. Perhaps it's time for bHVR to revisit and address this issue?
-
Please bHVR, give her the power to pick up a pallet, above her head and throw it after the Survivors.
That would be so, perfect.
-
I don't think they have announced they are working on such a project. Source?
-
@SuperCop said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649918#Comment_3649918
That's a pretty solid idea. We don't want the range to go too far or have it be abused by survivors, either. Which I'm afraid would happen if it's not carefully done.
100% agreed and we are doing the correct thing talking about it here in earshot of bHVR.
-
I think this is a fine idea, make an extra hole into basement an RNG chance. it could also have an effect on how we normally loop the shack, in good or bad ways. "Oh there is a hole there now..."
Do this bHVR, do it for the fun.
-
I align with the view that the current Anti-Face-Camp System has altered camping gameplay. While I've continued employing my Proxy Gameplay style, some Killers who previously face-camped have adopted a new strategy, standing just outside the Camp Meter range and ready to tunnel the unhooked player immediately. Although bHVR took a step against face-camping, the shift hasn't resulted in a large substantial change. (tho changes has been happening.)
Now is the time to encourage bHVR to take additional steps to address these new strategies more effectively. In a comprehensive post I've made on this topic (which might be overwhelming to read), I propose that instead of significantly buffing the range of the Anti-Face-Camp System, there are alternative actions that can be monitored to incur camp meter charges. These include:
- If the Killer is observing the hooked survivor (in their field of view).
- If the Killer is not moving (to a degree).
- If the Killer is moving far away from the hooked survivor.
Implementing tracking for these actions and allowing charges to be incurred can discourage the new strategies that have emerged. My reasoning is that Killers should not merely stand outside the Camp Meter range and stare at the Survivor; their vision should be focused on locating new survivors, and they should remain active rather than standing still. Moreover, they should be moving away from the hook. While bHVR may address tunneling more comprehensively later, it's crucial to tackle the evolving strategies resulting from the Anti-Face-Camping patch first. As an additional suggestion, having the Camp Meter full should enable all Anti-tunneling perks for free use, alongside their intended tunnel use.
I hope bHVR addresses these emerging strategies promptly, preventing them from becoming the new norm. These tactics are just as frustrating and unfair as the ones the recent changes aimed to address. if these new strategies are just a minor problem, it might be still worthwhile to nip the in the bud to ensure the new game evolution better.
Stay vigilant bHVR, and thank you for taking the time to read this.
-
@Pirscher said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3649393#Comment_3649393
I would not want to force this on the other players in the lobby.. I can imagine that a lot of people do not like the extra fog and darkness
Thanks for the feedback. I understand what you mean, and it's all about the perspective of how far away the darkness extends. If we consider the current Lights Out Darkness as the effect when all 5 players use the largest Murky Reagent bottle (the purple one), then envisioning 1/5 of Lights Out Darkness prompts us to discuss the size and impact it could have as an interesting addition to the game. Treating it as a visual barrier similar to Lights Out allows us to explore its potential, ensuring extreme examples are kept to a minimum. Players who prefer a clearer visibility can always use the brown clear reagent bottle to dismantle it.
-
someone suggested it should work with the reagent bottle offerings
-
I thought it was okay.
-
The changes were initially implemented because the perk proved to be too powerful when combined with med kits in certain instances, indicating a balance issue at that time. If the changes were to be reversed, it raises the question of whether the balance issue would resurface, It begs the question. What makes you so sure it would not be a balance issue?
-
More and different perks would be cool, keep it up guys.
-
@Phantom_ said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3647589#Comment_3647589
They state that they are monitoring the difference(s), but what they don't say in the AMA or elsewhere is how or what specifically they are monitoring, which makes it come across as just a dismissive response. Like something, they've added to the tally of all things in the game they're looking into. They do not state it as an 'ongoing issue' as you're making it out to be, in fact, they say that the lack of information isn't the problem in SoloQ in comparison to SWF, but rather a lack of team play.
Which is a very interesting statement. Let's focus on that for a moment! The difference between SoloQ and SWF when it comes to the amount of information you have:
SWF can let one another know about their whereabouts/actions/anything in regards to the killer that they know of, e.g. their perks, add-ons, killer's gameplay, or anything else for that matter that a SWF can deduct. Now let's take a trial and insert only SoloQ players, what's the difference? Mostly, the amount of information you have, whether that concerns your teammates' skill, perks, general knowledge of the game, or the information they give one another at any given time during a trial. Let's say the killer is hard-tunneling at 5 gens, most SWF's know to focus hard on gens, same as with face-camping, you'd focus on the gens and try to get them done as fast as possible. In SoloQ however not everyone knows that or does that, some just straight-up give up and DC because it has been the umpteenth killer hard-tunneling in a game. Which is admittedly something that's hard to fix.
Yes, some SoloQ players play selfishly, they don't care all that much for teamplay or have the mindset of them versus everyone else. But that is certainly not the case for most SoloQ-players, at least not in my experience. So it's not enough of an argument to just dismiss the entire player base because of it. And if it is for BHVR, that's fair enough, but then I for one at least know to not bother playing their game for much longer.
They state that they are monitoring the difference(s), but what they don't say in the AMA or elsewhere is how or what specifically they are monitoring, which makes it come across as just a dismissive response.
I fail to see how the absence of mentioning the monitoring process makes the response dismissive. It's essential to recognize that not every detail may be explicitly covered in a response, and the focus could be on broader insights or updates rather than delving into the intricacies of the monitoring process.
They do not state it as an 'ongoing issue' as you're making it out to be, in fact, they say that the lack of information isn't the problem in SoloQ in comparison to SWF, but rather a lack of team play.
If there wasn't an issue, why would they explicitly state that they are monitoring it? The acknowledgment of monitoring suggests an awareness of the situation and an ongoing effort to address potential concerns.
@JakeParkSimp said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3647589#Comment_3647589
The whole quote from the AMA is pure corporate rhetoric without any evidence that they are going to do anything about the problem. Yes it's obvious they are monitoring stats but it's a whole another issue if they are going to act based on them. I'm not holding my breath.
While skepticism and a demand for evidence are usually commendable, it might not align with the nature of an AMA. Expecting a detailed battle plan, dates of meetings, and comprehensive reports for every change may be unrealistic, as bHVR may not disclose such intricate details. Instead, the AMA serves as a platform for broader insights and updates.
-
According to your AMA's and recent updates/changes, it is beyond clear that the devs LOVE to push people to either play as a sweaty SWF or to uninstall this game.
I wonder if this perspective can be fully sourced from the AMAs or if it's a misinterpretation. Having read almost all of the AMAs myself, I didn't come away with the idea that this would be bHVR's perspective. I'm curious about the intention behind making such claims. Is it to garner attention without providing backing, or is it meant as a genuine and constructive critique?
Either way, I should think the release of the HUD System would be ample proof and confirmation that bHVR has a vested interest in SoloQ.