Emeal
Emeal
About
- Username
- Emeal
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
This is a bad idea cause it targets TTV users unfairly, and they are even sharing their game experience with others.
But how is bHVR going to detect if a user is streaming without it being an unjust invasion of privacy anyway?
Could we not have a game that injects itself into my system to check on my private stuff?
-
Well according to the plan it should be after a full 3gen protection system has been implemented after the anti-camp system.
-
i know they don’t want people constantly dc’ing but it’s not exactly fair if people wanna play and see a long ban timer pop up when entering the game for either killer or survivor
You mind explaining by what metric it isn't fair to hold players who dc a lot out of the queue?
How often do you DC? I have not DC'ed in months myself.
-
@LOVeMe said:
Thanks friends, I have read both of your comments carefully. Since you both share many points of view, I will respond simultaneously. I respect your opinions, but I still believe that [AVOID ANON] mode is necessary.
I have expertise in handling statistics and data, and I would like to provide further explanation.(as a Korean, I place a great emphasis on politeness and manners. Please consider my words to be as polite as possible within my knowledge. If there are any expressions that could be interpreted as insulting or sarcastic by native English speakers, I apologize in advance.😞)
First, you are trapped in circular reasoning. Your argument can be summarized as 'AVOID ANON will delay matchmaking because AVOID ANON delays matchmaking.' You fail to explain how [AVOD ANON] actually delays matchmaking in reality, and you are making an inappropriate conclusion based on amphibology, leading to an irrelevant conclusion.
In my opinion, you seem to have a lack of understanding when it comes to matchmaking and MMR. Additionally, you appear to misunderstand the concepts of population and sample, and you seem to be confusing causality.
We can categorize all DBD users into three groups with different opinions on ANON mode.
Group A consists of anonymous users who desire anonymity and are willing to play with other anonymous users since they themselves value anonymity.
Group B includes non-anonymous users who are comfortable playing with anonymous users.
Group C strongly rejects anonymity and refuses to play with anonymous users altogether.
However, this fact does not mean that Group B is compelled to reject or be forced into matching with either Group A or C. There exists a significant gray area between A and C, and this gray area is represented by Group B. I believe there would be no disagreement that Group B constitutes the majority of DBD users. Therefore, your argument that 'AVOID ANON MODE creates four completely blocked slots for anonymous users,' lacks persuasiveness.
A and C won't meet each other (just making the process much more efficient), but similarly, they both end up sharing the largest group, B. Therefore, the argument that the AVOID ANON system narrows down the matchmaking pool is an argument from personal incredulity.
Furthermore, dividing the people within the matchmaking pool into multiple groups does not in any way imply a decrease in the absolute number of the matchmaking pool. (Everything has a purpose.) Do you believe that the MMR system is causing significant delays in matchmaking? We must not forget the fact that the matchmaking system already matches five users selected based on MMR.
Another rationale for the necessity of AVOID ANON can be found in MMR. If Group A users with similar MMRs and Group C users meet in the same lobby, and 'C' leaves, the remaining 4 players must wait meaninglessly until another user with a same or similar MMR as 'C' appears. Similarly, since 'C' who left will be pushed down in the matchmaking queue, longer waiting times will be required. In both cases, the quality of the gaming experience is likely to be severely compromised
On the other hand, the 'AVOID ANON' mode fundamentally eliminates the situation where Group A and Group C meet in the same lobby and, by expanding matchmaking to the 'entire group,' paradoxically allows for faster matchmaking for both Group A and Group C.
Let's assume you're picking up 5 pebbles of similar size from a gravel field that contains white, gray, and black pebbles of varying sizes. However, there's a rule that you can't pick up white pebbles together with black pebbles. Now, would it be faster to randomly pick up pebbles of similar size and then discard the black pebbles, and then try to find white pebbles of the same size as the black ones you just discarded? Or would it be faster to start by not picking up black pebbles at all and instead pick up 5 pebbles of similar size from the white and gray pebbles?☺️
Assigning responsibility for issues arising from anonymity to users who want to 'AVOID ANON' is a typical 'Ergo Decedo' style statement and represents a narrow-minded mindset that dismisses opinions different from one's own.
First, you are trapped in circular reasoning. Your argument can be summarized as 'AVOID ANON will delay matchmaking because AVOID ANON delays matchmaking.' You fail to explain how [AVOD ANON] actually delays matchmaking in reality, and you are making an inappropriate conclusion based on amphibology, leading to an irrelevant conclusion.
In my opinion, you seem to have a lack of understanding when it comes to matchmaking and MMR. Additionally, you appear to misunderstand the concepts of population and sample, and you seem to be confusing causality.
I think you are mistaking disbelief with an argument, indeed I could have lacking understanding regarding bHVR's MMR and matchmaking system. But I have been following this game for 7 years understanding it. if you think you have a better knowledge of matchmaking and MMR, please set to record straight and explain how it works.
One thing is clear though, I am not persuaded by that its a good idea or that it would make faster than the normal system and you taking that non persuasion as an exact argument against your idea is entertaining but it isn't persuasive to me. The feature is your idea, you need to defend it, so pretending I have made a circular argument is not only a waste of our time, it takes attention away from you explaining your idea, which should be a strong idea able to take critique or doubt.
A and C won't meet each other (just making the process much more efficient)
Here you literally admit you need to split the player base into two which must pick players from the majority, However this is based on your assumption that B is the largest group. But you show no data to prove this would be the case, if you did please repost the source. But the fact that you split the player base will ALWAYS make matchmaking take longer depending on the size the pool of players, why? cause of the fact those people cant play, in a MMR group of 25 you would have 5 games being played. But YOUR SYSTEM cant insure that.
-
bHVR needs to re invent their cosmetic system to make sure they can provide cosmetic experiences to us without compromise or hurdles. This will take a long time to happen tho.
-
@LOVeMe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3551425#Comment_3551425
Thank you for your opinion. However, your words doesn't make logical sense.
Fundamentally, there is no significant difference between not encountering anonymous users at all and manually leaving a room after discovering an anonymous user. Instead, it would result in repetitive and unnecessary actions that would lower the quality of the player's experience.
On the other hand, the [AVOID ANONYMOUS USER] feature can reduce matchmaking time with unwanted anonymous users, benefiting both anonymous users and those who do not wish to be matched with them by reducing matchmaking delays.
Thank you for your opinion. However, your words doesn't make logical sense.
Oh I assure you my words make perfect logical sense. There might be a language barrier, but its sound English 100%.
Fundamentally, there is no significant difference between not encountering anonymous users at all and manually leaving a room after discovering an anonymous user.
Actually there is, and its the fact that the user who manually leaves the lobby is only locally destroying queue times for those they interact with nobody else. Having it as an option in game that anyone could turn on would easily be able to disrupt queue times without much effort.
the [AVOID ANONYMOUS USER] feature can reduce matchmaking delays with unwanted anonymous users, benefiting both anonymous users and those who do not wish to be matched with them.
Yes it would make those disruptive blocking users have shorter Q time but it would also wrongly impact everyone who uses anonymous as well. This isn't a well everything is sorted for me so screw everybody else situation, we have to think about how these features and suggestions cause overall reductions as well.
-
@Hanuka5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3551438#Comment_3551438
YES AFTER SOME TIME. You do realize there is some time that counts up before it goes out of your range????
No i dindt knew that, how long is that time?
It is if its small region or skill level or playing time of the day, like I pointed out earlier you dont know how big or small each queue groups are. So yes some regions does indeed come down below 40 people. 100%.
So you are saying with 40000players (on steam alone) there are some regions were are only 40 people are playing? I think the smallest region would be Australia. Do you have any souce that only 40 players are on that server?
I mean it sounds like BHVR would make a massiv loose of money for haveing dedicated servers for only that few people.
Yes. but it will also trap people who make it into a lobby with the guy, because if the system cant find an unblocked person quickly it will take time. There is no saying how long it would take. It wont make it a personal problem. it can affect multiple people.
Yes if you have an ######### in your SWF group who blocks hundreds or thousends of people or whos blocked by hundreds or thousends of people you will que longer. Tell your friend to stop acting like an #########.
No i dindt knew that, how long is that time?
I assume minutes, but only bHVR knows how it works currenly.
So you are saying with 40000players (on steam alone) there are some regions were are only 40 people are playing? I think the smallest region would be Australia. Do you have any souce that only 40 players are on that server?
I mean it sounds like BHVR would make a massiv loose of money for haveing dedicated servers for only that few people.
No Im saying there are times when the Asia Server has that few. Australian players connect to the Asia Servers. I know some Australian players, they tell me their queue experience.
Yes if you have an ######### in your SWF group who blocks hundreds or thousends of people or whos blocked by hundreds or thousends of people you will que longer. Tell your friend to stop acting like an #########.
No, im not going to let my queue experience be dependent on how much insight I have into my friends being blockheads.
Again, the idea is terrible in every example we talk about here.
-
@Hanuka5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3551248#Comment_3551248
Why do i have to write the same stuff again and again and again? It woulndt happen in DBD since dbd have a different matchmaking. In Overwatch you are paired with people on your skilllevel, and if there are no avaidable you will wait. In dbd if there is noone avaidable on your skilllevel you will just be paired with whoever comes closest.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550685#Comment_3550685
You are blocking 10 people for everyone you are in the lobby with. Not just yourself. This will blow out if everyone online has a list of 10 people.
If everyone has this, there are 40 people blocked. Thats still not ver mutch. And yes if one of the 4 people who are allready in the lobby put you on his block list you wont que with them, but whats the problem now?
I'd disagree. All you need to do is have a good read on these forums and you will quickly see people will block just because the wind didn't blow favorably for them.
This will put the person who blocks tons of people in a disadvantage and makes his que taking alot longer
In dbd if there is noone avaidable on your skilllevel you will just be paired with whoever comes closest.
YES AFTER SOME TIME. You do realize there is some time that counts up before it goes out of your range????
If everyone has this, there are 40 people blocked. Thats still not ver mutch.
It is if its small region or skill level or playing time of the day, like I pointed out earlier you dont know how big or small each queue groups are. So yes some regions does indeed come down below 40 people. 100%.
This will put the person who blocks tons of people in a disadvantage and makes his que taking alot longer
Yes. but it will also trap people who make it into a lobby with the guy, because if the system cant find an unblocked person quickly it will take time. There is no saying how long it would take. It wont make it a personal problem. it can affect multiple people.
Which is why most games companies dont do that, its a terrible idea. Even tho you do have that one person you hate so much and want to ban.
-
Blocking anonymous people will definitely interrupt the queue, maybe you could try to report the cheaters like everyone else instead of asking for questionable ways to insulate you from cheaters. Cheaters is just a fact of modern gaming, and Im always ready to report it to bHVR. If you wish to leave games with anonymous people you can most certainly do it by leaving the lobby manually if you are unsure about players legitimacy in the lobby.
-
Its perfectly fine to slug, You can only do it for a short while though or Survivors can get up again in seconds.
If you feel like your only tool is slugging, you are lacking in other departments of Killer skills to use in a match.
-
Skull Merchant really needs a complete rework. The concept of the killer is not heathly for the game in my opnion.
I have some great news regarding that.
-
You premise is false, Im a veteran and I played back then. Killers would just eat the stun anyway, Killers feared DS as much as survivors did when It came to NOED. It was rare to see a Survivor do Totems out of fear of NOED and at best Killers would just slug you until DS ran out too.
The 2 extra seconds wont change much anyway, yet you guys are hailing to it like it would solve tunneling with no evidence to back it up.
Maybe like, idk Dont pull the Survivor off the hook when the Killer is still in the area? Maybe try to distract the Killer or take a hit for your teammates? So many options for Survivors, but they always unhook behind my back like cheeky lemmings.
As to why DS was nerfed, I was used offensively as a non tunneling tool, which Survivors still do. The only version you could stack with Head On to stun for like 7 seconds. It was use too much exclusively and the meta of it was bad.
-
its useless if the Killer camps, but how often will have happen after the change?
-
7% Killer-sided
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550223#Comment_3550223
It would be more of a PvE focus. Getting “Fog Style” points would increase gen and exit gate speed. Killers would obviously be dynamic and it would not always be Wesker.
Not at all interested.
-
@oxygen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550426#Comment_3550426
Overwatch actually used to have "Avoid player" as a feature, but then what everyone should've seen coming happened.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/06/blizzard-removes-ability-to-avoid-this-player-in-overwatch/
And this is why you don't put a feature like it in your game. At least the successor ("Avoid as teammate") was inherently far less likely to be abused for reasons like this. Not a very good play to use that on players for the sin of being too good at the video game when that just means they'll always be on the enemy team lmao.
Hot Damn, Good find.
-
@Hanuka5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550379#Comment_3550379
.Giving them a block list that will hinter the matchmaking system is just a bad solution when they could quit to preserve their fun.
I honestly dont understand the point, how exacly would a blocklist hinter the matchmaking system? They could also have fun in DbD and ban the bullysqats out. They would have to face a toxic player only one time and give them an escape solution. Why exacly do you want them to face em again if they dont want to play with him?
Nice ad hominem, however most people I meet with after play with say im the chilliest Killer they ever met.
Its not ad hominem, its a real question. Why do you want to force players to play with people they dislike, if they could just play with other players?
You don't understand how the numbers work and how many players are near each other in each individual search pool to make any sort of rational argument regarding the numbers.Regarding MMR the numbers would most likely be in a bell curve, do you know how few people are in the low and high mmr ranges? No ofc you don't, but there wont be many so you system would cause them to take even long to find a queue. Now we have regions how many players are in each region right now? You dont know that either? Would there be enough players to allow a 10 people per block list? I doubt it. Those small outliners we have not idea about, yet here you are suggesting changes that might delay their queue.
Please just check out how the matchmaking and MMR works in DbD its way easier as you think.
You might say you dont care about other people queue times, but then why would they care about your fun?
With 40000 players alone on Steam it woulndt change your que times alot only if you ban alot of players or are getting banned by alot of players. Since you are the "chilliest killer they ever met" and you obv. dont want to play very very mutch player it woulndt change anything to you.
It has been bHVR's policy to not give players a blocklist that removes players from people's queue, and I think that has been working fine. bHVR is also working to remove the worst elements, which is fine too.
DbD changed pretty mutch everything so far. The argument "We allways did it like that" is not a good one. There will allways be a way to troll and be toxic in games. You cannot really remove that. For example the teabagging on survivor side or hitting the survivor on the hook on killer side.
I honestly dont understand the point, how exacly would a blocklist hinter the matchmaking system?
Consider a matchmaking pool of 25 Killers and 100 survivors, under normal circumstances the pool would produce 25 games. Now lets say each player has a list of 10 people they don't want to play against. Lets say each survivors have at least 8 Killers they don't want to play against. By random chances alone some lobbies will be delayed because an available killer cannot join a lobby due to your system, that lobby would have to wait for another Killer and then hope that killer does not have one of the other players in the lobby blocked either. This is why modern games just hides the info from you its just too hard and disruptive for matchmaking.
I hope that explains it, tho I am not the best at forcing horses to drink.
@ReverseVelocity said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550249#Comment_3550249
Yeah I know how the current block list works.
I'm not sure how the block list would be, that would be down to the dev's discretion really. I think Overwatch has something like that.
I'm not sure how the block list would be, that would be down to the dev's discretion really. I think Overwatch has something like that.
I researched it cause it sounded weird, but it seems players still get queue with people they have blocked. I would personally think Overwatch with its huge playerbase could support such a system. Blocking just prevents them from communication.
-
@ReverseVelocity said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550249#Comment_3550249
Yeah I know how the current block list works.
I'm not sure how the block list would be, that would be down to the dev's discretion really. I think Overwatch has something like that.
Well I don't like the suggestion of an Unknown Block Lists size either. No Thanks.
@Hanuka5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550209#Comment_3550209
And its your choice to play against them if you are survivor. I dont understand your problem, do you really play that toxic that you fear that everyone is blocking you?
this game isn't for you, quite clearly so.
So if I understand you right, you would rather prefere that a player leave dbd entierly as just that he blocks you because he dindt enjoyed the way you play?
There is no reason to change that, even if you think you would have more fun if the Killer dont have the ability to annoy you.
He still has the ability. Every killer and every survivor can go on playing however they want. Im not saying to stop anything with it. Im only saying that it would be nice if you can block people with whom you dindt enjoyed to play.
I really dont understand how that could be controversial, that you dont have to play with people that you dont enjoy to play against. There are like 10000 active Dbd players atm, whats the problem if i only want to play against 9970 from it?
And how i said, it woulndt even bother you. Its my Que i only prelong my queing time not yours. Your queing would only be affected if hundred or thousend of players are putting you on their blocklist. And TBH if thats the case, maybe you should change your behaviour.
You sound like a very toxic player who fears this scenario, because why else would you be against the rule? You dont need to block anyone if you dont want.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550249#Comment_3550249
How big a disruption in Queue time are you proposing?
Its not a big one. The peak in the last 24hours were 40000 people on steam alone. If you dont block very very high numbers of people, it wont extend your queing time.
So if I understand you right, you would rather prefere that a player leave dbd entierly as just that he blocks you because he dindt enjoyed the way you play?
Its not my preference, but if the player hates what can happen in the game, then ofc Im going to suggest they should not play it.
My wish is for them to grow with the game and accept that yes sometimes it gets tough and learn to deal with that.
Giving them a block list that will hinter the matchmaking system is just a bad solution when they could quit to preserve their fun.
He still has the ability. Every killer and every survivor can go on playing however they want. Im not saying to stop anything with it. Im only saying that it would be nice if you can block people with whom you didn't enjoyed to play.
Yes the Killer has the ability to Kill you, Welcome to Dbd. The Killer can be extra ordinary awful in the game to you and yes bHVR is working to limit the absolute worst parts, like the new Anti camping system. Just because it would be nice to your personal fun does not mean it would be a good idea for the game as a whole.
You sound like a very toxic player who fears this scenario.
Nice ad hominem, however most people I meet with after play with say im the chilliest Killer they ever met.
And how i said, it woulndt even bother you...
How big a disruption in Queue time are you proposing?
Its not a big one. The peak in the last 24hours were 40000 people on steam alone. If you dont block very very high numbers of people, it wont extend your queing time.
You don't understand how the numbers work and how many players are near each other in each individual search pool to make any sort of rational argument regarding the numbers.
Regarding MMR the numbers would most likely be in a bell curve, do you know how few people are in the low and high mmr ranges? No ofc you don't, but there wont be many so you system would cause them to take even long to find a queue. Now we have regions how many players are in each region right now? You dont know that either? Would there be enough players to allow a 10 people per block list? I doubt it. Those small outliners we have not idea about, yet here you are suggesting changes that might delay their queue.
You might say you dont care about other people queue times, but then why would they care about your fun?
It has been bHVR's policy to not give players a blocklist that removes players from people's queue, and I think that has been working fine. bHVR is also working to remove the worst elements, which is fine too.
I just dont think there is any need to rock the boat on this subject, and thats not me being toxic meanie.
-
@ReverseVelocity said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550185#Comment_3550185
I mean the Block List in its current state has an upper limit of people you can add to it.
I think a small Block List reserved for people who you have a genuine reason to not want to go against would be able to exist without destroying queue times or allowing you to block every single player that's better than you.
The block list is so you cant be friended or invited to their games all the time, not actual blocking from play.
How big would that block list be then? How big a disruption in Queue time are you proposing?
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3549904#Comment_3549904
I was thinking there could be “style points” like you get combos with maybe a flashlight blind into a pallet stun. Kind of like a horror version of Tony Hawk Pro Skater. Survivors could compete with each other.
Yeah, Im gonna dip out on that I dont get a hoot to play against the same stuff everytime even IF I can style points for diffrent types of play. No Thanks Please.
-
@Hanuka5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550185#Comment_3550185
Than your own queing takes alot longer in the future, you are only punishing yourself, so be free to do it.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550163#Comment_3550163
Yes I can ban people i dindt enjoyed playing against. For example if i see somebody who tunnel and camp, or try to annoy me in the game. The goal is to have fun in the game, and if I dont have fun playing against certain people why should I be forced to do it?
I dont understand how its "abuseable" if i dont play with/against certain players. How I allready said, in "worst case" i extend my own Queing time and thats it. It will only punish myself to "abuse" the system. If you are playing with 4 SWF and all of you are guys who try to abuse the system and ban every killer avaidable you need very long to find a game, but whos fault is that? Your own. So thats not really an argument.
Cause Camping and tunneling isnt breaking game rules. This is a game where the Killer hurts the survivors, ofc being mean to them is what you want to have in your game. You cant implement a banning feature people will use if you are being mean, if the purpose of the game is for the Killer to kill or be mean to Survivors.
If you are not having fun having a guy attempt to murder you, this game isn't for you, quite clearly so.
If you are not having fun with Survivors using whatever they can to save themselves from you, this game isn't for you either.
Try to think about the experience that bHVR is creating here, Sure its creating a ton of players who feel they have been slighted by any murder, but thats just how the game is. If you allow everyone to ban anyone for poor reasons then everyone will ban everyone, which is why real bans or true bans is always handled only by bHVR.
There is no reason to change that, even if you think you would have more fun if the Killer dont have the ability to annoy you.
-
Sounds like a way to prevent you from playing with people who are better than you or play in ways you don't like playing against. And then what, if one Survivor in a 4man group has banned someone that bans that Killer, that's quickly the whole region. Yeah, there are reasons why the game isn't made this way, cause it would be abused super fast and prevent regular play.
You can report targeted play if it is consistent over multiple games, if that happens too.
-
@Hanuka5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550129#Comment_3550129
For example skull merchant 3gen, 1 hour game tactic, 4man flashlight bullysquads. I mean just open Youtube, you find 10000 Videos about it just seach for stuff like "dbd making killers dc". I think the main kind of videos for dbd is beeing toxic to the other side
If you want to play that way, you are free to do so as long as I dont have to play it that way.
How many times are you running into " 3gen, 1 hour game tactic" ? cause 4man flashlight bullysquads are just something you need to figure out how to play against, its part of the game. An invalid reason to leave the game, but suit yourself stack up that penalty. There is not good reason to up the penalty because you dont like 4man flashlight bullysquads.
-
I have never had a problem with leaving penalty being too harsh for leaving a game of hacker/exploiters, but you must be leaving the game for a slight lesser reason. So tell us please when you encounter "trolls and bullies" what do they do? what kind of trolling is it that you have to endure?
-
nobody wants to use monstrous shrine as a synergy perk, its not THAT good and the benefit from the synergy is not enough.
-
a Flushed out daily would be nice.
-
If you have played against AI Survivors you will know they cheat, they can see you through the walls. They know where you are they know which way you are running. A Killer AI tuned in the same way would just be the same, not only that the AIs are particularly boring to loop- They always make the same mistakes and they always loop the same way. Survivor DCs are incredibly boring.
If bHVR would implement AI Killers this game would lose its teeth, everything would be the same. Not even the ever changing maps would make up for it, cause every match would be the same, looping the loops in the same way.
And so we have to ask why we are doing this?
Cause you don't like camping or tunneling? its like a Killer asking for Survivors to not loop. Like this is like a main gameplay of this game.
-
@Farya said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3549815#Comment_3549815
Yeah, maybe that. I would just like to try on and compare cosmetics while waiting for a game. It isn't possible to go to the store while waiting for a match to start, you get out of queue by doing so.
Yeah I definitely think people who wanna check out cosmetics etc should be able to do it. But I think I would hate having cosmetics I don't own or have paraded in front of me when I go to equip cosmetics.
-
Clam Spirit
-
I think that is crossing a consumer barrier, much better if you could press a button next to the other one to allow you to see store cosmetics. Like place the button next to the other one up here.
-
I would agree on this, but I think its better not to interfere with Survivors ability to save another Survivor. Adding a point of hesitation would not be good. Imagine you are sacrificed as Survivor and the reason the other survivor saved you was so their Off the Record would not run out, like.. No Thanks.
Yeah, I think this is one of those ideas that seem great on paper, but in practise is a nightmare.
-
Did you not read the EULA?
-
@Corpser said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3549018#Comment_3549018
You do realize that this isn't a horror film but a video game, right? You have to match entertainment, enjoyment, and the gameplay all together here. If you actually read my post, which you clearly didn't, my post mentioned positives for the killer from these changes. Literally no more flashlight saves and body blocking at hooks. And I never once said toxic anything in my OP. But by your logic the real face camping and real infinites should come back. People should just accept those and get better, right?
This game is simulating a horror film, 100%.
-
How about we just accept the reality of the simulation of a horror film is that some people will die without ending up giving much of a fight, maybe it lies to not only take you off the hook, but apply to some protection to ensure your survival. Maybe the Killer isnt toxic maybe the Killer is just doing his job.
-
Dead Hard for killers
-
Sure.
I'd like to see different types of Generators, Old ones that do harder skill checks more often, or big ones that take longer.
-
Your "healthy" Alternative is what DbD and bHVR has been doing for 7 years, it did not work, Survivors are tired of it.
-
bHVR cooks up a feast to make loads of people happy, and you are like: "Yeah but where is the apple pie huh?"
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3545249#Comment_3545249
I've had enough 3-gen games to be a little spiteful.
In all seriousness though, she needed a near complete kit re-design. If SM mains wanted her to be better, they need to accept that she's got to change.
For Sure, the only ones who will be mad are Chess Merchant Mains and well, its time that was a chapter in the dbd history books.
-
Pulsar there is a bit of spite in that comment, Im an Empath, I can feel it. 😆
-
No normal player misses as many skill checks as the bots do.
Oh you sweet innocent little thing. Survivors miss skill checks all the time lol.
-
When you try hitting a survivor you are lunging forward right?
I dont believe this is the case, Can you demonstrate this is the case?
-
Prestige 100 is optional. Always has been.
-
Well Devs are on weekend, if they gonna Killswitch anything. its gonna be Monday Morning.
-
@CookieBaws said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544446#Comment_3544446
It's not just it, you have to survive as well. I have gotten only ONE Nostromo offering and got Wesker cheesing UW and DMS. Cool
Yeah, since when is Surviving an Achievement? The game is designed to produce 2Kills/ 2 Survivors. It just isn't any more danger than a normal games. If the Achievement Gens were somewhat of a deathtrap it would be an achievement to do them and escape.
bHVR may find it valid as an achievement, but the justification is missing.
-
I agree cause Map Achievements are not an Achievement, the generators are not in particular unsafe places. Like the Window Gen in the Garden of Joy, absolute easiest gen to do. In fact it would be an achievement for the Killer to grab a Survivor in that window.
-
The issue where I can't drop a palette in chase, my character stands there and dies.
This one might be worth taking to: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/categories/bugs
-
Why are we resurrecting a month old thread?
-
Most maps got reworked and are now absurdly killer sided. Even less pallets then before (i counted 6-8 in custom games, more 50/50 then before, lack of playable loops, more deadzones.
Objectively false statement.
-
Just because a perk isn't Meta anyway does not mean it needs a buff, Whats wrong with the perk and is it underpowered?
Last time I checked Nightlight DS is still used more than way over half of the Survivor perks.
EDIT: Yeah, lol LOOK
