Entità
Entità
About
- Username
- Entità
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,644
- Last Active
Comments
-
Oh, I understand: you'd use vials to buy specific things you desire, selected from a catalogue.1 vial = common;2 vials = uncommon;3 vials = rare;5 vials = very rare;8 vials = ultra rare?
-
Oh, YES! **
-
About Survival category rework, I opened a thread: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/29649/balancing-of-survival-bloodpointsAbout BBQ and WGLF, there are dozens of threads, the main is: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/21731/why-bbq-is-superior-to-its-survivor-counterpart-we-are-gonna-live-forever-and-how-to-change-thatI agree killers need more BP, but not so much more BP than survivors.
-
I love you! You have conceived a wonderful game, there is adrenaline, tension, anxiety, a gloomy, heavy atmosphere, impregnated with the smell of blood and a perception of imminent death, where tactics, cunning and dexterity really make the difference! : D
I love the richness of the game, its longevity and replayability, the interweaving of perks and offerings and UNLIMITED POWERRRRRR! Oh, simply YES!
We, the whole community, and you, the Almighty Entity, together can make this game immortal, ever richer, more complex, beautiful and distressing! Thank you @not_Queen @Patricia @Peanits @Suggestive and all other developers, managers and creators! **
-
@Master Pardon, 2.3.0 patch reduced the hooking, not unhooking, time. However, if the survivor moves, then the player HAS control and invulnerability should have ended. Report that issue.
-
A kind of market: you pay vials in exchange of goods. I agree with the idea, not with prices: to collect 5 vials you need about 10 trials, in 10 trials you earn at least 75,000 bloodpoints as a survivor and 150,000 bloodpoints as a killer, so what are you doing with 7,000 reward (the ultra rare things' cost)? Pennies!I suggest every vial gives you at least 7.500 BP as a survivor and 15.000 BP as a killer.
-
@Master In this case, you are punished by a bug: report it. I also think I know the cause: the release time has been reduced with the last patch, probably the window of invulnerability is still calibrated on the previous time.
-
@Master I reject the very idea that one of the two roles should be punished: I find it useless, childish. Personally I just want all the players to have fun and the game mechanics are exciting, fair and varied.
I rarely play with the Nightmare: if you believe that the transition time is too long or that the visibility of sleeping survivors' Auras is not a sufficient advantage, open a thread and suggest your corrections: who knows, maybe I'll agree with you.
-
@ChesterTheMolester You talk about a real issue, but the solution is simple: no more Survival points after exit gates have been powered or when the hatch is open.
-
@Master That is practically the only occasion in which the blinding has a fair chance to work: it is a mechanic conceived on purpose. The killer, on the other hand, can hit the survivors from the first to the last instant of the trial: there is no reason to hit him in the exact moment when the unfortunate man is suspended between the hook and the arms of his savior.
-
I personally appreciate all the maps, but I'd like a richer group of maps for every realm except the original three (MacMillan, Coldwind, Autohaven): I say, at least three and at most five maps for every realm.
-
@Master Are you speaking about SWF?
-
@Master Do you think unreasonable that a character cannot be hurt when the player has no control? Let's see DarkSouls, for example: if you perry an enemy, an animation starts and your character is invulnerable until it ends.
-
@Judgement If a survivor trades their body with another, it's their business (maybe they have WGLF and accept a higher risk to die): no one cannot force the opponents to play as they like. I don't want killers are punished for camping or tunnelling (it's unfun and annoying, but everybody tries to win however they want) nor survivors are prevented from sacrificing their liberty and even life to save a mate. I dream a game where no people complain about opponents' strategies, just because the adversary cares for their own interests. What do you expect? That a killer helps a survivor or viceversa? It's not realistic nor reasonable.
-
@Blueberry You're right, it's balanced: does it mean that there are no other mechanics equally balanced? Many killers hate to be camped by one or more people when they hook a survivor: Nos37's and my proposal helps them to avoid this unpleasant event.
-
@Nos37 said:
Have it reveal Survivors' locations instead of auras (like Rancor), and remove the minimum range limit so that the Killer can actually tell if the hook is being camped by Survivors or not.I agree with this change: both a nerf (Survivors' locations instead of their Auras) and a buff (no minimum nor maximum range).
-
I prefer to see where the killer is going after the break action: if the broken object's Aura were shown with the killer's Aura, I'd agree; if it were seen instead of theirs, then I would consider that a nerf, rather than a buff.
-
Nudity? What's the matter? Free bodies in free Entity's realms. XD
-
Maybe something changed with the last patch... at the beginning it worked properly!
-
I'd rework Boil Over like this:BOIL OVER: "You are a battler and do everything to escape a foe's grasp.Your struggling speed is increased by 12/24/36%".
-
@Master @Doc_W__HOLLIDAY I don't complain about anything, because the killer is free to adopt their own strategy to win: tunnelling is annoying for the target, but it's not forbidden. The same applies to survivors' strategy: blinding the killer after a pallet stun is annoying for them, but people try everything to survive!Protection, in my experience, means that: John is chased, Bob is hooked, John rescues him and is hit by the killer, while Bob runs away. If John is injured and takes a second hit during the rescue, then the killer will hook him immediately, so the value of his protection is greater, because he has a bigger risk to die.About giving more BP to killers who hit healthily survivors, instead of hurt people, yes, it may help to lenghten the trial.
-
@Master I play to experience the game atmosphere, to try new perk combinations, to test my skills in survival or carnage mode, solo or with friends.I don't ask for oceanic incentives: proportionate rewards are enough, and about Protection there is a so large variability of circumstances that a single amount of BP cannot always represent a fair compensation for the risk occurred. My list may be semplified, if needed, by eliminating the last two options, to become the following:1) 250 BP for protection given by a healthily survivor;2) 500 BP for protection given by an injured survivor (who then falls in dying state);3) 750 BP for protection given by an injured survivor, already hooked once;4) 1000 BP for protection given by an injured survivor, already hooked twice.Consider that the killer gets hit BP and hooking BP, when an injured survivor put their body before a mate's body to guarantee them a safe escape, and they get also sacrifice BP, if the survivor does so after being hooked twice.
-
@Master @friendlykillermain I have no objections about giving more BPs to the killer who hits one of their prey.
-
I agree: the hatch should be reworked, otherwise the endgame with one survivor left behind can be problematic. This is what happens: survivor reaches the hatch, they don't jump, the killer doesn't hit them, they indicate the killer to go away with their arm, the killer answers NO by moving their body left and right, teabag, false attack and the dancing event goes on until somebody needs going to the bathroom and let the opponent win! It lacks of decency, destroys the atmosphere of the game: a real stalemate!
I wrote a lot of proposals to guarantee an adventurous endgame:
1) if the killer is allowed to close the hatch and does so, then:
1A) another one spawns elsewhere;
1B) the gates are powered;
1C) a chest with a Mist Key inside spawns somewhere;
2) there can be two hatches:
2A) the hatches open alternatively according to casual timers;
2B) if the killer closes the first, the second opens;
2C) if the killer closes the second, the first reopens;
3) when the killer and the last survivor stay near the hatch more than X seconds, then:
3A) the Entity comes from the sky to refresh the map, putting the killer, the survivor and the hatch in new positions, far at least 48 meters from each other;
3B) the killer can mori the survivor and the survivor can escape without being grabbed: the quickest or smartest player wins;
3C) the game ends with the victory of the player with the worse rank (because they have been able to draw against a better opponent).About totems, it's not bad to let the killer activate a new totem, when the first has been cleansed.
-
People of the Fog, I submit my proposal to the whole Community for a fair debate about it.
-
@Utna Of course you can! It is your full right to choose with whom to have sex, dine, go to the cinema, play poker or football or bridge, and you can do it because it's about personal matters, about your private life. It does not work like that, however, in official and public events, in a tournament or in classified matches, where the arbitrary decisions of individuals can cause unjust damage to other players and, regardless of this, where it is not conceivable that each choose their opponents. There is a system of scores and ranks that, even if imperfect, try to reflect the quality of each player according to objective parameters: the individual whim cannot have citizenship in the combinations based on this system, while your speech is fully valid in KYF mode. Ranked trials are under tournament's rules, friendly trials are under friends' rules.
-
@Malakir I congratulate you for the deep passion in this game and for your meticulous collection of information: it is the same feeling that animates me.
@MhhBurgers Poor, it will have been very unpleasant for him. I do not say that the developers are infallible deities to adore and flatter: I try only to promote, in my small way, a close collaboration in the community, even to exert greater pressure and persuasion on them. If we remain divided, bicker among ourselves, it is easier to leave us in irrelevance: we must become compact, speak with one voice, difficult as it is, and show them that we have valid, winning and rewarding ideas, to re-launch the game and attract new paying players. This is my mission: to promptly report problems, enrich the game with new or better mechanics, and make sure to be heard by the developers.
@se05239 I agree, and wrote my contribution in your thread.
@DisturbedZ Wait, both Sprint Burst and Balanced Landing cause Exhaustion: how can you use one of them immediately after having benefited from the other?
@Crizpen I agree with your mathematical objections. As I wrote, it was a quick calculation, which does not take into account the permutation of the same perks in slots nor the possibility, far from hypothetical, that a player will equip less than 4 or less than 6 perks, because they do not have still unlocked all the slots or have recently prestiged the character. It was not intended as an exact computation: it does not make sense to clog the forum with formulas of combinatorial calculation.
Six slots, however, impose very demanding choices, there being a range of options that is close to sixty. It is true that some perks are so poor as not to be a temptation, but this is a problem to be solved regardless of the 4-perk or 6-perk system: every perk must be useful, there is no space for the mess.
@Malakir @se05239 @Acromio @TerminalEntropy @MhhBurgers @G4rr3tt @Whisky_Glass @Scourge @Master @Justicar @Peasant @Crizpen @DisturbedZ @not_Queen @Patricia @Peanits
Here are some of the balancing corrections I suggested to guarantee a fair game with six perks each (with some last-minute additions):
1) the totems can be increased or even doubled, if needed;
2) about secondary objectives, my ideas are specifically explained in https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/27565/secondary-objective-shrines-to-the-entity ;
3) to strenghten killer perks and add-ons (which ones do you consider ineffective or too weak?);
4) to add 15 seconds per gen or a sixth gen;
5) to change some maps' design, so that there are less loops, more mind games, more hidden totems;
6) to eliminate one of the two exit gates, replacing it with the automatic opening of the hatch (much more difficult to find), or to lengthen the opening time of the gates;
7) to increase considerably the number of crows or their sensitivity;
8) two or more of the previous corrections. -
@SoylentPixie @redsopine1 I thank you very much for your strong support and for the profound esteem in my regard. I want to do my best to make this community come back harmonic and this game always better. I'll be proud to work with you.
@Utna Being able to block an unwelcome opponent is a dangerous power, because it is arbitrary. Players are not referees, rarely judge according to objectivity, impartiality and detachment: there would instead be the highest risk of revenge against good opponents, who are afraid to face, or petty choices, dictated by selfishness, anger, frustration . No player can stand as a judge of the other players.
-
@Master Let's help each other to make a detailed list of balance changes, then:1) about totems, I wrote to @TerminalEntropy and repeat now that they can be doubled, if needed;2) about secondary objectives, my ideas are specifically explained in https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/27565/secondary-objective-shrines-to-the-entity ;3) about killer perks and add-ons, which ones do you consider ineffective?;4) adding 15 seconds per gen or a sixth gen, for example;5) less loops, more mind games, more hidden totems, for example.I'm not in the Balance Team: I'd be happy to give you more details, if I were in there and could do many tests.@Malakir @MhhBurgers I ask you a very direct and sincere question: would you have the desire and enthusiasm to spend time and money for players who judge you openly incompetent and incapable? It is not the right approach, this. The game will not be perfect, but if each of us tried to:1) bear small smears;
2) to report serious problems in a calm manner, not angry, not contemptuous, possibly balanced and without supporters for one or the other faction;
3) to work for a more cohesive, more collaborative, friendlier, granitically available community to support and motivate developers;
then, perhaps, it would be easier to obtain results and satisfactions. It's a general speech, I'm not accusing anyone, but it's not constructive to debase those who offered us the opportunity to have fun with this game of ruthless hunting and desperate survival. Dialogue, hope and perseverance are my polar star.
-
-
@Crizpen I respectfully disagree. Humans are basically habitual creatures: they build their certainties on a reality consolidated over time and tend to be wary of any change in that reality, as if it were the only possible or reasonable, rather than simply being the one to which they are accustomed. If the game had started directly with six perks each, nobody would have been astonished, but indeed it was born with four and then this appears to be the only appropriate number. It is not necessarily so. Many new dynamics have been introduced, from the Obsession to the secondary objectives of the Pig's victims, through the excellent stealth of Myers at Evil Within 1, to the Spirit's phasing and so on: each addition involves new tactical challenges, a radical rethinking defensive strategies, an unthinkable variability at the time of Trapper, Wraith, Hillbilly. No less important are the new challenges imposed on the killers by the new survivor perks. The game has always earned it.
Now, imagining that all the perks have been unlocked by developing all the characters or buying them from the Shrine of Secrets and making a quick calculation, having FOUR PERK SLOTS means, at present (ie without considering the upcoming two new chapters and related perks), and without considering perk tiers:
1) 56 * 55 * 54 * 53 = 8,814,960 perk combinations for survivors;
2) 51 * 50 * 49 * 48 = 5,997,600 perk combinations for killers (a drastically lower variability: I propose the introduction of another 5 killer perks, regardless of whether developers accept my system or not).Under the same conditions, having SIX PERK SLOTS means:
1) 56 * 55 * 54 * 53 * 52 * 51 = 23,377,273,920 perk combinations for survivors;
2) 51 * 50 * 49 * 48 * 47 * 46 = 12,966,811,200 perk combinations for killers;
ie:
1) a game variability 2,652 times greater than now for survivors;
2) a game variability 2,162 times greater than now for killers.Of course, it's a big news, and will require balancing. But the gain in terms of gameplay richness, tactical depth, longevity (the game itself is very repetitive: these are combinations that make it virtually inexhaustible), the novelty of the challenge, it will be immense.
Some possible balances:
1) to increase the number of totems or the cleansing time (since many of the most powerful killer perks are curses);
2) to add secondary objectives, which will drain the survivors' time (we talked about it in many threads, including: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/27565/secondary-objective-shrines-to-the -entity );
3) to review the effects of some perks (or add-ons of the killers), to the extent deemed appropriate during the tests;
4) to lengthen the repair time of the generators or introduce a sixth generator to fix;
5) to touch up the structure of some maps, to make the six perks system more enjoyable.In my opinion, the problem is not real, but mental, in the sense that some perceive this change as impossible, as an impracticable distortion, and look discouraged, resigned, to an incredible opportunity for both parties. I do not say it's easy, but it's definitely a great leap forward, a way to make this game even more immortal and palatable for new players (and for me, that I have a weakness for tactical challenges).
I pray @Malakir @se05239 @Acromio @TerminalEntropy @MhhBurgers @G4rr3tt @Whisky_Glass @Scourge @Master @Justicar @Peasant and all other users to read carefully this post, and to think about it.
Of course, @not_Queen and @Patricia are always welcome!
-
@Justicar Yours could be a good idea to make the survivors something more than simple skins. In practice, do you want to enjoy the fifth and sixth slots (previously unlocked at the 20th and 25th level, respectively)? Then run at least one of the unique perks of the character you chose. Not bad, not bad.
-
Justicar said:
I'd only want additional perk slots if the new slots are survivor/killer specific, to give them a bit of individuality.
Do you mean perk slots reserved to the unique perks of that character? -
@Master Read my answers to similar objections in this thread, please.
-
Regarding the graphic appearance of the icons, with the six perks system implemented, the perks will become hexagons and the offerings rotated squares, of course.
-
@not_Queen @Patricia Should it be possible to give the players extra Iridescent Shards to reward their Devotion?
-
@BACKSTABBER @Bug_Reporter @EntityDispleased @Rebel_Raven @redsopine1 @ShrimpTwiggs @thrashed2pieces @Greater_Cultist @twistedmonkey @MuttonChops @Peasant @ProximityOfToxicity @Nick @Utna @DarkWo1f997
I have read with pleasure all your constructive answers regarding the definition of "toxicity", therefore I suggest to move on to the analysis of its possible causes and the appropriate remedies.
In my opinion, several factors are involved in "toxicity", from the mildest to the most serious:
1) poor knowledge of game mechanics;
2) immaturity due to age or character;
3) irritation for unfortunate events (for example: being the first survivor chased and hooked by the killer or losing precious minutes in a long and unsuccessful chase);
4) anger for the defeat suffered, with possible loss of valuable items, add-ons or offerings;
5) intolerance to game dynamics considered unbalanced or buggy;
6) rebellion against the opponent's unsportsmanlike behavior;
7) frustration for the continuous repetition of the facts indicated in the previous points, by pure chance or by personal or team demerits;
8) rudeness, incivility or personal problems poured into the game;
9) sabotage of the game or other hostile purposes against the community of players or developers;
10) criminal purposes.The ideal would be for each player to commit himself to the correctness and respect of others, but it is purely utopian to imagine that all are good and honest by mere bond of conscience. The practical solution that I suggest is a global rethink of the system of reporting wrong conduct, imposing something more than just pressing a key: the player must attach a brief description of the fact complained, so that the managers of the game can:
A) understand if the report is founded or not (for example: the accusation of camping or blinding during the break of a pallet is unfounded, because they belong to the tactics of play and are consistent with the purpose of the role);
to compare similar reports and to understand if the accused player is habitually or only occasionally incorrect;
C) make the necessary checks;
D) to hear the reasons of the accused player;
E) adopt appropriate sanctions.On the other hand, to those who suffer these disrespectful behaviors I ask to be reasonably patient, in order not to flood the managers of the game with a million reports.
The same goes for the "toxicity" in the forum, of course.
-
@Peasant Read all the thread, please: the issue is greater than specific, annoying users.
-
No other ideas?
-
@Blueberry There is no disagreement between you and me: the game is not too difficult for any of us, I find it pleasantly challenging. Maybe Devs want to help low rank people, I don't know. Aside that, the "solo survivors/SWF" issue is almost unsolvable.
-
@Scourge I understand your fear, but some changes can balance the game. For example, since more powerful killer perks depends on totems, let's add more totems, so survivors have to spend a slot with Small Game to have an opportunity to destroy Devour Hope, NOED, Ruin and so on. My proposal is not an unreachable utopia: it requires a reasonable test about new game mechanics, and the full help of a Community committed to improving the game with constructive and accurate criticism.
-
@Blueberry said:
@Entità said:
@Blueberry said:
@Entità said:
@Blueberry No, at all ranks and against all combinations of opponents. The game must sell and, to sell, must be as balanced as possible for all categories of players.Balance for lower ranks means intentionally making something overpowered because you assume the player will just be stupid and use it incorrectly. That is a terrible way to balance.
You forgive two questions:
1) both survivors and killers are inexperienced at low ranks, so why should a role be overpowered?
2) nobody reaches rank 1 without passing from rank 20: if the game is not balanced at all ranks, many people probably will give up (and new players mean new customers, who buy the gamee and convince their friends to do the same).1) Something isn't overpowered just because they're bad at the game, it's a skill issue.
2)They realize they failed because they have to learn to become better at the game. This is an entitlement issue and skill issue. Just because something is difficult you don't just lower the bar, you work harder to reach it. The most successful games apply this.I agree, in theory. In practice, a too difficult game is often abandoned: videogames are not a school or a job, a player is not paid in knowledge or money for playing it, they are paid in fun. And Developers know that, and try to do a game enjoyable at every rank, which is a real issue, not to talk about "solo survivors/SWF".
-
@MuttonChops Read my answers to other users, please.
-
@Blueberry said:
@Entità said:
@Blueberry No, at all ranks and against all combinations of opponents. The game must sell and, to sell, must be as balanced as possible for all categories of players.Balance for lower ranks means intentionally making something overpowered because you assume the player will just be stupid and use it incorrectly. That is a terrible way to balance.
You forgive two questions:
1) both survivors and killers are inexperienced at low ranks, so why should a role be overpowered?
2) nobody reaches rank 1 without passing from rank 20: if the game is not balanced at all ranks, many people probably will give up (and new players mean new customers, who buy the gamee and convince their friends to do the same). -
@SasukeKun My first thread in this forum was a heartfelt appeal to restore the Moonlight Offerings: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/21738/could-you-reintroduce-moonlight-offerings-please
@not_Queen @Patricia I understand that it is difficult to balance the brightness of each map, and that the maps inside are not illuminated by the moon, unlike the original ones (Autoheven, Coldwind, MacMillan), but these offers could be readapted: for example, a map obscure as a sewer (I think of It) would require torches for both the killer and the survivors. It would not be bad to introduce a personal lighting system, durable throughout the game, which allows you to tear the darkness at the expense of stealth. It would be a very interesting and tremendously horror mechanic: while walking in a dark alley, turn on the torch and see the killer a few meters away from you! Guaranteed heart attack.
-
@Blueberry No, at all ranks and against all combinations of opponents. The game must sell and, to sell, must be as balanced as possible for all categories of players.
-
If it happens often, it is better to equip Whispers: when the survivor will be in front of you within the perk radius, you will be able to fall on them.
-
Those looking for the hatch in stealth, that is, walking crouched and looking around constantly, can take a lot more than three minutes to find it. If they had been stationary, idle, for three minutes, three ravens would have appeared over their head and you would have caught them immediately, so they were obviously wandering around the map.
-
@BACKSTABBER @Bug_Reporter @EntityDispleased @Rebel_Raven @redsopine1 @ShrimpTwiggs @thrashed2pieces @Greater_Cultist @twistedmonkey Thank you for your contributions. In my opinion, there is enough confusion among the players: some consider "toxic" the simple fact that the opponent uses tactics that are very disadvantageous to them. We must accept the idea, common to all competitive games, that everyone plays to win, not to make the opponent's game easier. Of course, if it did not hover in the air that sense of perpetual injustice, according to which the game is ALWAYS unbalanced in favor of the opposing faction, the climate would be more friendly in the game and in the forum. I read everywhere complaints that the survivors are favored or that the killer is favored by the game mechanics: I say, would not it be better to make accurate and detailed reports of specific issues rather than go on an entire category of players (the war between "survivor mains" and "killer mains" is childish)?
They would be the first steps to defuse toxicity and restore a bit of fun.
-
@not_Queen @Patricia Do you think it would be possible to do a test with six perks each, to verify what kind of balances it requires and if players are satisfied with a richer equipment?