Entità
Entità
About
- Username
- Entità
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,644
- Last Active
Comments
-
I loved, among other things, two upcoming news in particular, namely the allocation of points based on the duration of survival in the trial and the increasing lock-out based on the number of disconnections, two reforms that I passionately advocated in recent months of participation in the forum. Thank you so much. :D
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/564270#Comment_564270
They said "Yes" in the stream. :)
@NMCKE Given that I could have misunderstood, I had the impression that it was only an eventuality, still to be discussed and evaluated, and not a certainty.
-
Are snares and fake pallets considered "traps", for the purpose of Small Game?
-
@Adriang14 Believe me, new players don't study any stats, they like the killer and try to have fun, and, if they are curious, it's far more confusing for them to read that Myers has 6 meters TR AND 4.6 m/s speed, a couple which never exists in game.
-
@Jdsgames Yes, BBQ & Chilli. :)
-
@prettyf Yes, these people waste time and risk to find bad loot, but if they also risk to find only open chests, there is no hope someone uses that build. Secondary objectives need strong incentives, because they improve the game's overall health.
-
@Raptorrotas Yes, it would be reasonably easy for good users to create some maps.
-
Other comments? :)
-
Other opinions? Don't you think survivors should be given good reasons to avoid gen rushes and enjoy different playstyles?
-
I relaunch this proposal! :)
-
@KillermainBTWm8 Consider a rank 1 player, after the season reset, becomes "green", but they are still a very skilled guy.
-
I'm glad this procedure is receiving such a strong support! I hope our great developers will adopt it before any new killer release.
-
@NuclearBurrito What? The Nurse blinks at 333% speed, the Spirit phases at 176% speed. If the player doesn't use the power, they are playing very bad, but these killers have a lot of map pressure.
@Centernova Ruin doesn't last more than a minute at high ranks. :(
-
@Raptorrotas The Nurse can blink at 333%, while Billy sprints at 230% speed.
The Spirit phasing can be both a mindgame trick and a high mobility tool. The cloaked Wraith has a good speed, too.
All killers above have add-ons to improve their basekit movement speed.
Yeah, the Pig can make ambushes, but it's absurd to use them to patrol quickly the gens. Even Legion suffers a high downgrade when he ends Frenzy. I don't consider them as movement speeds, for the purpose of this reform.
Many killers have 115%, some 110% (Hag, Huntress), and cannot go faster with any means in their own possess (survivors can avoid traps, and hatchets are not good to damage generators). They need a strong buff, greater than the others.
-
No one comments: strange, many games have something like this. I'd simply like not to see anymore criticism full of anger and disgust and hate against the developers, and a community allied with them to make DbD better, richer, more magnificent, more balanced, more funny to play. That's it. :)
-
No other comments?
-
@Orion Yes, I'd like to see it tested in PTB, to tweak the percentages.
@Raptorrotas No, I don't want to nerf the Nurse or Billy: I want to buff the others and make them viable at high ranks. Fast killers have map pressure, so the others need gen pressure. I want to see more Wraiths, more Myers, more Pigs, more Hags in purple/red ranks, but they have no hope against a full SWF, with purple toolboxes and flashlights and the luck to find Ruin in less than a minute. We not-Nurse not-Billy main need more TIME!
-
@Orion @Raptorrotas @Milo @TAG @NuclearBurrito @Luigifan64 @darktrix I have carefully examined your objections and decided to completely rewrite the proposal: please take a look at the OP again. :)
-
Great idea! I fully support it! :)
-
Yes, I like both Freddys: why should the wise Developers delete a character made with hard work? New Freddy, old Freddy: make your choice, and have fun! :)
-
@Peanits Could you kindly give us some official information about this very interesting matter?
-
@not_Queen @Patricia @Peanits I added a passive immunity to Whispers, because the red bulbs are irrelevant if the killer has that perk. It's still a very situational perk, which helps you only in the EGC, if you are skilled enough to survive to all your team.
-
@Peanits I'd like to read your wise opinion about my proposal. :)
-
@Peanits @MandyTalk I fear this is not the appropriate section to discuss dedicated servers.
-
@Poweas I will pray to the Entity to rekindle your love for her realms, and for the people who live there. See you soon. :)
-
@Milo It would scale with killer's rank, a way to make slower killers more viable in red ranks, and avoid the boring couple Nurse-Billy.
-
I had two trials against Legion: in both cases they have the Nasty Blade and all actions were slower than normal (mending, healing, repairing gens, searching the chests, cleansing totems, opening a gate...). It's a serious bug.
-
I expressed my position in both the Legion's add-ons and the Quentin's perk cases. Each player, who has legitimately unlocked a game resource (character, perk, item, add-on or offering), is free to use it at will, even if it is an unusual or irrational choice, because everyone plays as they wish. Furthermore, there is no obligation for players to attend the forum or to consult the trend topics, or to inquire about the problems of the game: such as patch notes and new cosmetics are announced in-game, on a screen impossible to not see, so bugs, and related prohibitions, should also be blatantly announced. Once this is done, offenders can be punished under the Terms of Service as exploiters. It is a criterion of justice and reasonableness that I apply to killers and survivors, indeed to this and every other videogame.
-
@Orion Players can always derank, if they are looking for easy games or want to bully the opponent.
Your objection is like saying that Devs don't have to introduce rewards for high ranks, because you can farm to get there.
-
@MegsAreEvil Do you think the developers are not able to make a good calculation algorithm?
-
@prof_teabagger said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/258660#Comment_258660
@Peanits majority of people who want ultra rare want it for one reason: the colour. So it should quite possible for the devs to give us the colour but keep the BP prize low. This would be an exception, just for perks.
@prof_teabagger I want the old system for many reasons, explained in my petition: one of them is that NOED cannot have the same rarity of Monstrous Shrine, it's insane... The Bloodweb grind should be revised very soon: 1,000 more BP would not be an issue, in my opinion, if every Bloodweb gave, at high levels, more than one perk...
-
@sanki said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/544231#Comment_544231
is that work? I mean that are the developers work with this idear now?
@sanki Many people desire the old 5-level rarity system is reinstated for all perks. :) Give your comment there, if you like it, please.
-
@BBQnDemogorgon said:
@Entità And what will current players get after a second grind nerf?
I'm not a fan of nerfing the grind and making current accomplishments lessened tbh.
Imagine playing to p3 50 all perks everything then one day bam its super easy to do...that'd be awful for the people that struggled
@Bbbrian2013 I'm not against the idea of giving some rewards to players who struggled with a heavy grinding.
-
@Paladin_Goo said:
You think the grind is insane NOW?
Oh man, you have it easy now, friend. Drive a DeLorean back to 2016, and tell me how "hard" it is now. It's so funny when you baby players comp
And no, they won't sell bloodpoints. That would be pay to win.
@Paladin_Goo At the beginning there were 3 killers, not 16, and 4 survivors, not 17, and old players got the Legacy...
-
@Theluckyboi said:
Considering the game is no longer scary i consider that intro to be innapropiate, they should change it into some kind of chase scene with the survivors cooperating to escape
The game should come back to be scary, with darker atmospheres and new assets in every map. Now it's too cartoonist.
-
I'm a PS4 Pro player and my console is fine with DbD.
-
I greatly support this idea, and opened an official petition some months ago: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/28110/about-restoring-the-5-level-rarity-system-for-perks
-
@SmokePotion Yes, to disable the bugged perk, any bugged resource (perk, add-on, offering...), it would be the best solution. Until this will be done, people should be warned not to use it, and punished if they ignore the announcement.
-
@Visionmaker said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/541665#Comment_541665
Monitoring the style of play proves material conduct, not psychological awareness. if, instead, the restaurant is publicly declared not up to standard and I continue to frequent it, we can discuss some of my complicity and responsibility.
@Entità And in the event that you suddenly and now daily frequent the same restaurant that you scarce paid more than three visits to over the last year? What if you started bringing your friends? What if one the patrons even told you - or an outsider heard you on record? How far can it go where we chalk it off to coincidence?
What anarchy? If the reporting system does not work, the best solution is transparency: more information, more details, also to avoid false reports of non-bannable behavior, and more informed behavior, that's what is needed.
A lack of governance is anarchy. The better question is when were we not an anarchy? I can agree that we need transparency because evidence of its effectiveness is lacking.
The players are customers: if they abandon the game en masse, the developers suffer a serious damage, they are forced to reduce the expenses to the detriment of the quality and also the other players are affected. You put the need for punishment before the need to maintain a loyal player base; I, on the other hand, prefer clarity, loyal cooperation, prevention, which protects honest players and leaves no loopholes to the profiteers.
The devs need to make clear who they prioritize: customers that flagrantly disobey the standards of behavior or customers that are unduly punished by those people. I think you heavily overestimate the number of people who have clearly broken the rules and the importance of the "loyalty" of that select few.
Punishment and reinforcement are necessary for changing behavior. It is a fact not up for moral debate. People should be punished when doing the wrong thing and rewarded for doing the right thing. What we have now is the reverse. Societies, big or small, cannot function without this basic principle.
@Visionmaker I fear you miss the essential concept of freedom: doing whatever you want, without obligation of warning or motivation, without trampling on the rights of others. The sudden change of habits is irrelevant: if I want to have lunch here or there, try a restaurant that has been neglected before and therefore frequent it assiduously, they are essentially my business: if I do it for the sake of food, because I want to try with the nice waitress, because I have commitments to be done in that neighborhood, because I rolled some dice and I decided so, because I see a beautiful view, because a friend recommended it to me, because it is easy to find parking or for a thousand other reasons, I do not have to explain to anyone.
The same is true for perks legitimately unlocked with a character. I have my own build with Claudette and my build with Myers, but both have all the perks: if I want to try a new combination, or no combination, or just use one or two or three perks, meta perks or junk perks, it's my business and no one can intrude.
The choice of perks as restaurants is an intrinsically legitimate, common and physiological action: if a prohibition arises for exceptional reasons, this must be announced with a resonance proportional to the gravity of the exception.
If I never go out at night and suddenly go out every night, I don't have to report to anyone: if the state wants to impose a curfew, announce it with official and public proclamations, and only then it can punish me for leaving at night. Until then, I will be master of changing my habits as I please.
Punishment and reinforcement... People are not dogs to be trained with the cookie if they act as the owner wants. You have a somewhat authoritarian conception of society: people and dogs are different, and deserve different treatments.
And above all you pour into a video game a kind of animosity for the social ills of today. We should give things the right weight. As the BHVR rightly announces patch notes and new cosmetics in the game, so it can announce temporary prohibitions for failures to certain perks. Easy, immediate, effective, just: the innocent will be protected, the guilty will have no excuse, it's a win-win option.
Instead you are against the announcement, because you assume that anyone who uses the perk, or starts using it now, is guilty: the risk of punishing casual players, players outside the forum, players who start the trial without too many strategies, just to have fun for an hour in the afternoon, it is high; and, at the same time, the silence on the ban offers an easy excuse to the guilty: "But how? The developers are wrong to program the game, do not bother to warn us, and then they ban us too?", so it is a lose-lose option.
@miaasma What I have just written above is an answer even to your objections.
-
@Visionmaker said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/541584#Comment_541584
Punishment follows a knowingly illicit behavior, otherwise it is arbitrary harassment.
Mens rea and actus rea. The devs have already stated they record a player's behavioral patterns. Using behavioral patterns, we can establish what is incidental use and what is intentional abuse. Intention can be comprehensively inferred, and the act is documented. Furthermore, it is acceptable for them to only punish clear cut cases. Anything is better than nothing. As it is now, we aren't punishing every single person for D/Cing, so why assume this would be any different?
I only say that writing an explicit announcement about the prohibition of using a certain perk, because bugged, it does not cost anything, prevents many players from being punished
The cost of anarchy is dealt to those whose experience is ruined by the offenders' behavior. Furthermore, it sets an ineffective precedent that harms the community. Players already know what is right and what is wrong; this is advertised in both the ToS, the forum, and it is common sense. It is juvenile and negligent to assume otherwise.
Yet the developers' approach has only led to rampant abuse, not only in this situation, but in all aspects of the game. Players do not have trust in the report system. They need to change their approach, and both the past and present is evidence of this. This is what actually leads people to leave in droves: disappointment and unfairness.
In terms of mere convenience, it would be self-defeating to punish the players for a development error: they would feel abused, used as scapegoats to hide the developers' wrongs, and would abandon the game en masse.
Offenders are not children that cannot distinguish their faults from others'. They are adults that will use whatever excuse to absolve guilt. If a light punishment is enough for them to "abandon the game en masse", then it is their problem, not the game's.
I never said the developers did nothing wrong either. On the contrary, I am often heavily critical of them.
Your idea of punishing everyone, punishing immediately, punishing without warning, seems to be the daughter of a blind rage, which demands a sort of implacable revenge.
"Everyone" is not abusing these bugs. Punishment needs to be reasonably swift after the behavior, as the cause and effect need to be apparent. It is an established facet of behavioral psychology, not "implacable revenge." Furthermore, I only ask for the devs to safeguard the integrity of their game, as they are expected. I am not asking for a crusade, so please don't exaggerate and attack my character.
@Visionmaker Monitoring the style of play proves material conduct, not psychological awareness. If you show that I go to a certain restaurant every day, you have experienced the fact, not its illegality (I eat wherever I like); if, instead, the restaurant is publicly declared not up to standard and I continue to frequent it, we can discuss some of my complicity and responsibility. Is the perk broken? Very well, write it in large letters in the game and nobody can say that they are in good faith. On the contrary, keeping hidden that a perk is buggy and yet claiming that the players know and abstain from using it would be irrational and vexatious. If there is a dangerous hole in the road, the owner body must signal it and blind it, it cannot say: "Eh, you can see it, arrange yourself...".
What anarchy? If the reporting system does not work, the best solution is transparency: more information, more details, also to avoid false reports of non-bannable behavior, and more informed behavior, that's what is needed.
The players are customers: if they abandon the game en masse, the developers suffer a serious damage, they are forced to reduce the expenses to the detriment of the quality and also the other players are affected. You put the need for punishment before the need to maintain a loyal player base; I, on the other hand, prefer clarity, loyal cooperation, prevention, which protects honest players and leaves no loopholes to the profiteers.
-
@Visionmaker said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/540713#Comment_540713
Exploiting bugs is already against the Terms of Service. They already announced what is bannable from the beginning. The announcement for the Legion exploit was merely a courtesy, and it is obvious that it gave the wrong message to the playerbase.
You don't need to make up imaginary rules for the owners of the game to follow, and there's no feigning ignorance when you consistently used a broken mechanic only at the exact time it is broken.
For everyone's reference:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/19450/game-rules-and-report-system#latest
@Visionmaker What you call imaginary rules are centuries-old principles of civilization, applied to matters far more serious than the abuse of a bug in a videogame, for example criminal law. Punishment follows a knowingly illicit behavior, otherwise it is arbitrary harassment.
If a survivor, by hypothesis, lowered three pallets in sequence, vaulted two particular windows, cleansed a given totem in a given map and unlocked the hatch to finally jump in, and this happened repeatedly, it would be clear to all his bad faith: the combination of actions is not accidental, and the result, clearly eccentric in regard to the normal game mechanics (pallets, jumps and totems do NOT open the hatch), makes evident the presence of a bug, whose exploitation is therefore deliberate and contrary to the Terms of Service.
But do you want to argue that equipping a perk is an illegal action? Each player is free to use, as he sees fit, everything he gets from Bloodweb or from the Shrine of Secrets, so we are in the presence of a physiological, common, unquestionable action. I repeat, the player is not required to study the debates of the forum, he is not required to time the repair times of a gen and to notice the savings of X seconds, he is not required to approach the game as one approaches a professional competition: he paid a license to have fun, not to review the programming and detect the flaws.
If the product is defective, the main responsibility of remedying it is of the producer: the consumer is not the expert responsible for quality control, it is his full right to play even superficially, without asking too many questions about the interactions between certain perks, add-ons or cosmetics or other.
You maybe play competitive and spend hours on the forum: admirable, but not mandatory. Your claim that everyone is necessarily aware of the failure of the perk is arbitrary, even more so for those who play in the non-English language, given the translation errors that sometimes distort the meaning of the caption. This in terms of reasonableness.
In terms of mere convenience, it would be self-defeating to punish the players for a development error: they would feel abused, used as scapegoats to hide the developers' wrongs, and would abandon the game en masse.
Unlike some users in here, who also vulgarly insult the developers (I read really disgusting comments during the test of the first Ghostface), I hold the highest respect for them and I'm adoring the growing fluidity of the gaming experience, aware of their great efforts to make the program better, richer and more enjoyable. Precisely in this spirit of affectionate esteem, I do not blame them if a bug has escaped the controls or if there is no system to disable a defective perk: I only say that writing an explicit announcement about the prohibition of using a certain perk, because bugged, it does not cost anything, prevents many players from being punished without any fault and maintains a relationship of transparency, loyalty and mutual trust between players and developers. Your idea of punishing everyone, punishing immediately, punishing without warning, seems to be the daughter of a blind rage, which demands a sort of implacable revenge.
-
Any rule, before becoming mandatory for anyone, must be made public: if the developers wish to ban those who use the bugged perk, they must publish an announcement in the game, similar to the patch notes, which is impossible to miss. Players are not required to consult the forum or to read up on any hidden programming defects, and cannot be punished for having used a resource (perk, add-on, offering ...) legitimately unlocked and made available according to the ordinary mechanics of play (Bloodweb, Shrine of Secrets), unless this prohibition is brought to the attention of all people with appropriate means of publicity.
-
I never found a Splinter, since I have already unlocked all the killers, but they are useful offerings for licensed characters.
-
The ideal solution is to leave "Ghost Face" as the name of the chapter (similar to Halloween, SAW, A Nightmare on Elm Street...), and "The Ghost" as the name of the killer (similar to The Shape, The Pig, The Nightmare...). Copyright: respected. Consistency with the names of the previous 15 killers: respected. All satisfied, both developers and players. :)
-
@rch614 Object of Obsession is a perk that I used once, regretting it soon after, due to the chainsaws that Billy planted in my back. XD It seems to me a very rare perk, potentially problematic for slow killers, who can't fall on the survivor to punish their bravado, but at the same time a suicide if they happen to face Nurse, Billy or Spirit, especially high-ranking. I recognize that the stealth and slow killers, that is, all but Wraith, can suffer great damage from this perk, without an effective counterplay against those who use it, and I would have no objection if the developers retouched it in some way. There is also to say that the survivors in a full team always know where the killer is, so OoO can be a valid, high-risk help for those who play alone. If OoO is modified, probably Sole Survivor should also undergo reworking.
Spine Chill and Premonition, on the other hand, give you orientation tips, but without a sharp eye and stealthy skill on the part of the survivor, they do not save you, by themselves, from ambushes. They must not be touched: they are well balanced, situational and in any case rare at high ranks.
@Tru3Lemon Spine Chill and Premonition that don't work against sneak killers would be like Enduring that doesn't work against pallets: a total nonsense. About Object of Obsession, read above.
@HavelmomDaS1 Many people opened threads complaining about detection perks during the 3.0.0 PTB: I want to show and explain a different point of view about this topic, that is detection perks without permanent Aura reading (all of them, except OoO) are fine.
-
@NuclearBurrito I want a name consistent with all other killers', like The Trapper, The Shape, The Pig... so The Ghost. :)
-
@NuclearBurrito You quoted the wrong message: it was @thatguyinktown to suggest the "a" article, not me. I suggest "The Ghost". XD
-
"The Ghost" clearly expresses his fearsome ability to disappear and reappear without any warning, just like a ghost that suddenly appears on the wall. Furthermore, it would be much more consistent with the name of all other killers, consisting of an article + a noun. No one would be prevented from calling him "Ghost Face", but his official name should be changed, and properly translated.
-
I don't tbag nor hit people on the hook: both of them are useless and nasty behaviors.
-
Your fears will last less than a week, then people will find Billy and regret their choice to use Object of Immediate Hook... I seldom see it in red/purple ranks, especially after DS ceased to be usable before the first hook. Many people remember it just because Ghost Face is arriving, but it's not a common perk, it's not META.