Faulds
Faulds
About
- Username
- Faulds
- Joined
- Visits
- 504
- Last Active
Comments
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805736#Comment_2805736
Are you sure is it really equivalent though?
Removing killer's capability to hook is like removing survivor's capability to do generators since both of those are main objective of them, I don't know what will be equivalent though... maybe removing the capability to kick/slowdown gens or something like that?
You want a better equivalent? Old brand new parts then.
-
I'd be fine with it. But what she needs more is trap consistency in my opinion.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805715#Comment_2805715
Thats how NOED used to work. Is was just a perk on a 120 second timer. Wasn´t a Hex back then.
When exit gate were opened. Not since when the fifth gen pops.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805715#Comment_2805715
It doesn't matter whether if I make sense to you or not, because that's not the point.
You make no sense cause you don't play the other side. For you a killer able to mechanically block any unhook, that isn't a problem. Let me give you an equivalent: what about places where downed survivor wouldn't be picked up by the killer? Fair?
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805702#Comment_2805702
If you are the only one who decide a point is valid or not, I don't think any debate can have meaning.
I said that noed should be a one minute timer. Someone else said that it would make the perk useless. I played endgame noed builds, and then thought that a 60 seconds timer might make those builds bland then. So i wouldn't be against a bigger timer or a permanent noed under certain conditions. When someone make a valid point my position evolve. You didn't make any, and you make no sense.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805698#Comment_2805698
Look? this is the problem, if people see different opinion, they just go "you aren't playing" or "you clearly are xxx main".
Its unfortunate that killers and survivors doesn't have their own devotion. Cause that would close up some issues.
-
@jesterkind said:
It's not a great look to bemoan how debates often feel pointless, and then near-immediately start accusing the first person who disagrees with you of being biased and wanting to make the game miserable for one side.
It kinda makes it look like you just want people to agree with you without any pushback and that if they don't the "debate" was pointless, y'know?
When people object valid points my position evolve. I still didn't see any one else doing the same though.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805679#Comment_2805679
I won't consider getting camped "miserable", that's the reason.
Same reason as I don't consider getting hit by killers "miserable".
Then it's quite obvious that you don't play much survivor. Survivors don't like playing ham on hook simulator.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805663#Comment_2805663
Ah yes, this is the reason why we can't debate things.
As i said. You make one side experience miserable for no reason. What don't you understand about it? Do you need someone to camp you like that, or your teammate, every game to understand?
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805654#Comment_2805654
Which is a lot of time wasted in the early game, which most Killers can't afford. The early game is the Killer's worst, Breakable Walls either need to be dealt with at the start, which means you're not pressuring any Survivor, or you leave them alone until someone heads that way, forcing you to break it mid-chase losing the chase and losing pressure. It's a lose-lose
Which is still easier than dealing with a loop that can't be destroyed at all. What was the point in the first place.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805649#Comment_2805649
I mean... you are only thinking about survivors because you are literally ignoring the existence of killers in this case?
The game experience facing it is more or less "died from camping" and that's it.
No. As i said. You don't understand survivors' end. You only care about killers. Thats so fricking obvious. You make one side miserable for no reason.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805636#Comment_2805636
Most Breakable Walls are pre-dropped Pallets, how is that a good thing?
You can break them early. You don't have to wait entity blocker multiple times in the trial. It is a god loop only one time.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805640#Comment_2805640
It's different from simply removing capability to unhook from survivors... because it involves killer interaction.
You may feel like it is same, but it's actually not.
It is the same from a survivor's perspective. You're only thinking about killers. What do you think the game experience is facing it? That is exactly what i'm all about. You don't care about other side. You have a one sided point of view.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805628#Comment_2805628
I don't think killers having capability to stop unhooking is that bad, especially when it's involving their power.
It takes time and some effort, and more or less uniqueness of them.
So you're accepting that a survivor shouldn't be able to be unhooked at all. That makes no sense from a survivor's perspective. No sense.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805632#Comment_2805632
Ah, unfortunate.
How the hell having litteral god loops was easier to deal with? You couldn't break walls back then. And i've seen even worse footage from when i wasn't playing dbd yet (before 2019).
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805624#Comment_2805624
By this, you mean the current maps are worse?
If so, you just earned my respect.
The opposite.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805619#Comment_2805619
You have more chance to experience something with higher playtime and playing both side, but I think what's important is breaking down why that's a bad/good thing.
I mean if someone says "survivor shouldn't be able to unhook other survivors" your head would be filled with question marks.
That's exactly the issue with Bubba and Doctor in the scenarios above. And yet...
-
@OpenX said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805582#Comment_2805582
Yes them reworking maps to be super survivor sided is more balanced. They have released some of the most unbalanced maps in years lately and some of them give me 2017 vibes.
The maps and their totem spawns are easily the biggest balancing problem and they take almost no steps to address it. That's why half the offerings you see are Coldwind, Springwood, RPD, The Game, Haddo, etc etc. Cause they are all braindead easy to loop on. It takes a real spud to go down to M1 killers on those maps but survivors do manage it somehow, and then come here to complain killer is OP.
Go back see how maps were in 2019 and before. You don't know how much more easy our worse current maps are than what it was.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805615#Comment_2805615
I don't think play time makes opinion right neither, probably logical reasoning or something like that.
Which comes from experience. Since you have to confront theory to reality.
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805603#Comment_2805603
That's great, but quite a lot of people only play 1 side, then start whining on the forums asking nerfs or buffs that'd make the game unbearable for the opposite side just because they lost 1 game
Some times they are right, sometimes they are wrong... sometimes its partially both.
-
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805582#Comment_2805582Well.. they are fixing literal game-breaking things for sure.
Ruin change/ Ds Change/ Mori change/ Key Change/ BT change made my experience quite better balance wise.
@fulltonon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805603#Comment_2805603
Playing both sides doesn't magically make your opinion right though?
That's not a very good reason to validate it.
I have 3,4k hours on that game... playing both sides. I know that game quite a bit now.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
The forum is filled with people asking for nerf/buffs based on personal feelings, it's why disscussion around balance are useless, people don't care about balance, they just want things to be fun for their side only
I play both sides, and i know that there is issues on both ends.
-
@fulltonon said:
I'd say balance discussion in general is pointless because BHVR don't care balance.
Try to discuss something better.Step by step the game become more balanced. You have to be quite blind to not see it.
-
I'm afraid you are right Azshhh. I tried to have a thorough discussion on this forum about the game itself. But it is pointless.
-
Is it that hard to understand? I want, for example, a definite criteria of what is balanced or not balanced. What is a problem and what isn't. So people stop talking into the void.
-
Here we go...
-
@Nos37 said:
It's a hex perk. It can be REMOVED from play by being cleansed!
The killer should have to work for a perk that can be removed anyway?? 😂Ruin doesn't give anything if the killer isn't good. Devour doesn't give anything if the killer isn't good. Every hex but noed ask the killer a lot of input from him to reward him. So yeah, make me laugh. Look at Otz proposal to rework noed.
-
Dying light should not give any bonus to the obsession to begin with. She also should not be unaffected by the slowdowns. But i do agree that when the obsession dies the perk shouldn't disable. I don't think it needs more buffs than that though.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805082#Comment_2805082
Is it a problem to have perks that are more useful on some killers than others, though? Take Save The Best For Last; useless on, say, Huntress, but very good on Demogorgon or Trapper.
While the upper level of how powerful Ruin can be may be a problem, that's more to do with the strength of the killers that use it most effectively. I'd also argue it genuinely isn't useless on less mobile killers, it's just not as powerful- which is a good thing, it encourages perk variety depending on what killer you want to play. If you wanna play Trapper, you might wanna pick different generator defence perks since Ruin is less useful.
Well, at least something we can agree on.
-
That would actually be a good thing. But then you'd need to determine the good timer. I feel that 10 minutes is too short, but 20 is too long. Maybe 15 minutes would be balanced.
-
Well, we could go that way... or increase the duration in which scratchmarks are hidden. I dunno.
-
@buzzaman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2805050#Comment_2805050
You could make it 30% which would be a one stack of Pentimento. I dont think that would be all too crazy since its a hex perk. Freddys slowdown addons were active all the time and you couldnt do anything about them, thats not the same. Noed is not something that needs changing in my opinion.
1. Youve played with 3 perks all game hence the strong effect at the end
2. Against good survivors it will give you one down and thats it.
3. Survivors can stop the perk activating in the first place.
But then it would be redundant with Pentimento. Ruin rework was one of the best changes they made. It doesn't need any more changes.
Getting devour for free in endgame is cheap. You don't lose 1 perk for an endgame perk. You create a three perk build that might get huge buffs in some games. That's how it works with hexes. You create a build around it. You need three perks that make a strong bottom line... and then you let RNG enhances it on some games.
-
@Shaped said:
If people weren't happy about anything in the game I doubt anyone would play it.
Me for example. Game has flaws sure but it can still be fun and that is the reason I play it on and off for years.
People do focus on the negative, and that is why you might get that impression. I doubt that even those who complain the most are not having fun at all. Why would anyone play the game they never find fun?
They are kids that can't rationalise things. You see it even more when trying to debate on the forums.
-
Ruin change: that's an absolute no. Forever freddy was deleted for a good reason. And a killer should be working hard to get good value from his perk.
Dead Man Switch: that's actually something i agree with.
Dead Hard: i don't know the numbers behind it. But apparently they are going to rework dead hard that way.
Iron will. I can agree with. But i'd also be fine with replacing grunts of pain with breathing sounds (heavier than full health ones).
Prove thyself: no. Prove thyself just negate the penalty its fine.
And there is more pressing meta changes:
*BT: could be shorten to make bodyblocking more dangerous (10 or 8 seconds duration rather than 12)
*NOED: allows killers to come back even if they did bad in chase all throughout the trial... they get a 3 stack devour for free in endgame, thats complete bs
*COH: the self care ability provided by the boon to all the team needs a nerf
-
@lemonsway said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2794646#Comment_2794646
What do you mean in the right direction? If in 2016 things were worse then yeah sure the game got better over 5 years but if 2016 was Hell then 5 years later we're not in Heaven we're just in a slightly not as bad of a place as in 2016. In simpler terms if 2016 was the 7th Circle of Hell now 2022 is like the 4th Circle of Hell, it's still very broken and terribly managed just not as bad as 2016. The issue here is that yeah that's how it should work, it should get better over time so going from "7th circle of Hell to 4th circle of Hell" means jack ######### that's how it should be done in every case. REALITY CHECK tho : YOU'RE STILL IN HELL.
No. The devs made a lot of changes that make my experience better whether i am playing killer or survivor (keys/ moris/ ds/ bt/ object/ no more god loop/ good variety of good killer perks etc.). The game is in the best state that's ever been. The problem is the childish community.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804282#Comment_2804282
Neither does NOED. Getting one guy on a hook if nobody's been hooked means everyone is totally healthy and not at all vulnerable, making cleansing and saving far, far easier. If you want value from NOED, you ideally want at least one person dead already, otherwise the one person you down is going to have three other people to rescue them.
They're all still perks that, if you're skilled, you can use to turn around a losing match. Same as NOED- except all the perks listed are stronger and more consistent than NOED.
Those perks require a lot of input that noed doesn't require. How is getting passively an unlimited insta-down ability an input from the killer?
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804266#Comment_2804266
If you're gonna do the whole "Wrong!" thing, it might be worth making sure you're actually correct.
No Way Out is improved by the killer hooking all survivors once. With zero hooks, No Way Out still activates and still allows the killer more of a chance to turn the endgame around. That also doesn't address the other two examples I gave, of perks that allowed the killer to come back in the endgame.
It's also worth mentioning that you didn't ask for a perk that had no activation requirements (even if NWO still qualifies), you asked for a perk that let the killer turn things around in the endgame after having a very poor match.
No way out doesn't have a sgnificant effect if survivors haven't been hooked. Starstruck has a 30 seconds duration on survivors. Devour hope needs stack by hooking numerous times, and getting far from the unhook. Killers needs to be quite active to get value from them. That's not the same with noed in a good rng.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804236#Comment_2804236
No Way Out.
Also, depending on how loose we are with strict definition, tons of perks. Starstruck has actually carried me to extra kills I likely wouldn't have gotten without it because survivors tend to get cocky when they think they've already won, and I've also personally had late game Devour Hope carries after only getting a few hooks. Both of those happened after the last generator was completed, so it's definitely comparable.
There's also the fact that the fifth generator being completed doesn't actually translate to "getting beaten to a pulp". Sure, if that point is reached when you've only got a few hooks, that's a poor game for you, but it's still not over and you can still turn it around with the help of perks, and your power.
No way Out ask the killer to hook all survivors once. And killer can't be passive about it. Wrong!
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804212#Comment_2804212
Comebacks happen in the endgame all the time, NOED or not. As for a killer not deserving a comeback because of a perk, that seems a little excessive- if it takes skill to actually perform that comeback (which it does), why exactly is that unfair? You still need the skill to actually use NOED (or whatever other endgame perk you have, No Way Out is the same way) and a trash killer still doesn't benefit in the way you're suggesting, so what's the problem?
The game isn't over just because the last generator is done, it doesn't matter how many hooks the killer has. If they have the skill to make use of what they have available, NOED or not, that comeback is earned.
Tell me one other perk that allows a killer to snowball as much after getting beating to a pulp. There is none. That's why the perk is a problem. WHether you think it is true or not it doesn't matter.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804167#Comment_2804167
I'd argue choosing whether to wait out the timer or not is exactly the same amount of counterplay as choosing to cleanse a totem or not, with the sole difference that cleansing a totem is more interactive than waiting in a bush.
Your second point is the one I have bigger problems with, though- NOED may feel as though trash killers get too much value, but one of my main points throughout this thread is that I genuinely don't see how that could be true. If a killer is trash, they'll get one down, the perk will be revealed, and then their more skilled opponents will go cleanse it or they'll just leave. The only way a trash - or even just average - killer gets all that much value is if survivors play into it, not because the perk itself inherently gifts it to them.
What I think it boils down to is that survivors see a killer that's having a poor match, assume they're trash, and then get mad that they successfully leveraged NOED into a few kills because they don't think a skilled player could possibly have a bad match- or more realistically, because they don't realise how much they or their teammates played into NOED and gave it value. It all comes down to perception, and while there's merit to saying a perk that feels bad warrants changing, it's important to understand that it just feels bad so you don't suggest things that'll make the problem far worse. Changing NOED to give the same or better value so that "trash killers can't benefit" will make the perk a far bigger problem, because currently, trash killers only benefit if the survivors play poorly- and a skilled killer will get much more out of a less counterable version of the perk.
When a killer get two hooks all throughout the game he doesn't deserve a come back because of one perk. A good killer can snowball with any perks... take noed away they won't. That's the problem. Take NOED away from the equation, they would never make a come back. So NOED is the problem within this scenarios.
Cleasing a totem or fighting a timer is different. Cause one is rng related. Not the other. And the gameplay would be more interactive since the killer would have to choose between taking risks or camping till the end. He won't be passive and getting as much value from it.
-
- NOED needs a buff
- You can win consistently with any killer, if you have good perks and good add-ons
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804133#Comment_2804133
Sure, in my opinion, but we're just discussing opinions here anyway.
If the timer came with the removal of its hex status, it would end up in the same scenario- you already need to have quite a few hooks going (ideally someone dead) before NOED's going to do all that much for you, so it'll be in the exact same spot. But... that's bad? It would be just as annoying to survivors because nothing about it has actually changed beyond it having less counterplay, and it's still not going to be a particularly great perk because the benefits being on a timer means survivors will be more inclined to be immersed until they're no longer Exposed.
If it's not on a timer, and it's just permanent... that makes things far worse? Now it's a strong effect with no counterplay at all, I don't see how that fixes anything.
Putting it on a timer has more counterplay from survivors. Cause choices to make are more clear then. Like, if the timer exceeds the hook state you just leave. Otherwise you wait it out. With a totem its different. Very different. It all comes down to luck.
I'd be fine with noed being permanent if the killer has hooked all survivor once... because trash killers wouldn't benefit from it in the first place, what is my only issue with the perk from a survivor perspective.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804118#Comment_2804118
...No? I think the perk is too weak/inconsistent and think it should have a completely different effect, because making this effect stronger risks actually making it OP and making the effect weaker by forcing a token system or timer onto it is obviously the wrong call.
I am not interested in making NOED more finnicky and inconsistent to actually use, even if it comes packaged with some stronger effects. I want it to be consistently useful.
In your opinion. I could also say that a timer limits the snowball potential that is problematic, but make it consistent enough so that other problematic aspect gets addressed. I could also say that endgame builds needs a good noed or they'll be worthless, and that asking for the four survivors to be hooked once before the fifth gen pops is enough restriction to reward the killer with good permanent pressure. NOED has its own core, no need to change it... just create another perk if you have a good idea for endgame.
Edit: look at ds... it was op as hell. They didn't change its core nature, only its activation requirements. And now it is in a perfect spot.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804110#Comment_2804110
I know the thought doesn't come out of nowhere, I just disagree with it. I don't think that NOED actually does unfairly punish solo q players, for reasons I've laid out throughout the thread.
Hearing Otz thinks it does have too much snowball potential doesn't change my mind because it doesn't address any of the reasons I think the things I think.
But by denying that aspect... you're also preventing buffing the perk accordingly in the end.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804089#Comment_2804089
That's just not true. I just haven't accepted the Bs you personally have said. My comments in this thread alone show that I am more than willing to consider actual reasons.
Its not BS. You don't want NOED to change. When a change would eventually make it better for killers also. If you understood what i said, i'd actually buff NOED in the end. I'd buff it for good killers. And weaken it for the trash ones.
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804080#Comment_2804080
I agree! It doesn't mean they're automatically right, and it also means they aren't experts, they're just people with a wider knowledge base to pull from.
They're relevant, but they're relevant because their reasoning might be persuasive, not just because they hold a certain opinion. I don't care that Otz thinks NOED is unfair, necessarily, but I might care why he thinks that.
(I don't, in this scenario, but hypothetically I might.)
That's why it was an argument from authority; you weren't bringing up his argument, just mentioning him because you (presumably) thought his name was inherently more persuasive.
I mentioned content creators to say that thinking that noed is unfair doesn't come from nowhere "since players of that caliber came to the same conclusion". From what i've heard, they dislike noed for his snowball potential against solo q players... the same argument you all just put aside.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804060#Comment_2804060
Ok, so then why earlier did you completely refuse to accept the developers (Amos in particular) and say they are mistaken? Are the ones who made the actual game and keep it going not considered "experts" to you? After all, using your own analogy they would have been the ones who went to school and studied the brain, while otz and the like are more the "self help" gurus you find on YouTube, who while very enthusiastic, are not formally trained.
Because you deny all validity from noed criticism. You don't admit that it is understandable that noed have issues for survivors.
Edit: also... Almo, the same dev that said that old Object is not a terribly effective perk?
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804060#Comment_2804060
Slight correction, they are not experts on the topic we're discussing, because we're discussing potential balance changes. Otzdarva and the others are very thoroughly knowledgeable on how the current currently is but that doesn't automatically translate to having any particular authority on how it should be.
That's why bringing them up here isn't really relevant, in this area they're just people who play the game whose opinion has about as much weight as anyone else's.
They have quite the experience with the game. That's why it is relevant. It doesn't say that they are automatically right. That's it.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2804040#Comment_2804040
Provide an actual reason, not "these guys say it is". So far that and "it feels bad to me no matter what any data says" are the only "reasons" you have brought forth and no, neither of which is particularly valid.
They are experts on the subject not you. You can't put they expertise aside for no good reason. It doesn't work this way. When you want to know if someone is responsible or have a mental illness you ask a psychiatrist... not the local bookseller.
Edit; you can have a different opinion than theirs. But you can't say that people that think the same have no reason to think it.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2803990#Comment_2803990
Literally a textbook definition, that you then tripled down on. Should we then start naming streamers who don't think noed should be changed? Or should we go back to the actual merits of the argument?
Ohtofu/ Truetalent/ Otzdarva says noed is unhealthy as content creators killer mains. It only means that thinking that noed isn't fair and healthy doesn't come from nowhere. But, continue to deny all validity from the other side. Continue to pretend that there is no valid reason to think that noed is unhealthy and unfair.
-
Just make it a basic feature on random so survivors have a chance.
I'm joking. But, i saw that bug against a Nurse. Didn't know till now that it was so frequent. Ah, that's so much our DBD.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2803965#Comment_2803965
A lot of people on the forums also think that, an argument from authority or an appeal to the majority don't really mean much. Otzdarva is a great content creator, probably my favourite, but he has blind spots and it's kind of silly to expect anyone to be right 100% of the time.
I have actual reasons for thinking what I do about NOED, hearing that some other guy thinks otherwise isn't inherently enough to change my mind.
Having the perk work on a token system is honestly the worst idea I could think of, that just weakens an already inconsistent perk- especially if it's still a hex and has all its current counterplay on top of that. At best, it fixes nothing, and at worst it stops NOED from even doing the thing it's supposed to.
It is not an argument of authority. It is nothing more than getting another argument coming from an expert on the topic. It doesn't necessarily say that they are right... only that it doesn't come out of nowhere "for no reason". I also said that Otz's change would overnerf the perk.
Edit: Truetalent thinks the perk is unhealthy. Ohtofu thinks it also. (All killer mains btw). How much do you need?