Fibijean
Fibijean
About
- Username
- Fibijean
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@LeonardPChurch said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1107650#Comment_1107650
Lag switching is still absolutely a thing. It doesnt work in the on demand way it did, but it does still give an advantage to the killer in most situations.
If you can't do it on demand, then it's not really lag switching. It's just lag.
-
@fcc2014 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123679#Comment_1123679
See i feel like this one is less of a grind than the last one.The challenges were more toxic in the last one. We have a few this time around but not as many as last time. Did you ever post the survey responses by the way. I was curious to see where respondents fell.
I'm still working on them. My life has been quite busy the last few weeks, and the survey was more work than I expected. There are over 1000 responses, with about 15 questions in each one, and I have to enter every answer manually into a spreadsheet in order to be able to properly make links between them (because the software I used to create the survey doesn't allow me to draw comparisons between questions along the lines of, for example, how many of the people that completed the Rift bought the Rift Pass). But it is definitely still coming! I'm very sorry for the delay.
-
@FireHazard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123973#Comment_1123973
The Killer hit her, as seen from the scream the Demogorgon makes when you hit someone successfully.
Regardless of what happened, it just seems like lag and latency was a factor here, since this body teleportation and Survivors being moved while downed isn't anything new in-game with Dedicated Servers. It does look a bit odd though and up for interpretation, but because of how limited the visibility is... it's not really enough to determine if foul play was a factor or not.
Yeah, I was just pointing out it was strange that we didn't see the killer hit her - not only was he nowhere near her, but he was in the middle of a different animation. But as you say, it's hard to tell exactly what did happen there since it is quite odd.
-
@Cius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1124100#Comment_1124100
but it would be much better than the current system
The current system is pretty bad, I won't argue with you there, but it is at least loosely based on the player's in-game performance, which is a far better reflector of skill than simply number of hours played. Experience =/= skill or understanding.
-
@Respectfulnancymain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123223#Comment_1123223
This! Everytime i say anything i get called a entitled survivor main even though i became a killer main recently
If you can find a way to dismiss an argument without having to think about it, that's much easier than taking the time to actually consider it seriously. I've been called a killer main in the past for saying "killers have as much right to a victory as survivors do" and other such outrageously biased remarks.
-
@DelsKibara said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123846#Comment_1123846
Normally you would think an M rated game would have most of the playerbase being mature enough to have that skill, but I guess when it's just a game you can act as immature as you want and no one will know who you are.
Well unfortunately, although the "M" stands for "mature", age actually has very little to do with that.
-
@FireHazard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123396#Comment_1123396
This just looks like the usual that I see in-game when I down Survivors.
I've never seen it go that extreme, but sometimes when you down a Survivor they'll jut back to a previous position before being downed. Usually when this happens the position is not that far from where you downed them, either behind you or a big side-ways. From the looks of it, it just seems like a latency/dedicated server mishap that happened there, since this is fairly common for me and other Killers when they down a Survivor.
The only difference here is this one was fairly extreme with where that Survivor was placed after they got downed. From the looks of it though, it seems that Claudette was lagging before she was downed, meaning when she was downed she rubber-banded back to a previous position. This too happens sometimes, but more commonly in chases where a Survivor will be moving forward and than all of a sudden teleport behind you or a ways away. From the looks of it though, it seems she rubber-banded back right when she got downed. This too is not a SUPER common thing to happen, but it usually happens because of the Survivors connection to Dedicated Servers, and/or latency.
I agree that it was probably latency, but Claudette's position wasn't the weird part, it was the fact that she went down while the killer was 20 metres away placing a portal, and then the killer apparently teleported.
-
@ChiTenshi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123035#Comment_1123035
I'm treating them like a crazy person because what they're saying is in the video isn't factually correct, they are completely ignoring the player's PoV (and anyway who states this), and they have heavily edited their comments to make opposing comments look bad.
I will not continue a discussion with someone like that.
---
You need to remember that the player did not know they were going to be free, they thought they were stuck in the falling animation after being unhooked. If you are stuck due a bug and you don't know how long you'll be stuck (5 minutes, 10 minutes, 1 hour), then disconnecting is definitely an option.
I think what others are trying to say is that it was just that, an option. The point of contention seems to be whether or not a DC was necessary in this scenario, on the premise that a DC is only justifiable if the player has no other choice. It may have felt necessary to the player who didn't know what was going on, but it can't be justified on the basis that there was nothing else they could do, because there was.
For the record, I don't believe you were arguing that they had to DC. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed to me that you were just trying to say that a DC would have been reasonable under the circumstances, if one takes into consideration the fact that they didn't know what was going on and had no way of knowing that the problem would resolve itself. Carpe was saying that since that bug did resolve itself, a DC was unneeded and therefore unjustified. In a way, you're both right.
Either way, @gelukrait, the answer to your question is that what you should do in that scenario is wait for a resolution, unfortunate as that is, because you're not actually stuck indefinitely in that scenario even though it may seem like it. You can disconnect, obviously, but I wouldn't encourage it and neither, I'm fairly certain, would the devs. You won't get banned from the game for a DC unless you make a habit of it, but you will get locked out of the matchmaking queue for a short time.
-
@ViciouscirceBU said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123641#Comment_1123641
I'm guessing that's where u don't see the rank at the end of the game?
There is an entirely new system for measuring player skill being implemented, based on a Match Making Rating (MMR) that will be hidden from all players, including the player themselves. You can find more details about the system here: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/124795/status-update-matchmaking-changes
-
I've never met a single person on this forum who mindlessly agrees with everything the devs say, so probably the reason they were left out of the OP is because they are either incredibly rare or don't exist.
-
Winning gracefully is a vastly underrated skill.
-
@LemeTheMeme said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123786#Comment_1123786
The thing is, you're approximate is purely that, an approximate. The amount of time a game takes is about 10-20 minutes. Finding a match is anywhere between 5-10 minutes as survivor, to instant as killer. There are also more survivor challenges than there are killer ones. I don't agree with it being an "achievement" because this is a battle pass, and they come and go frequently. I don't feel like I've "achieved" anything when I complete these challenges, I feel actually underwhelmed that the first challenge as a survivor takes 5 games to beat IF you escape, for 15k bps and a little progress on your rift.
I don't want to spend 70 hours in game to complete one pass. I don't just want to sit and play dbd everyday for hours to complete it. The grind is not worth the rewards in my opinion. Not to mention that 70 hours is inaccurate due to the waiting times with finding matches, sitting in lobbies, loading screens, players not loading into matches, etc.
I think the distinction to be drawn here is that the challenges themselves don't come and go, they stick around forever, which is why I say that a balance needs to be found between that and how they affect progress while the Rift is open. For example, if one were reasonably able to complete the Rift by doing most, but not all, of the challenges, I don't think it would be a problem if some of them were particularly difficult because you have all the time you need to work through them. It's only a problem if the difficulty of the challenges increases the Rift completion time exorbitantly.
-
No worries bro 👍️
-
The Shrine is randomised. It's not an anti-killer conspiracy.
-
Step 1: Don't. Be a nice person and respect the fact that killers have feelings too.
Step 2: Throw them a "gg" after the game, for good measure.
-
If that happened, it would probably make use of them as a killer. We know that survivors who lose hope and are therefore no longer of any use to the Entity get lost in the fog, but if a survivor started killing other survivors, assuming that were even possible, my guess would be that the Entity would take advantage of that and redistribute them to where they're most useful.
-
@LemeTheMeme said:
I didn't buy this tome because it was way too grindy. I don't want to dedicate everyday to this game just to get some recolors and some new cosmetics. Also, some of these challenges require a lot of games to achieve them. That should never be the case. A challenge should be able to be completed in a match or two, no more.
I think challenges should be like achievements - some of them easy, some of them difficult. If all of them are completable within a match or two (assuming by that you mean a match or two's worth of attempts, not theoretical progress), they're hardly worthy of being called "challenges". Though obviously, a balance needs to be found in how Rift progress is affected.
I actually think they've come a lot closer to hitting that balance this time - this Rift, by my calculations, should take about 70 hours in-match with all challenges complete, but it could do with being a little less grindy, since they once again appear to have failed to factor in time spent in queues, lobbies, loading screens etc. between matches.
-
@Elk said:
I think the first time we had more time, i think. Don't quote me but i thought T:1 was released later due to something but the Devs gave us the progress for that time that was supposed to be on.
That's also true. A lot of people started the last Rift somewhere between tiers 5 and 15.
-
@SnakeSound222 said:
I think the common one reduces it by two meters, uncommon one reduces it by four meters and the very rare one reduces it by eight meters.
They are getting buffed in the next update though, so this might change.
According to the wiki, it's actually 4, 6 and 8 metres currently, but as you say this may be about to change.
-
The only time Oni's speed changes is while he's absorbing blood, and while using his Demon Dash. His speed is the same while walking normally whether he's in Blood Fury or not.
It's possible that his Blood Fury walking speed feels slower because of the contrast between it and the Demon Dash speed, and/or because of visual changes while in Blood Fury, like having the Kanabo covering half the screen. It's also likely that he, like most killers, slows down while charging his dash, which might make him feel slower if you're spending most of your time either charging or using Demon Dash.
-
The Demogorgon vanished from where you could see him at the same time as Claudette got downed, which makes me think it was probably just really bad latency at play. Do you have footage of the other person being downed?
-
I think this Tome is more grindy, but I think that's a good thing. None of the challenges in this Tome even come close to the difficulty of some of those in the previous one, they just take longer to do. One of my main complaints about the last Tome was how quickly you could work through the challenges, because the more time you spend doing challenges, the less time you spend grinding levels through pure XP. So I think a grindy Tome is a huge improvement over a grindy Rift.
-
@List_of_concerns said:
@Fibijean I think I might've needed an undecided option. From where I'm sitting you've changed your mind a few times.
For example:
"If this were a purely cosmetic change I'd be all for it." - Fibijean
"...what you're proposing is a purely cosmetic change." - Fibijean
Another example:
"the possibility of succeeding DC or wiggling out and getting the hatch does exist" - Fibijean
"given how niche and unimpactful a change it would be" - Fibijean
Fair enough. Let me clarify, then:
The first set of statements ("If this were a purely cosmetic change I'd be all for it" and "the possibility of succeeding DC or wiggling out and getting the hatch does exist") were made in response to your initial idea - that is, the idea of allowing killers to mori the last survivor in a trial, period.
The second set of statements ("what you're proposing is a purely cosmetic change" and "given how niche and unimpactful a change it would be") were made in response to your revised idea, of allowing killers to mori the last survivor only if the hatch is closed, there is no key in play, and neither exit gate has been opened. In responding to that idea specifically, my position was that while I personally would be happy for it to be implemented, I couldn't see the devs doing so. This was for a couple of reasons - partly because cosmetic changes have no impact on gameplay and are therefore unlikely to be prioritised above things like bug fixes and new mechanics, and partly because although it was now purely cosmetic and therefore "fair", the amount of conditions you needed to place on it to make it so ensured it would only activate under a very specific set of circumstances. And a cosmetic change which only activates in maybe 5% of games, while I would personally have no problems with it if it were implemented, doesn't seem like something that would make it onto the devs' to-do list at the moment.
In summary, those seemingly conflicting statements you quoted were responding to two separate ideas, and expressing my difference in opinion over each of them. I was against the first idea, because it would affect gameplay. I was all for the revised idea in theory, but didn't think it would be worth implementing from a practical standpoint because of how niche it was. I hope that clears things up.
-
@NullEXE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1120608#Comment_1120608
If the dev's are smart they are going to be releasing this DLC late, after they fix EVERYTHING they broke balance wise with the Toolbox changes, Perks, and Keeping items after a match 🤨. Like i'm pretty the last of their killer's are just sitting here waiting - staring at the DLC, and ready to uninstall the second it comes out with any of these Survivor Buffs.
Though they already mentioned they don't plan to release the updated Hangman's Trick - which was probably the only balanced thing that came out with this update, but of course; It's in the Killers favor and makes the game easier for them. Therefore it's gots to go! The killer isn't allowed to have fun in this game.
Where did they make that announcement, about Hangman's Trick? Could you link me to it?
-
@Codela said:
As of now, your system would not make much sense I'm afraid. If you're making match-making dependent on a character's level, I can as well have all survivors on P3 Lvl. 50 and an according DbD experience but once a new survivor gets released, I might get matched with a completely new player. That would be quite unfair, wouldn't it be?
Not to mention it's very easy to level a character to max without ever having played them.
-
The devs have seen the video already, and had a discussion about it internally. We don't know what the outcome of that discussion was, though.
-
I'd play it, but I don't think it's a good idea to implement right now because DBD simply doesn't have the population to support it.
-
@Archimedes5000 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1121670#Comment_1121670
Actually hatch closing and grabs are the only cases where killer action does not override survivior action, so what matters is who presses the button first.
I think his problem was because killer hitbox is so big that it blocks the whole hatch
Far from the only case. But you're correct about this being one scenario in which neither side is favoured.
-
The PTB usually ends after a week, and then they spend the next week getting ready for the live patch. It's very rare that they make changes in the middle of the PTB, or even announce upcoming changes at that point. Most likely, we won't know what changes are happening until the patch notes for the live update are released.
-
@List_of_concerns said:
@Fibijean I know it's not the same exact thing. It's a proof of concept. It demonstrates that they have the capability of making things function under very specific sets of circumstances. I'm not trying to imply that cosmetic changes are greater than or equal to gameplay changes.
Of course - again, I never denied that they could do it, all I said was that it didn't seem worth it given how niche and unimpactful a change it would be, nice as it might be to have in theory.
-
@List_of_concerns said:
@Fibijean I guess my counter would be: Perks. There are 134 Perks and almost all of them function under very specific sets of circumstances. All of those Perks must've been worth it. I have faith that BHVR could figure it out.
That's not the same thing at all. Perks affect gameplay, what you're proposing is a purely cosmetic change. I'm sure they could do it, all I'm saying is that they probably wouldn't when it's just for visual pleasure and only happens under specific circumstances.
-
@List_of_concerns said:
@Fibijean What if for all intents and purposes there was no way for the last Survivor to Escape? For example: What if the Hatch has been closed, the last survivor does not have a Key, neither Exit Gate has been opened, and the last Survivor is in the Dying State? It's not my goal for this change to affect win versus loss scenarios.
I guess it would be okay in that scenario, but that's a very specific set of circumstances you would have to program it to recognise. It almost doesn't seem worth it at that point.
-
If this were a purely cosmetic change I'd be all for it. But the possibility of succeeding DC or wiggling out and getting the hatch does exist, so as small as that chance is, I'd rather not see it removed altogether.
-
@Ursocapitalistaa said:
@FireHazard Thank you but I play on Ps4 amd that link only have solutions for pc players
You can contact Support directly and tell them about your problem, and they will give console support as well. I think that's what FireHazard meant for you to do, but just to clear up any confusion, here is the direct link to contact them about a technical issue on any platform: https://support.deadbydaylight.com/hc/en-us/requests/new?ticket_form_id=191366
-
@ViciouscirceBU said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1119615#Comment_1119615
Thank you tbh from reading other threads I've seen on here a lot was unclear since it seems everyone has a biased opinion weather it be for killers or survivors. I appreciate the help
No worries! And yeah, everyone on the forums has some very different and very strong opinions. It can be hard to separate the wheat from the chaff sometimes, especially when you're new and unfamiliar enough with the game that you don't yet have strong opinions of your own.
-
We'll know when the patch notes for the live version come out. Which, judging from recent history, won't be until an hour or two before the patch itself gets released.
-
@BenZ0 said:
Yeah get ye, how you discribed, I meant when the perks comes in clutch. My point was that, that Killers only have 1 comparable perk like unbreakable that can be a gamechanger but is situational and that is Bloodwarden. But bloodwarden has 2 requirements and also a counterplay to it. You need to hook someone while the gates are open. The counterplay is just leave before the Killer hooks the person. While ubreakable has none of these things I mentioned, thats why I made this entire post. I dont find it fair that a situational perk like unbreakable (even though it will not come in use alot) has NO downsides or requirements compared to all other situational perks (Said perk Bloodwarden).
One could make the argument that Unbreakable is too strong, but I would be very cautious about making such an argument on the basis of comparing it directly to killer perks or mechanics, since that's an inherently flawed premise. Killers are not and never have been designed as an equivalent to survivors, and neither have any of their perks or mechanics. The two roles are different on such a fundamental level that it's pretty much impossible to compare like with like when debating the balance between the two. So the fact that killers don't have an equivalent to Unbreakable is not only to be expected but also largely irrelevant. Point being, there may be other reasons why Unbreakable is problematic, but the fact that there is no killer equivalent is not one of them.
Having said that, I would personally argue that Unbreakable has counterplay in the same way that any other hidden perk (Blood Warden included) does - you play on the assumption that they have it, or suffer the consequences. The counter to Unbreakable, similarly to the counter to Blood Warden, is to simply not give them a chance to use it. For the record, I'm not saying it's a good counter - largely for the reasons you mentioned above about the necessity for slugging in certain scenarios - but it is a counter, and should in fairness be recognised as such.
-
Finally, someone is talking about the real gamebreaking stuff. Thank you, I hope the devs see this.
-
No - simply because if he opened the gate himself, he was almost certainly trying to get EGC kills, and although I'm a very forgiving person generally I never let mercy get in the way of completing my challenges.
-
@BenZ0 said:
Hm I manage to use unbreakalbe at the half of my survivor games^^ Sure most of the time I dont turn the entire game with it, because sometimes I am the only one who is slugged but still, I manage to use unbreakable far more then you mentioned. Are you playing in swf aswell or solo?
I should clarify I suppose, I have a lot of opportunities to use Unbreakable that I don't take, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, because for all I know there may come a point later in the game when I really need it, and I want to be able to use it if that point comes and not have wasted it already. Secondly, because as long as I haven't used Unbreakable to get myself up yet, I can use it to recover to 99% so that teammates who come to rescue me can literally just give me a single tap to heal me.
The reason I didn't mention that in the first place, and only talked about the times it has actually saved my life, is because the discussion appeared to be mostly about the perk's use in clutch situations, rather than just as a means of getting up without assistance any time you're slugged (which in my opinion is a waste of the perk and not using it to its full advantage, and therefore definitely not a problem).
-
That's a fair few questions. I'll try to answer them all as best I can.
Firstly, why do survivors wait at the exit gate for you to hit them before leaving? There are a couple of reasons, but no, they don't get more points if they leave injured. Sometimes, they do this as a means of rubbing their victory in your face. Usually the ones with that attitude will run around in circles, spam flashlights, and maybe even leave right before you manage to hit them. However, some survivors will wait around at the gate because they know you get points for hitting them, and they want to ease the sting for you a little bit by giving you some extra last-minute bloodpoints - a bit of a consolation prize, if you like, for the fact that you lost.
What defines toxicity? You'll get different answers to that from pretty much everyone. In my opinion, toxicity is a behaviour or an attitude. It's not about what builds or mechanics you employ, but how and why you do so. No build or mechanic on its own is inherently "toxic", but people can be toxic and often use particular items, perks or mechanics which allow them to behave that way. A basic definition for toxicity is, if what the person is doing serves no tactical purpose - especially if it actually hinders their chances of victory - and the only thing they get out of it is making others suffer or feel bad in some way, then it's toxic. Examples of toxic behaviour (though admittedly only mildly so) in DBD include teabagging the killer as a survivor, or hitting hooked survivors as a killer. They don't do it to help them win the game, they only do it to gloat and make their opponent feel bad.
Is the scenario you described camping? Yes, absolutely. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily. No reasonable person would expect you to leave the hook when you know there are survivors right there who you could hit. However, it's also a mistake not to chase anyone for fear of someone else coming to rescue the hooked survivor. One of the biggest lessons to learn as a new killer is that it's okay for survivors to get rescued from the hook. Basically, if leaving the hook is more likely to get you another hook than staying around, it's a good idea to leave. But if you know there are other survivors nearby just waiting for you to leave, feel free to search the area for them instead.
As for where camping crosses the line from strategy to toxicity, it comes back to what I was saying earlier about intent. Camping, in and of itself, is never toxic. But it could be considered to be so if the killer doing it is willingly relinquishing a strategic advantage in order to camp the hook, just because they want to ruin the hooked survivor's game. An example of this might be if other survivors try to start a chase, but the killer refuses to chase or even hit them. If there are tactical reasons to camp, it's absolutely fine. If there is no tactical reason and it's purely about ruining the game for others, then it's toxic.
-
@wozza70 said:
THX, that link is what I was after.
No worries, glad I could help 👍️
-
I've been working on a group project where half the group aren't doing anything. It's like playing solo survivor, but worse.
-
First, you need to have reported them ingame in the post-game scoring screen. If you didn't do that, unfortunately the team won't be able to do anything about it.
Secondly, you need to submit a Support ticket under "Additional Player Report Information" with your Player ID, the offending player's Player ID, and your video evidence. Here is the direct link to do so: https://support.deadbydaylight.com/hc/en-us/requests/new?ticket_form_id=191426
Also, make sure that what they were doing is really a bannable offence. You can check up on what is considered griefing in the official Game Rules post here: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/19450/game-rules-and-report-system
-
"If" being the operative word. If it comes into play, and if the killer can't recover the lost pressure, it can turn a game around.
The rest of the time, it's pretty much useless. I've been a long-time fan of Unbreakable, and in 70% of my games, I don't even use it. And that's the entire point - it's meant to be really good when you do get to use it, because most of the time, you don't. The risk balances out the reward.
-
@FireHazard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1118490#Comment_1118490
Well i'm saying that I doubt new Ruin by-passes this, that's why I said "I doubt it" at the start.
The rest is just agreeing with what you said. The part where I say "I doubt it" goes off of how Ruin automatically damages a Generator, which is what I initially thought you meant but from what you're typing it isn't the case.
Regardless if it was or not, that part still stands I suppose. All in all, we at least have our answer for the OP.
Oh okay, I get it. Yeah, I wasn't saying that, I was agreeing with you 😊
-
@Stitch7833 said:
best way would be to reduce repair speed while injured, this way you wont get games where people never heal and it will award those people that hit multiple people and juggle all the survivors. doesnt need to be major but enough to make it worth healing so you arent a 1 hit and the gens dont take too much longer. this would make games longer, allow for more cases on both sides, more altruism etc.
That's basically Thanatophobia.
-
You can post in the Technical Issues subforum (https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/categories/technical-issues) and see if someone there has the answer, but the best way to get a problem like that resolved, especially if progress loss is involved, is probably to contact Support, and submit a ticket in the technical issues category.
Here is the link to Support: https://support.deadbydaylight.com/hc/en-us
-
@FireHazard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1116913#Comment_1116913
If you scroll down you can literally see the same post that I answered before, he posted about something else being taken by the spam filer I think.
If it was that post, than it still exists. I don't see why the post was re-posted instead of just waiting for it to return.
Yes, I saw your answer. But it's entirely possible, as I explained, that he didn't see it until after he reposted the discussion, not realising that the original thread had been swallowed by the spam filter and thinking it had simply disappeared.
-
@FireHazard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1116910#Comment_1116910
Again?
I guess it's finally happening this time huh...
Hopefully.