Fibijean
Fibijean
About
- Username
- Fibijean
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1069023#Comment_1069023
That's the point, you can use stealth to avoid the killer and hopefully they will find someone else. You're in a team of four survivors, if you like stealth, then hopefully your have teammates that like to take agro of the killer.
If you're entire team is stealthy, then yes, the game won't progress until someone does something. I believe this is fair because if no one is doing anything, then of course the game shouldn't progress — why should it progress when no one is doing anything.
It's like saying there's two survivors left with a generator to complete, if both survivors are being stealthy because they are afraid of the killer, then of course the last generator won't get completed. The game shouldn't reward you for hiding in a corner or locker all game, anyone can do that.
It's not that the game isn't rewarding people for hiding, it's that it's discouraging them from pursuing their objective. I'm sorry Nick, I know you want to have an interesting discussion about this, I'm just too exhausted today 🙁 I wouldn't have commented on the thread if I'd known it would be so contentious.
All I'm trying to say is I like the general idea, I just don't like that it tries to force the survivors to be aggressive. If there were a way to implement it without penalising stealth builds so heavily, while still being fun for killers, I would be all for it.
@WolfPad06 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1069023#Comment_1069023
I don't think you're understanding the point of Jund's suggestion. Or maybe you are, and find it unrealistically unfair.
Stealth early game is still completely possible in this scenario, it simply LIMITS the progress survivors are able to make in the first few seconds on the game to allow weaker killers (or killers with set up) to not fall behind so terribly in the early game.
Nobody is suggesting you block all generators, just reduce the speed by which they are repaired. The chances of encountering 4 survivors who all prefer a stealthy playstyle in one game is rather low, so in practice you'd be having this debuff for a very little amount of time before someone else is found and the normal game resumes.
Even if all 4 survivors preferred a stealthy playstyle, it makes no sense for stealthy play to be optimal, as opposed to risky play. Otherwise we might as well have AIs for killers.
After all, being truly stealthy you are not moving fast (in order to not leave scratch marks) and avoiding potential confrontations with the killers, which means you'll be stepping in and out of the gens often when the killer is around.
Now before you say "But why must my playstyle be penalized?", it's being limited in the beginning because the gen rush meta is a big problem in this game (especially for setup heavy killers), and as survivors, taking this small nerf at literally the first few seconds of the match will improve the health and balance of the game greatly. Does is affect stealthy players more? Maybe, but such is the way of balancing, your preferences sometimes get affected more than others.
Finally, please keep in mind this is literally just in the beginning of the game. It can last 10 seconds and have pretty much no impact, or last 80 seconds where a trapper or hag are able to set up without 3 gens popping, from which they are extremely unlikely to recover.
Yes, it's a small nerf to survivor objective speed, but I think it's not only necessary, but balanced enough to not cripple survivors in the late game, when they are arguably weakest.
Most of all, it's EASY to implement, as opposed to re-balancing every killer, perk, item, add on and map. BHVR would just have to iron out some details that could be exploited by certain killers, perks or items and this could be live in a few months.
I feel like you didn't read my original comment on this thread. I actually like Scott's idea, I just wish it weren't so polarising. I would be happy with it if only some adjustments could be made such that it doesn't affect stealthy players so much, while still being helpful and enjoyable for the killer.
-
@suksAtGame said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1069034#Comment_1069034
I doubt a section of this community would do something so pointless as that are you sure there isn’t a strat
Yes, I'm quite sure. I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're being serious, which is why I'm answering you seriously, but in case you are trolling, you should know that you can get in trouble for posting bait on the forums.
-
It doesn't do anything. It's just their way of celebrating the fact that they got you with the pallet. It's actually a bad move, tactically, since ideally they should be using that time to gain distance instead of gloating.
-
@flsl216 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068847#Comment_1068847
My point of the "only way" is for the developers to play their games themselves in high tier for them to agree and understand the same core issue the players go through. And I said in a way they really need to play their own game because they clearly show they don't understand what needs to be done with their game which are the things MAJORITY of the elite players are not satisfied with. I said devs can't apply EVERYTHING out of each individual player's ideas as some may be too subjective. And as far as I know the games that are very popular today do listen to the opinions to those who do and apply things that really have to be as they smartly understand what and why they are. And therefore for them, they do not need an action for themselves to make a good rational thought even if they don't play the game as much and good as them. But it is very obvious dbd devs really do need to.
You're not listening to me. If the DBD devs were to listen to their players more, then by your logic they wouldn't need to play the game at high ranks themselves, just like those other developers who don't. Therefore, you're effectively saying that playing the game themselves is not the only solution - listening to their players is also an option, and a better one apparently, since that's what the developers of all these "top" games do.
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068946#Comment_1068946
Actually, a survivor shouldn't be able to stealth their objective easily, which is why you need to know when it's perfect to use stealth. Using stealth early game can help you avoid the killer and start working on a generator, odds are, the killer is going to find someone else and you will lose the penalty. Someone will have to be the first target, regardless of you like that or not — if survivors could just get by stealth, then they can lead into boring games for both sides.
I'm not saying survivors should only rely on stealth. I'm saying it should be an option early game, just like in the scenario you're describing. The only problem is, survivors can't use stealth to start making generator progress under this system the way you describe, because generator progress is slowed to a crawl until someone gets found by the killer.
@Reinami said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068938#Comment_1068938
"You shouldn't have to go out of your way to contribute to your opponent's objective in order to start making progress on your own."
Neither should killer, but that's currently how it is, as soon as you commit to the first chase you are basically letting 2-3 gens go.
Leaving your opponent to make progress on their objective so that you can make progress on yours is pretty much the opposite of going out of your way to help them do theirs. It's not comparable.
@Reinami said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068958#Comment_1068958
That is incorrect, they can choose to do other objectives and remain stealthy, such as look for totems/hex perks or look for chests. And if this were implemented with some sort of timer like 2 minutes, then there is a clock on it where you can start doing gens. The perfect amount of time to get your bearings, figure out what killer it is, be a bit stealthy, and take out a totem or 2 or find an item in a chest. Then go hop on a gen.
Again, please read my wording more carefully. There is nothing "substantially useful" about searching chests or doing totems at the start of the game.
-
@silverwolf4455 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068836#Comment_1068836
But it only requires 1 survivor to end this mode.. the other 3 could still be stealthy.
Read my comments above. The point is that they only have two choices - throw themselves at the killer, or be useless. There is no option to be both stealthy and substantially useful in the early game under this system, and therein lies the problem.
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068885#Comment_1068885
I think you can already stealth in @ScottJund's idea because you can just wait for the killer to find someone else first. Then after the TWU, you can just jump on a generator. 😁
That's true, but as I explained above, it's also missing the point. Survivors shouldn't have to wait for the killer to start making progress on their objective, or go out of their way to make that happen, before they can make any meaningful headway with their own.
-
It's probably just a coincidence. Ghostface has five rare add-ons, and there are only so many "rare" slots on each bloodweb, which get filled with a random rare add-on or offering when the bloodweb generates. There is no mechanic that stops you from getting a particular add-on at any point, so as far as I can tell, the fact that you haven't been getting any Chewed Pens lately is just down to simple RNG.
-
@MonsterInMyMind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068907#Comment_1068907
Yeah i mean its not like you still cant play stealthy early game again the idea is based around an early game interaction so all that means is you just wait until he finds another survivor then you can start your objectives i dont think this really hurts stealth i mean does it punish hiding and not being found yeah but honestly im not against that. The developers have said looping is what the game has become and they have accepted it with all do respect just learn how to pallet loop and there ya go stealth will still be useful throughout the game but if this change is added whispers needs a serious change.
It's not that people can't loop or play aggressively, it's that they don't enjoy it as much. No one ever claimed that Scott's idea negates stealth completely, only that it punishes it in the early game, which it does. Stealthy players still want to be useful. No one has fun just hiding in the grass in the corner waiting for someone else to get found so they can start being useful.
I'll say it again - it's a good idea, and it has merit, but I think it's a problem that it essentially makes survivors useless until they (or someone else) gets found by the killer. You shouldn't have to go out of your way to contribute to your opponent's objective in order to start making progress on your own.
-
@MonsterInMyMind said:
@Fibijean @thrawn3054 With all do respect stealth would still be a play style just not an early game one basically meaning if you are found first just loop you can still play stealthy mid to late game its not completely crapping on the playstyle all this does is add more killer and survivor interaction early game which honestly is healthy for the game.
I agree that killer/survivor interaction is healthy, but I don't believe it should come at the cost of what we might call player freedom or agency. The point - at least, my point - is that players shouldn't be forced to play the game a certain way, at any stage. If stealth is a mechanic in your game, if you have dozens of perks dedicated to pulling it off, you shouldn't be actively discouraging players from employing it. As I said, I think the concept has merit, I would just like to see it adjusted to be less punishing on those who enjoy and design their builds around stealth play, while still remaining enjoyable for the killer, if such a thing is possible.
-
Regarding the edit:
Well, a flue is like an air tunnel or chimney, which makes no sense so it's probably a typo. Maybe they meant to type flute? Or fool? I could make either of those make sense with some very stretched logic, but honestly you're right, it doesn't make much sense. I wouldn't think on it too much, if I were you.
-
@GHOSTfaceP3 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068876#Comment_1068876
I’m done arguing with you lol I can tell you don’t care if gens go to fast or about killers fun ..it’s all about the survivors fun guys!
All they said was that they don't want stealth play to be punished even more than it already is, and somehow you took that to mean that they don't care about game speed or killers having fun? That's some seriously impressive mental gymnastics.
-
@flsl216 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068656#Comment_1068656
Apparently no matter how reasonable the ideas of elite players are, they won’t rely on it at all. And that is where I felt they need to play their own actual game at a top tier level consistently. Of course all the devs shouldn’t and can’t apply everything out of each individual player’s mind, but they definitely have to have a point where they are able to share rational ideas which are so valuable that they cannot be rejected. So yeah I am approving my point thank you very much.
Your point was that the "only way" for the devs to make their game as good as these other games you're thinking of is to play it themselves. Which we've now agreed is not true, because that's not what makes those other games good. So according to what you've now established, what the developers actually need to do isn't play their game more, but listen to the opinions of those who do.
-
@thrawn3054 said:
This is a terrible idea. He literally wants to force survivors to run at the killer. Stealth play is already not rewarded as it is. His idea would actively punish it.
I think his idea has potential, but I also agree with you that stealth play needs to be considered. The main flaw I can see in Scott's argument is that he's assuming chases are what makes the game fun to play, for both sides. For a killer, I would generally agree with him, but there are some survivors who actually have the most fun playing stealthily, evading the killer, and doing generators to feel useful. I know because I'm one of them.
Interaction with other players is what makes the game fun, which is why stealth is as fun for some survivors as chases are for others, but it's not fun for the killer if they don't know that they're interacting with the survivors. So the question is, is there a way to (a) adjust this idea so that it's equally rewarding for stealthy players as aggressive ones, and (b) make playing against stealth-inclined survivors less boring for the killer?
-
While that's techncially true, it only means anything if we're assuming that survivors repair generators at a constant rate throughout the game, and same with killers and their hooks. Which we all know is far from being the case.
-
@Dwinchester said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068739#Comment_1068739
Fair point, but if they're cleansing, then there's no need to save it for later. then there's always what was mentioned above, have her puke still infect them, just not other survivors or objects.
If they still refuse to cleanse, nothing changes, it's still an Insta down.
I'm not sure that's true. I've certainly found what appears to be strategic value in waiting for opportune moments to activate Corrupt Purge, rather than just doing it straight away as soon as anyone cleanses. But I'd defer to an experienced Plague player like @DudeDelicious on this, since I haven't played her a huge amount and could be wrong.
-
@danielbird11 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068728#Comment_1068728
I broke them. It is defiantly bugged. I just had a round and did a challenge to get 5 evader emblems with silver quality or better. And got gold but it did not progress. :(
Sorry to hear that 🙁 Did you report them as bugs?
-
This wouldn't incentivise survivors to cleanse. Survivors don't avoid cleansing because they're scared it will be pointless and they'll be infected again right away, they avoid cleansing because they don't want to give the Plague CP, no matter what. They already know that if she gets CP she won't be able to infect them for the next 60 seconds, and they don't care, because they believe being hit by CP is way worse than being infected.
I understand the theory, but all this would do in practice is force the Plague to activate CP as soon as possible whenever survivors cleanse. She can't save it for a strategic moment because her Vile Purge is crippled in the meantime, so she has to use CP right away if she doesn't want to be at a tactical disadvantage. So it is a nerf, in practice if not in theory, because it does next to nothing to incentivise cleansing and boxes the Plague into a corner unnecessarily.
-
Did you actually sabotage the hooks, or just 99 them? I believe that challenge requires the hooks to actually be broken in order to progress, it's not an "equivalent of" type of challenge.
-
I thought the same thing when I read the title of your post. Context would be helpful 😉
-
@flsl216 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1068143#Comment_1068143
they at least try to reference from the perspective of the players who are "experts" at the game rather than people who complains at the game than trying to improve themselves to the top level. That is for sure no doubt.
You're disproving your own point. If those developers can create successful, well-balanced games just by listening to the opinions of the top players without playing at elite level themselves, then obviously it's not necessary for developers to be good at their own game in order to balance it.
-
@Kenidur said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1067917#Comment_1067917
"...and just because someone wasn't nice to you doesn't mean it's okay for you to retaliate in kind..."
while you were a little more polite about it, I was a little more aggressive about it. I do believe people should be treated with a certain amount of respect. but if someone is being disrespectful, I'd expect someone to say something about it. I used the "you" as in not yourself, but as short for any sweaty killer or survivor. The worse you are, the worse they're probably going to tell you off about it.
I do aim this more at killers because, as not being in a SWF, I constantly hear "Well if you didn't gen rush..." as an excuse. If it was SWF, yeah maybe you were gen rushed, BUT non-SWF doesn't have open channels. The match just happened to start with all survivors separated, and probably near gens. No coordination, Primary task to do gens and 3 pop between 60 and 80 seconds in, that's not being Gen rushed, thats the killer not applying pressure. This will happen more than killers want to admit and use it as an excuse to be extra sweaty I've been in matches that plain and simply sucked because the killer applied 0 pressure to the gens, tunneled the living hell out of the 1st person he found to death, and it cost him all 5 gens. After the match, he said he was gen rushed. The game lasted less 10 minutes total.We tried to break him from tunneling, he didn't care. so we did gens, cleaned all 5 totems, and opened the door, and pointed that out to him. He stated we were being toxic by running into him, following him around... umm, he tunneled the same person because we were trying to get him NOT to tunnel...???? He then claimed,and this is ridiculous, because "you all came in with all meta perks" like he knew what perks we had to begin with. I find it ridiculous because I never considered Botany a meta perk. To top it all off, he then stated he tunneled because we "Broke all the totems, making NOED useless." How do you answer that? don't tunnel, don't camp, go after others, and apply pressure? Sure we won, we got out with only 1 death, and we were all BORED because he wanted to tunnel. As I stated, games are meant to be fun for ALL, that game wasn't for anyone.
That being said, I do play killer as well, and I do find that a bunch of survivors that constantly follow with flashlights, crowd the first hook, block you entirely, while t-bagging, just to grief is just as sweaty and also not needed. It is supposed to be fun and there are objectives to do, there is no need to be a douche about the whole thing.
I addressed all of that in my original comment. You're still misunderstanding me. Yes, disrespect should absolutely be called out. But there is a difference between calling someone out for being disrespectful, and being disrespectful in return. When a parent, say, takes away their child's toys because the child was rude, they're doing it to curb bad behaviour, not to get back at the child. Denunciation is not retaliation.
-
Do the developers of the "top ten" games you're referring to play their game at elite level?
-
@FireHazard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1067022#Comment_1067022
It's either an error or Renjiro isn't technically a Samurai, yet he's seen battling Kazan and literally throwing the match after he also lands the killing blow on his son.
In a sense, I think the lore misses that part for some reasons, or maybe the legend didn't really start with Renjiro (Which it didn't) and instead began with Kazan due to his legend of being seen as an Oni in battle.
But again, this is also put into question since Rin even mentions in her new lore pieces that she hoped to be as great of a warrior like Renjiro and Kazan, implying Renjiro has a legacy of his own. (These lore pieces are from her "Steeped in Blood" Archive pages for Tome ll Level 1 and 2)
Also, you could say that Renjiro was mentioned because he's Kazans father, but she literally mentions him as a "great warrior", so it's hard to say he doesn't have a legend if she also refers to him as a great warrior as well. I mean, Renjiro literally almost killed Kazan, quite easily I might add, but he held back because Kazan is literally his son... so in the end Renjiro lost because he showed mercy for his own son who didn't even know it was his father under that suit of armor, not until the end of the fight anyways.
In a sense, It's hard to say if this was an error by BHVR or it has another meaning behind it.
We know that Renjiro was a great warrior, it's all in the lore for the Yamaoka Estate realm.
The estate was bought by the first of the Yamaoka, a shipwreck survivor, who came from a distant ashy island. He washed ashore just as political tensions sparked the flames of war.
Yamaoka joined the battlefield and unleashed hell on his foes. No one could match the raw fury of his Katana, which elevated him to a legend. They say his devilish mask haunted the dreams of all men.
His fame grew as he spilled blood on both sides of the conflict. With power came wealth, which he used to buy the estate and begin his legacy.
I also can't find anything in the Oni's lore that says Kazan was the first samurai, so as far as I can tell there's no contradiction there.
-
@Kenidur said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066625#Comment_1066625
This is a double standard. It's ok for "you" to treat others like garbage but they can't treat "you" the same? If you don't respect your opponent, there is no reason for them to respect you, nor should they. These tactics, tunneling, camping, slugging, infinite looping, ruin the game for at least one person. It is simply not enjoyable. It is a game, it's meant to be fun for all who play.
The bigger problem I see with killers is 0 accountability. If your idea of fun is making sure others don't, then I say all player names need to be locked down and revealed in the beginning. That way you can be as sweaty of a killer you want to be, and I can decide if I want to play against you again.
Where did I say it was okay for anyone to treat anyone else like garbage? I actually said the opposite in the very first line of my comment. I'm also not a killer main and I don't treat anyone like garbage, so I have no idea why you're speaking in the second person throughout your reply.
-
Interesting. I suppose it's meant to be part of a ritual she probably performed often in her previous life as a priestess.
-
@Jasonisanicefella said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066825#Comment_1066825
I understand, I am simply trying to have a functioning game, where all the aspects are considered, even of it means slowly recoding the game to a more stable code
Yeah, that's what we all want at the end of the day. Without seeing the code itself, it's hard to know how feasible an option that is, though. DBD might just be built on shakier foundations than the other games you mentioned, and it's hard to repair the foundations once you've already built on top of them without causing the whole building to collapse.
Again, though, I do agree that the sound bugs should be high priority. Hopefully there will be a fix soon - for all we know, they could be working on one as we speak.
-
@csandman1977 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066709#Comment_1066709
I think they should do that with the tomes. Give an extra incentive to complete them. Then that would generate hype with these kinds of next killer discussions.
I agree, I think it would be really cool if they did that from now on. I'd love to be able to try to puzzle out the next killer from clues in the lore.
-
@Iudex_Nemesis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066630#Comment_1066630
Ok well I will just go at my own pace then. I definitelty won't buy another rift pass.
Fair enough. It's up to you to decide whether you feel it's worth the investment 😊
-
@Amygdala said:
Wish someone would post the stats. I recall seeing one ages ago, 4 mans aren't exactly common.
To my knowledge, the only stats they've ever published relating to SWF were in this post:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/61114/community-community-data-requests
-
@Jasonisanicefella said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066760#Comment_1066760
Programming being difficult is NOT an argument for poor execution.
The sound bugs have been around for months now, and they have been a constant issue in dbd every few patches.
This situation needs to change, because sound is part of the game and if a change in another area of the code impacts sounds in a negative way something needs to be done to avoid this.
I play plenty of others online games and I have never seen so many sounds related bugs, despite playing several games with the same engine of dbd.
In 2019-2020 we had already 3 situations when sounds were bugged, twice favouring survivors and once favouring killers.
It is important to fix this situation as fast as possible and take serious steps to try, as much as possible to avoid further issues.
Of course... and nothing the devs have ever said contradicts any of that. Explaining why something happened the way it did is not the same thing as saying "we couldn't help it because it's hard". I don't understand why you keep insisting that the devs are trying to "argue" something to the effect of "it's fine for the sound to be bugged because fixing it is too hard", when that's simply not true.
-
@fleshbox said:
They posted stats last year and it was something like %50 of games start with 2 swf. Basically nearly every game has 2.
Do you think you could provide a link? I haven't seen any stats that show what percentage of games contain SWF players.
-
@johnmwarner said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066760#Comment_1066760
Maybe worded poorly, but in”think,” what they mean is that saying they know it’s related to animations but not actually fixing it isn’t enough. Yes, they’re a small team and there are millions of lines of codes but this is months, literally months of the game being broken in one of its most important aspects.
The reason people are so harsh is because this bug primarily affects killers, missing survivors who are literally a foot away behind a bush because they’re injured and we assume we would hear them so we don’t look. And nooo it isn’t always iron will I check after game.
I understand why people have problems with the bug. That's why I said I agree that it's important and needs fixing. But taking issue with the devs attempting to explain why the bug exists just comes off like they're looking for something to be mad about. If OP is mad about the bug not being fixed, they can just say they're mad about the bug not being fixed. No need to take offence at such an inoffensive statement as "here's why there are sound bugs".
-
@Hoodied said:
You need to give us a dad joke!
The title of the thread is already a dad joke.
-
Congratulations! Awesome job 😊
-
Argument for what, exactly? They weren't arguing anything, they were explaining why sound bugs come up so often, because people keep complaining that they're not transparent enough about their development process. They didn't say it was an ideal state of affairs, and they certainly didn't say they weren't doing anything about fixing it.
I mean, yes, you're quite right that sound is important and fixing it should be a priority. But you're coming across like you're saying the cause of the bug is somehow invalid.
-
@Todgeweiht said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066744#Comment_1066744
"Splintered hull" - The very rare add-on for Oni, describes Renjiro as "The legendary samurai".
Then you're probably right. It also mentions Renjiro being shipwrecked, which fits with the lore. I don't think the devs have ever explicitly said "Renjiro is the First Yamaoka" but all the evidence seems to point that way.
-
@Todgeweiht said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1065810#Comment_1065810
Wasn't Kazan fathers the original yamaoka?
It's certainly not Kazan himself, since his lore doesn't really fit with the First Yamaoka lore. I think it's speculated, but not confirmed, that the First Yamaoka was either Kazan's father or grandfather.
-
@kreeper124 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066709#Comment_1066709
I completely forgot about the siren teaser. I wonder if they'll actually add it, or if it's just a lore character
Time will tell, I guess. I really hope she makes it into the game, though. Both her and the survivor sounded like they would be interesting to play.
-
I'm hoping for The Siren (or something similar, that's just a name I think is likely), the killer that was referenced in the lore from Tome I. I think it would be really cool if they dropped hints for the next killer in the Tome, and it seems like something BHVR would do.
-
@Archimedes5000 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066647#Comment_1066647
More surveys could work. They inform you about changes, but without telling you if its really going to be added or not. It also gives players an ability to rate the ideas without being pieces of ######### and creating rage threads every time a change is proposed.
It's a bit of a double-edged sword. As much as some people might appreciate the opportunity to have their voices heard, I imagine many more will get upset and resent the developers even further if their ideas don't end up being implemented. That kind of attitude is already way too prevalent. If they don't ask for feedback, it's "why didn't you ask for our feedback? You clearly know nothing about the game so you should listen to us" and if they do ask for feedback but don't then comply with the players' every demand, it's "why even ask for feedback if you're not going to use it? The devs don't care about our opinions, they just pretend they do for publicity". Whatever they do, people will find something to be angry about.
Let me be clear, I too would like to know more about what goes on behind the scenes and have some input on the process, but at the same time, given how spoiled and entitled a lot of the community act when things don't go their way, I can absolutely understand why the devs might be reluctant to implement such practices.
-
They've tried sharing details while they're still being developed in the past, and it's turned out really badly. Most players don't know how to distinguish between "this is something we're thinking about doing" and "this is something we're going to implement in the future". Ideas were interpreted as promises, and then when plans changed down the line, people were angry and disappointed and everyone felt bad. More communication would be nice, but there is an extent to which the community has only itself to blame for the lack thereof.
-
@FireHazard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066425#Comment_1066425
At least it's confirmed, so that's good.
I'd like to ask for the Q&A they said this in, but it's not necessary if you don't feel like getting it.
It was the stream before last, back in December. You can watch it here https://youtu.be/vde613ZMd88 or read what they said in my summary post (it's the first question in the Q&A section) https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/114042/i-watched-the-dev-stream-so-you-dont-have-to-again/
-
You can complete the entire Rift without doing any challenges, if you don't want to. It will just take you a lot longer.
After the Rift closes, you won't be able to unlock cosmetics on it anymore. However, most of the cosmetics from the Rift will arrive in the Store at some point, but that won't be for at least another 6-12 months after their respective Rift closes.
-
Personally, I think that humans should show some regard for other humans, and just because someone wasn't nice to you doesn't mean it's okay for you to retaliate in kind. Some people value courtesy and sportsmanship less than others.
Having said that, I would never expect someone not to try to win. So I don't consider employing effective strategies, like tunneling and looping, a problem, as long as you're using them to win and not just to be a jerk.
-
@Deadeye said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1066236#Comment_1066236
Ok so you mean wording might actually have impact on the calculation, meaning
Reduced consumption rate: Put less charges per one second into one progress
Increased efficiency: Put one charges per one second into increased progress
If this is the case, efficiency would in addition have a higher speed XD but I don't wanna drive it too far o.o How do you get from 25% reduced consumption to 33% efficiency?
Basically, I ignored the whole "charges per second" thing, because the fact that it isn't affected by things like speed boosters was just confusing my calculations, and thought of it in terms of "charges per heal" instead, with the standard being 16 charges per heal. I guessed that "increased effeciency" just means "takes less charges to heal". It probably amounts to the same thing, I just found it less confusing to look at it that way.
I also suspected initially that Streetwise and Botany Knowledge did two different things, the way you're saying, but what AntiJelly said above made me realise that maybe it's essentially the same effect for both, just worded differently. Which seems to be the case, since it led to apparently correct calculations.
How do you get from 25% reduced consumption to 33% efficiency?
Firstly, I assumed, as I explained above, that reduced consumption and increased efficiency were basically the same thing. Kind of like how saying "I'm going to make the water less cold" is the same as saying "I'm going to make the water warmer". As for the numbers themselves, that was just a matter of maths. If you know how to do basic fraction-based arithmetic, multiplying by 3/4 is the same as dividing by 4/3. So Streetwise both reduces consumption rate to 75% and thereby brings the efficiency up to 133%, and then adding on the 33% from BK and the 20% from SC, you get 186%. Then you divide 16 by 186%, because 16 is the base number of charges needed per heal, and you get 8.6, which is how many charges each heal consumes with the increased efficiency from the three perks.
I'm not sure if I explained that very well - I'm also finding it a bit difficult to wrap my head around - but I hope that makes sense.
-
Some players have lost the mask, along with other items earned during the Howling Grounds and/or Summer BBQ events. Yes, you will get it back. The devs announced a few months ago that they would be permanently restoring the event cosmetics to everyone who originally earned them, but since that announcement they have run into some technical delays. However, rest assured, they are still working on it and you will get your cosmetics back at some stage, we just can't be certain when yet.
-
@Asegbloodtears said:
WTH i cannot close an account on this Forum... it goes with the game i guess lolll
If you want to delete your forum account, you can ask a mod to do it for you. I'll @MandyTalk so she can help you out with it.
-
Okay, so, I think I've figured it out. This is all based on the assumption that reducing item consumption rate is the same thing as increasing the item efficiency.
In the first scenario, with Streetwise, Botany Knowledge and Self-Care, Streetwise reduces consumption rate by 25%, which is the same thing as increasing efficiency by 1/3, because 16 x 75% = 16/1.33333... In other words, Streetwise increases item efficiency by 33.3333...%, which we'll round off to 33% for simplicity's sake. So with the combined effects of Streetwise, Self-Care and Botany Knowledge, medkit efficiency is increased to ~186%, so each heal will consume 8.6 charges (or maybe even 9 - I don't know if the game calculates charges other than in whole numbers). Since there are 24 charges on the medkit, this will give you just under three heals.
Without Streetwise, each heal would consume roughly 10.5 charges, giving you a bit over 2 heals.
The Brown medkit with Abdominal Dressing basically just has added healing speed. Both charge add-ons cancel each other out. So the medkit the other player gave you has 16 charges, and at the above rate of 10.5 charges per heal, a single heal would use up around 60% of the medkit's charges.
All of the above concurs with your description of events and what is displayed in your screenshots. Did I finally get it? 🤞
-
I don't say anything. I don't tell people I'm doing well if I'm not, and I don't say it was a good game if it wasn't.
However, it does give me a bit of a chuckle when the other survivors come up with creative ways of calling it out, with references to tents and the great outdoors and that sort of thing. Assuming the killer was camping badly, of course, and not just hanging out near the hook for legitimate strategic reasons.