Fibijean
Fibijean
About
- Username
- Fibijean
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063298#Comment_1063298
Hey Fibi, while @Peanits didn't confirm they are changing The Sanctum of Wraith, he did acknowledge how dark the map was.
Hopefully, in the near future, they will confirm a map change and make the map enjoyable because currently, darkness isn't the only thing that bothers me. It's a nightmare for Nurse players because the amount of bugged zones makes it near impossible to play her on that map, I'm not exaggerating the problem — it was ridiculous. 😕
Good to know. I quite like the lighting the way it is, personally, but it seems like I'm in the minority there. I definitely agree that the dead zones need to be fixed up for Nurse, though. As I understand it, she's just about unplayable on that map at the moment.
-
@Deadeye said:
But that's only to that thing. The calculation is still open and not fitting to what I expected regarding the screenshots 1 and 3 :P
But the new information has made me think that maybe I was on the right track with my calculations, so that's why I'd like to take another look at it when I get the chance.
-
If we're talking about a second objective - that is, one which is compulsory, like generators, to escape - I expect it's because it would be a huge undertaking from a balance perspective. I think most of us can agree that they have enough on their plate, balance-wise, without introducing a new game-changing mechanic and shaking things up completely.
-
@UwUMyersUwU said:
Give killers a fifth.
It would allow better synergy, and more use out of perks that need multiple.
Survivors have 4 people, and therefore 12 more perks then killer. It is fair to have 5 as killer but 4 as survivor.
That's not how balance works. Both killer and survivor perks have been balanced since the beginning around the fact that everyone has four perks. Just because the number is smaller doesn't automatically mean it's unfair. By the same logic, we could introduce another killer or two into each match on the grounds that having four survivors but only one killer is fundamentally imbalanced.
-
@Deadeye said:
@AntiJelly If it helps, here are three screenshots. The first two regarding the bug, the third is a separate situation
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/127057/item-consumption
Those pictures actually help a lot. You didn't mention that the brown medkit you ran with all three perks had additional charges equipped, nor that an Abdominal Dressing was in play in the fourth scenario, which actually decreases the charges (you may have gotten it confused with the Gel Dressing). With that information, I'm going to redo the maths when I get home and see if I can figure out a solution for you.
-
@Kind_Lemon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063363#Comment_1063363
In my opinion, rather than switching the shrouds, it should be made so that survivors working together are more powerful than when split up so that when a killer is efficient at splitting up survivors in chases and such, the killer is rewarded.
The problem is that it's actually in the killer's best interests - some killers more than others, admittedly - for the survivors to stay together in the same area most of the time, because it's easier to catch them and to monitor them so you can keep track of what each survivor is doing at all times. So rewarding the killer for forcing the survivors to split up doesn't make a lot of sense, since the killer actually doesn't necessarily want them to split up unless it's to stop them from healing.
-
@FrootLoops said:
Well put OP. This is the kind of methodical thinking that should be applied in all things, not just discussing this game.
I think it worth mentioning too that what is read on here has no real emotional context, since there is no body language or vocal tones, so don't assume a deeper meaning to the words written without asking probative questions. Example being a post where someone asked how to counter whispers and some members assumed they were asking for a nerf
Quite true. Another example is the popularity of accusing people of only caring about a certain role just because they're advocating a change that benefits that role. Although I've noticed that this increasingly gets called out for the nonsense that it is whenever it does come up, which can only be a good thing.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1064005#Comment_1064005
They literally said "Let the survivors do 40% of their objective, it makes the game easier for you"
They also LITERALLY said "We aren't looking at gen speed right now" something something "M1 simulator" something something "we are looking at toolboxes"
Yes, they did say both of those things, although that's a somewhat uncharitable rephrasing.
Letting your opponent gain some ground in the short term can help you secure your objective in the long term, a concept which is an absolute basic of strategic gameplay. Anyone who thinks it's not appropriate for a killer to sometimes let undefendable generators get completed for the sake of defending the others more thoroughly has probably never played a strategy game in their life - or if they have, they weren't very good at it.
"We aren't looking at gen speed right now but we are looking at toolboxes" is also a far cry from "we aren't going to address game speed" - in fact, it's almost the opposite - which is exactly my point. Too many people pretend that increasing generator speed is the only way to decrease game speed (which is why they assume that the devs don't care about the latter), when actually it's only one solution, and the most boring and obvious one at that.
-
@Kees_T said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1064346#Comment_1064346
I didn't know about this lol.
It's easy to miss, so I don't blame you, but it's handy to know 😊
-
@Kees_T said:
In League of Legends, when you're going to change your runes, the game have an option for "advanced explication" of the rune, saying in numbers what it does, if this option is disabled, there's just simple texts saying what it does. So they could implement in the config an option to allow us to enable "advanced explications" to show the actually numbers of the add-ons, by default this would be disable and only people interested to know will enable it.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1062879#Comment_1062879
I know the wiki has a lot of information, but most of them are missing or outdated. I didn't even mentioned the Wiki because I wanted the devs to publish it since it's gonna be more accurate than the wiki.
Devs certainly have more important things to do like fixing the game that in the actual state has so many bugs, so I guess they'll never implement this. But you know, little details is what makes some games so good.
The numbers aren't missing, but most of them require you to hover your mouse over the word slightly/moderately/considerably/tremendously to see the percentage.
-
@lazytension said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1064268#Comment_1064268
I literally came to post this. It's sad that this is what we have to think about whenever a new patch is released. You know the quote "when one door closes, another one opens". Well, both doors are locked and the house is on fire. Good luck!
Well, if both doors are locked, at least we get extra emblem points for it 😉
-
@Lliart said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1064303#Comment_1064303
Oooooooh that makes a lot more sense lol. Guess my reading comprehension skills need a bit of work, eh? :y
Haha, no worries. Happens to the best of us! 😊
-
@ohheyitsbobcat said:
The wiki has the exact numbers if you're interested but I agree, it'd be nice to see them in game. I wouldn't even mind a percentage on gens while working on it so that when you tell someone you have an exact percent. It's also be fun or at least different to watch the number climb while working on the gens.
I don't know, I like estimating percentages when I tell my friends how far my generator has progressed. It makes me feel like a mathematical genius.
-
This one is easier than the one in the last Tome. It's not a master challenge, which means it's effectively just "sacrifice one survivor during the EGC, twice".
-
@Cronk said:
Shhh I'm hunting wabbits
Wascally ones?
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I'm surprised you're still trying to "fix" this mess of a forum with such brute force tactics. I suppose you're living up to the tag though. I could never force myself to take this place that seriously for any extended period of time.
I'm trying to encourage the people around me to stop damaging themselves and others. Not just on the forum, but in general - as I said, this is the kind of skill that's useful to practice in any context where someone finds themselves wanting to defend their point of view or challenge someone else's, not just within this community.
-
@Deadeye said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1064084#Comment_1064084
Are you sure there is a difference? I know they had several strange wordings like on flashlight addons, which should mean the same. And then stuff like enduring, when they said "75% faster recovery" to change it to "50% less stun time" because the first is simply causing knots in the brain to understand
You know, now that you mention it, I'm not actually sure that there is a difference. I thought that the phrasing was implying two different things, perhaps due to the contrast between "reduced" and "increased" in the two descriptions, but "efficiency" is actually a very vague word, and one could quite reasonably describe reduced item consumption rate as "increased efficiency". So I'm really not sure. I think the truth is those descriptions are just too vague for us to figure out concretely what the formula is, without the devs just giving it to us.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
Thank you for your Thread. Indeed sources should be checked before. Quite a common thing I have read here was "The Devs want games to be done fast", when indeed they said "You should not expect to have all Gens up after 4 minutes", which is completely different.
To add to your points:
I also think it is highly disrespectful to make up things that were not said in the Livestream. The Devs are really active with their community (I dont know why, when we consider the reactions they get when they change things and inform about things), so the least that can be done is to give correct information and not some interpretations or simply misunderstandings.
I completely agree. Thank you for your input! As I mentioned, I think in most cases people don't necessarily realise that they're making things up - they just don't care that much about accuracy or fairness because they'd rather be outraged.
I've also learned to become suspicious whenever anyone says "this is basically what they said", because the fact that they even feel the need to use the word "basically" already indicates that the report they're giving is not entirely accurate.
-
@Watery said:
Misinformation is so hard to pinpoint at the source, so it’s important to always ask “Is this credible?” “Can I rely on this?” and or “How is this relevant to what I am talking about?”
Fake information can steer the game in the wrong direction, so it’s important to stick to the clear provided data. If you cannot provide a reliable source of information, this not ultimately weakens one’s argument, but can also be just flat out embarrassing.
Thanks Jean for addressing this issue, it’s so frequent but I don’t think anyone had the courage to say it.
Edit: I also wanted to add that sometimes it’s also misinterpretation on the forum users end; so don’t be like “Hey! That’s wrong!” But more like “I don’t see [x]”, or “Where did you get that idea?” Because sometimes it can’t be the users fault when data can be “up to interpretation”— and it’s not their fault sometimes, but you just need to be constructive about it. You’re not getting anywhere by flat out ignoring what someone else thinks, so it’s best to listen and address; because sometimes, you can be wrong. And that’s okay.
I totally agree, and thank you for the encouragement 😊 Self-analysis and reflection is always a positive thing, and I really think these forums would be a happier place if more people chose to employ it.
-
@AntiJelly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1064062#Comment_1064062
No problem. The whole charge system of dbd is really confusing and I'd love to spread the (botany) knowledge about it!
I wish there were more official information about it. I still don't think I really understand what the difference is, mathematically, between healing efficiency and reduced item consumption. I know there is a difference, but I don't know how each one is calculated beyond an educated guess.
-
@Deadeye said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063930#Comment_1063930
What is your calculation? On the second one, I reported that as bug with screenshots. There were no other influences
Don't worry about it - both fortunately and unfortunately, @AntiJelly helped me to see that I'd made a mistake in some of my calculations, so I'm still stumped, sorry 😕
-
@AntiJelly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1064020#Comment_1064020
It's really iffy and complicated and I've only recently been able to get a good grasp on the efficiency part of it.
Think of it as a bar that requires a certain amount of things to be filled.
Healing requires 16 charges. You have a yellow Med-Kit (which has 24 charges)
Self-Caring with a med-kit does not apply the speed boost, so you would be able to heal yourself 1.5 times over 24 seconds.
Take the same situation with Botany Knowledge.
You are now contributing 0.33 charges more (1.33c/s), but with item efficiency, you're not actually taking 1.33c/s from the Med-Kit, but 1.0 instead.
So what this really means is that you can heal 0.33 charges more per second, giving a total 1/3 bonus to your total charges, effectively giving your yellow Med-Kit 31.92 charges. However, you're still contributing more charges per second, so your heal takes 12.03 seconds instead of 16. This means you can heal yourself just barely under 2 times in about 23 seconds.
Yeah, I think I understood what you're saying. I edited my comment above after I realised my mistake. But thank you very much for the polite and well-reasoned explanation, it's much appreciated 😊
-
@AntiJelly said:
Item efficiency and Action Speed actually work against each other. Botany knowledge is the perfect example of this.
If you're using a medkit, you'd think it would make you consume 0.33 charges less per second, but because you're contributing 0.33 charges more per second as well, it evens out back to 1 charge/second.
Is that how it works? I would think it would be more logical if the 33% efficiency bonus brought you up to 1 charge consumed every 1.33 seconds instead of every second, and then the 33% speed bonus would just make you consume less charges overall because the heal wouldn't take as long.So with the healing speed boost, at default healing speed, one full heal would consume about 12 charges with the efficiency boost at a rate of 1 charge every 1.33 seconds, but with the speed boost the heal itself would only take 12 seconds, so at the same rate of 1 charge every 1.33 seconds only about 9 charges would be consumed overall.But that's just my guess as to what "healing item efficiency" actually means, mathematically speaking, so if you have a source that disproves that I'd be very interested to see it.Nevermind, I think I've just understood what you're saying - that the charges gained from the efficiency bonus is the same amount as the seconds gained from the speed bonus, so the rate still ends up as 1 charge/second. Both effects do play a role in healing more quickly and efficiently, though, because you still end up with more charges in less time after a full heal.
-
@Blueberry said:
What misquotes are we even talking about exactly?
Too many to name. Examples of some I've seen include "the devs said that they aren't going to address/don't care about game speed", "the devs told killers to git gud", "the devs said we shouldn't bother defending generators", "the devs said they can't fix the sound bugs" and "the devs said they aren't going to change survivor perks". There are others, those are just ones I can think of off the top of my head.
-
@Deadeye said:
@Fibijean Yes, only on me.
@DWolfAlpha What now, cumulative or not? :P Percentages on movement speed is a bit irritating I think. Adding 10% and another 10% woudlnt make you go to 121% ms because it is actually just a fix m/s value added. I also never understood how "running survivor" is set as 100%. They should just write 4m/s and add 0.2 m/s and so on. Btw your calculation isn't working as well, because I had the +8 charges. So it should be 3 full heals. But there is most likely a bug as well, when there is already the bug with the two items in the same game, where the more charges got consumed faster.
I see. Because I worked out what I think is the correct maths for the first two scenarios you gave, but the last two have me beat. Because you're right, if both medkits were at full charges when you started using them, and you only used them on yourself, and there was nothing like Coulrophobia or Sloppy Butcher or any Mangled add-ons in play, then I can't see any reason why 24 charges should heal you more than 40 charges with the same perk loadout.
-
@SquirrelKnight said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1061930#Comment_1061930
Actually according to the devs, yeah we should listen to streamers, the devs said they are the ones who know what should be done
Yes and no. What they actually said was that there are lots of good players in the streaming community who can offer tips for tactical gameplay. In other words, if you're struggling, try learning from someone who's better. Should go without saying, really.
-
I do feel that game speed needs to be addressed in some way.
In that case, you'll be pleased to know that the devs revealed plans during their last livestream to shrink maps, adjust toolboxes and look into expanding on side objectives like the totem system, all in the name of addressing game speed 🙂
-
@redsopine01 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063790#Comment_1063790
That's why I said I cant wait lol so no longer dealing with it
Yeah, I'm with you. It will be a lot easier to get through my killer challenges this Tome if people don't keep DCing on me. I only managed to get all the level IV challenges done last Tome as quickly as I did because I managed to finish them all during the DC penalty testing period.
-
It's okay if you don't want to play anymore, and it's okay to make a post about it if you really want to. But it's not necessary for everyone who quits to do the same. The devs can see their player numbers rising or falling whether or not those players take the time to personally inform them about it.
-
@EvilJoshy said:
I thought when the servers got here they said they would be able to track people dcing on purpose? WTH happened?
They can, and do. There have always been DC penalties in place, but most people don't notice them because you only get banned if you DC from 80% of your games, and nothing before that. The new system will punish players to varying degrees every time they DC, so it will hopefully be a lot more effective overall, but it only works on dedicated servers. If you're asking why the new system isn't in place yet, the devs said that they had run into some issues but are still working on getting them out as soon as possible.
-
Did you only use the medkits in question on yourself? The Self-Care bonus to medkit efficiency only applies if you're healing yourself, not others.
-
@Helevetin_nopee said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1062004#Comment_1062004
Well, theres a report button for a reason
... Which is exactly why OP was asking how he should go about reporting it.
-
That was just an example they gave. What they were saying was that the reason sounds get bugged so often is because they are tied to many other things in the game, animations being only one example, and when those things are changed it can affect sounds as well. Another example is perhaps if they made adjustments to the functionality of a killer's power, that could also affect any sound elements which are linked to that power in the code.
Here is a quote from the summary post I made on the stream, to better explain the context of the comment you're referring to:
They are aware that there are problems with sound at the moment, and are currently working on fixes.
The reason why sound seems to get broken every update, according to not_Queen, is because sounds are linked to many other elements of the game, and when these other elements are changed or updated, the associated sounds can be affected. For example, when changes are made to animations, the associated sounds might no longer trigger at the correct point in the animation.
The sound team is working hard on trying to pinpoint the issue – player feedback is very important here, as the more precise feedback they receive, the easier it is for them to isolate and fix the issue. As an example, the TVs on the new Lery’s map were discovered to have been emitting a very high-frequency noise that older people (like the developers) can’t actually hear. This has since been fixed with the help of player feedback.
-
As Mandy mentioned, it's a known issue. According to the Patch Notes (https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1042793/#Comment_1042793) the issue is specifically with his Auto-Lobotomizer head, which is part of the Wild Asylum outfit, and also with his Foul Bile outfit (the Halloween one).
-
@HellCatJane said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063338#Comment_1063338
Pretty much this. But also I notice a lot more people getting "false" grabs. Like it was going to register as a grab, but due to dedicated servers now, it does not actually register as a grab and only goes as a hit instead. So, you may be doing it right, but the server lags and it counts it as a hit instead. Just something to be mindful of. I see it a lot when people are trying to get generator grabs, but the game is like NOPE!
That's true, I thought that might have been the case as well, but usually when that happens the killer sees the grab animation start and then cancel, which doesn't sound like what happened in OP's case. Still, it's a good thing to be mindful of.
-
In my opinion, they don't need to be removed, just switched. The killer should have the power to make survivors start together, and the survivors should have the power to start separately, instead of the other way around, because as you pointed out, the current effect of shrouds is actually detrimental to the role using them most of the time.
-
@Deadeye said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063349#Comment_1063349
You can just grab mid/slow vaults? I thought the condition was just the survivor needs to be injured
You're right, they do have to be injured for you to grab them off a vault.
-
Hook grabs are definitely still a thing. It should work, as long as you do a normal attack and not a lunge, and you are standing behind the survivor you're trying to grab. You don't need to be pixel perfect, but you do need to be somewhat precise, because if you're not right behind them the game will tend to register it as a hit to the hooked survivor rather than the rescuer.
-
@snozer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063280#Comment_1063280
Are you using a TN panel that is washed out compared to IPS monitors?
The map is dark AF with correct black levels (black=black and not grey)
No clue. My monitor is fairly old, though (not even 1920x1080) so that could have something to do with it.
-
@Rivyn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063280#Comment_1063280
Not a monitor issue, thankfully. Maybe my eyes, because I have some difficulty with Yamaoka map as well, though only in specific parts. Sanctum just appears really dark to me. I can make out the map, but during chases, survivors can simply disappear with how dark the corners, around rocks, and in certain patches of reeds. Especially when they're using dark themed skins.
Hmm.. Well, it's not unlikely that the devs might make lighting adjustments to it in the future, given how many people have complained about the darkness. In the meantime, is it possible to boost your monitor brightness when you're playing on that map?
-
@ZoneDymo said:
idk, maybe calibrate your monitor, it should not be THAT dark
I suspect it might be a monitor brightness issue. I have no problems with it on mine - it's darker than most other maps, but not to the extent that I find it difficult to make out objects because of it.
-
I would go for some of the recolours of his default outfit ("Aces and Eights") in colours like dark brown, dark grey or green. Probably the black/maroon one for the shirt, charcoal jeans, and rust or dark green for the hat.
-
The only thing that's wrong with endgame builds is that they're not very rewarding. I think people should be not only allowed, but encouraged, to use whatever tactics and builds they like to secure their objective. Variety is what makes games like this interesting.
-
@MEATSOLDIER said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1062920#Comment_1062920
One shouldn't have to go to the wiki just to get information that valuable. Whether the info is publicly available or not, if it isn't contained in the dbd.exe its irrelevant. This isn't 32 bit fallout, I shouldn't have to put together a research doc just to explain perks and add ons to my friends. this lack of mechanic transparency contributes massively to new players struggling. This is unintuitive.
That's not what I'm saying. If you had read my comment more carefully, you would know that I actually totally agree that the numbers should be included in the descriptions in-game. My point was that the developers aren't maliciously trying to hide information from us, the way some of the commenters above were suggesting, because if they were the information wouldn't be as easily accessible as it is.
-
@ABannedCat said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1063005#Comment_1063005
Which is why there should be the actual numbers displayed as well. So players can make up their own mind about what is strong and what is not.
I agree, I think the ideal solution would be to have both the words and the numbers included in the description so that players can easily find whatever information is most meaningful to them.
-
Unfortunately, this would probably kill queue times. As the devs explained in the post where they announced the MMR system, queue times, ping and fairness of matchmaking are all inextricably linked, and improving any one will have an adverse effect on the other two. So by narrowing the window for ranks with which players can be matched, you would also be giving players longer queue times and/or a slower connection to their opponents.
Having said that, the way matchmaking works at the moment is not actually how it is intended to work. The devs have explained previously that the "rainbow matchmaking" is caused by a bug in the system, which I believe they were working on a fix for, but I couldn't say whether they will fix it before the MMR system gets implemented.
-
@FireHazard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1062883#Comment_1062883
I know it's not their software i'm just saying that it would make more sense if it was, but they didn't make it first and it's the most widely used Anti-Cheat for literally almost every Steam game, so it's how it is.
VAC as far as I know is not used in DBD unless you actually tamper with something that Valve doesn't take too kindly too, I can give some examples but i'd prefer not saying it here.
Also, I suppose because of EACs ease of implementation and somewhat decent results is why they choose EAC for their Anti-Cheat, it's mainly what most games do on Steam anyways.
DBD's game bans are implemented through VAC. When the devs ban someone, that's how they do it. I was talking to a friend of mine who is a game developer the other day about it, and my understanding from him is that VAC does everything EAC does, only better, and it has actually been around for longer. Also, the prevalence of EAC is actually a bad thing, apparently, because it makes the games that rely on it easier to hack with than without it.
None of this is directly relevant to the question, so this is probably not the best place to discuss it in depth, just a few fun facts that not everybody knows.
-
@Levitika said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1062901#Comment_1062901
I'd disagree. Use Plague's Devotee's Amulet as compared to Myers' Hair Bow: Both "considerably" increase the duration of a part of their power (Corrupt Purge, Evil Within III, both 60 seconds by default), but one increases it by 8 seconds, while the other 30. Percentages were just an example; the obvious alternatives of stating values by time, effectiveness, and other values are viable.
As I said, I think those words are meant to indicate how much of a difference said add-on makes in comparison to others for the same killer, not necessarily to those of other killers.
But yes, that's the problem when you use relative descriptors like that, because it's subjective to a certain extent. I was mainly trying to explain the theory behind the idea, not claiming that it works perfectly in practice. Although one could argue that Corrupt Purge is more powerful than EWIII, hence the distinction, it's more likely that the devs' perception of the balance in their game simply changed in the two years or so between Michael's release and the Plague's.
-
@lynelmane said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1062920#Comment_1062920
I would rather know the seconds over percentages. Like saying "increases Evil Within III by 30 seconds" instead of considerably or even 50%
That's another good option, and would probably be clearer too, because it removes the common confusion over how the percentages are calculated when stacked - whether they are based on the original value or the modified one.
-
It's not a conspiracy. If they didn't want us knowing the truth, they would go to a bit more trouble to hide the values in the game files. It's not like this information isn't publicly available on the official wiki.
OP - I'll copy and paste the answer I gave on your original question, in case you'd like to have a discussion about it.
I believe the reason they use words is to make the add-ons easier to compare to one another. Everyone knows what the word "moderate" means, so you can get a rough idea of how effective that add-on is just by reading the description, whereas if it said 10% you would have to do the maths to understand how much difference it really makes in the context of the power.
And the reason that particular words aren't associated with specific percentages - for example, "considerably" could mean 20% on one killer's add-on and 15% on another - is because they are relative terms. Meaning that their purpose is to give you an idea of how effective that add-on will be at enhancing its corresponding killer power. 15% might be a "tremendous" amount in some contexts and only a "moderate" amount in others - a 15% movement speed increase, for example, is huge, but a 15% increase in healing speed only makes about two seconds' difference - so in some ways it's more useful to know the relative effectiveness of an add-on instead of just a number.
Having said all that, and while I do think that using relative terms to describe certain add-ons is actually useful, I think it would also be a good idea to include the actual percentages in the descriptions for those who are interested in exact figures.