Firellius
Firellius
About
- Username
- Firellius
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,210
- Last Active
Comments
-
It doesn't really apply to Pyramid-head, and shouldn't apply to Pig. For Sadako, it would apply under a situation where it normally should anyway.
And we don't even know what this compensation speed is, it could be a complete nothing-burger.
-
@Ragna_Rock said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3989585#Comment_3989585
No it does not maximise killer pressure if one person is on hook. As one guy at all times should be on gens. One guy is being chased and another is unhooking.
Just as a baseline when im talking about this is assuming you can hold your own in loops like 40-45sec minimum plus the time it takes for the killer to find the next person which could be anywhere between 10-20 secs.
Its not a paradox as the guy on hook is still in the game and will still need to be dealt with. You need to have the game sense to be able to know when you unhook early and having someone healthy to force the unhook.
The reason why killers tunnel someone out as fast as possible as when it is just 3 people one is being chased, one is on hook and the third is un hooking making gens slow down a ton.
No it does not maximise killer pressure if one person is on hook. As one guy at all times should be on gens. One guy is being chased and another is unhooking.
How does it not? The scenario you're describing requires one on hook. If no one's on hook, there's one in chase and three on gens. How is that not far less pressure than one on hook, one in chase, two on gens, with one having to rescue and opening plenty of space for killer to punish?
As killer, you WANT that survivor on the hook, dying. It's better than having them on a gen, not dying.
The reason why killers tunnel someone out as fast as possible as when it is just 3 people one is being chased, one is on hook and the third is un hooking making gens slow down a ton.
Why would the third be unhooking if leaving them on the hook is so much better?
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
What happens if the most recently hooked survivor decides to aggressively bodyblock the killer after the elusive status wears off?
Because that sounds like survivors weaponizing the anti-tunnel feature.
Then they die. They wouldn't have any protection left.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3989600#Comment_3989600
For real, I’m not having this conversation again. I am just so so exhausted with hearing how important it is for survivor issues to be fixed, but being told that killer issues are “fine”.
This update has massive massive massive changes for survivors. The fact that killers get absolutely nothing to help fix their slugging issues, is absolutely ridiculous.
This just encourages survivors to weaponize the anti-slugging mechanic, just like they did back in the PTB that had basekit unbreakable.
Have you considered bringing up the hook denial issues outside of topics about anti-tunnel/slug/camp?
-
@Ragna_Rock said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3989427#Comment_3989427
"On skill expression he also makes the mistake many players do of only being able to judge the survivors off what they see. Survivors do have perks that are high risk / high reward, but if you only focus on the time that survivors pull it off you're missing the point. It would be like watching a few minutes of a basketball game and seeing a team not miss a single 3 pointer and concluding 3 pointers are too strong. You need to take the entire picture into account, successes and failures, and be aware that streaks of everything going right, or wrong, will happen."
The only perks that can even have any kind of failure factor om that level would be Shoulder the burden, Deliverance, Background Player, Dead Hard and Conviction (If you don't have a build for it). Meanwhile you have perks that are so easy if effortless to pull of like Vigil, WIGLF, Lithe, DS, Unbreakable, OTR, Resurgence, MTF, Soul Guard, Do no harm, Finesse, Dramaturgy, Deja Vu and Last Stand.
There are more but that should be enough to show most do not require much to get value, with the worst offenders giving the player an instant get out jail free card in a lot of situations.
"Additionally, when he lays out what the survivors can do, there's lots of 'ifs' (he does touch on the randomness issue a bit). You can bring a strong anti-tunnel build, but if someone else is tunneled, nothing to help. You can bring anti-slug, but if not slugged, useless. Lots of his examples of builds survivors can run actually highlight how many strategies killers have and the difficulty of survivors on trying to guess what they might run into."
Yes the game has a lot of RNG, a killer can bring hex perks into a game but they may get cleansed two second into the game and now you have no perk. Your not always going to get the value out of what you bring. But a lot of what separates the low tier players from higher tier players is game sense and what to follow up on, when to reset, when to commit to a gen, when to save someone.
"Then you have things like exhaustion and healing perks. Yes, survivors have lots of options, but primarily because BHVR has made them extremely hard to stack in meaningful ways. Once upon a time it was just 'run dead hard' on the exhaustion front, now survivors have a lot of viable options because DH was heavily nerfed. That is not an improvement to survivor in strength, though it does make for a healthier game."
"On the other hand, killer perks usually stack, so you can run 4 gen regression, or 4 aura read, or all hex, etc"
No Lithe, SB, balanced landing and so on are all really great perks the first two being hard meta, you cannot compare the state of exhaustion perks to old dead hard a perk that literally was a get out of jail free card when they were always viable its just dead hard was leagues stronger. Also no improvements since?
A lot of survs run Windows, SB/Lithe, vigil and either resurgence, resilience or finesse and that if all you want is just chase perks there are builds for pretty much everything.
Or you can run Dramaturgy and finesse another powerful combo then there is SB+Vigil+Fixated+COL a very powerful chase build that makes the already high uptime of SB even more available. Meanwhile killer has gen defence and aura reading that's it.
Allot of surv perks do stack in meaningful ways.
"And on the issue of gen regression perks since 6.1, the meta at the time was overpowered and incredibly stale. Yes, many things have been nerfed since then, but it was desperately needed."
So when surv perks get nurfed its "Now there is nothing left to use" when that is clearly wrong. Then you nurf all killer gen defence without introducing any alternative its "oh but it was needed". You also get more tunnelling and camping to boot since going for multiple hooks is now detrimental to you all it leaves the killer with is to tunnel, camp slug even harder than before.
"Hook stages: he compares these to gen times, which BHVR has also down, but they aren't close to equal. Unless the killer is camping, leaving the survivor on hook is always going to be a bad idea. On the other hand, 10 extra seconds is a minimum of 50 extra charges the survivors have to complete. One was an absolute nerf to survivors in literally every game, one was a nerf to killers in limited situations (which is how a lot of killer nerfs go, 3 genning, AFC, etc. are nerfs in situational circumstances)."
If you insta pull me in a public game like that im going myers mori you as dwight for it.
People should never just insta unhook I see this happen in lobby's and when I am playing surv its really annoying when you do that. When someone is on hook they are INVINCIBLE and cannot be touched anymore meaning you can leave them there untill last second to pull and the killer cannot stop you. The only time you pull early is if a second person goes down but at that point you are already failing horribly and the killer is demolishing your team or if you know the killer is somewhere else and cannot stop the unhooker.
"Basically: like a lot of these takes, he compares unalike things. He imagines a killer playing a weaker killer hitting a survivor team running all meta and that meta being executed against the strategy the killer pursues. But that's not a fair comparison. If you want to talk about the extreme maximum sweatiness end of things, you have to do it for both sides."
He did talk about this, that is why he said the power creep for surv has gone unnoticed because of the recent killers all being powerful untill the FNAF chapter when people started to take notice at the new killer was not great compared to Dracula and Ghoul. But if you look at the bigger picture the role as whole as gotten far worse if you are not playing these top 5 killers and with every new update its only getting worse.
People should never just insta unhook I see this happen in lobby's and when I am playing surv its really annoying when you do that. When someone is on hook they are INVINCIBLE and cannot be touched anymore meaning you can leave them there untill last second to pull and the killer cannot stop you. The only time you pull early is if a second person goes down but at that point you are already failing horribly and the killer is demolishing your team or if you know the killer is somewhere else and cannot stop the unhooker.
But the only two states you're describing here are 'do not unhook ever', but if you do that and the killer gets a second down before you've unhooked, you immediately switch to 'you should've already unhooked'.
Yeah, obviously hookbombing is bad, but leaving someone on hook also maximises the killer's pressure and slowdown. So many people insist that the best thing for killer to do is to make it 1v3 as fast as possible, but when the hook timers are mentioned, it's paradoxically also best for survivors to maximise the 1v3 time?
-
@Ragna_Rock said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3989374#Comment_3989374
What? Did you even fully watch it?
The video was not just about how Hook times being buffed added 80sec of extra time to do gens (which kind of invalidated the gen time increase), heal or whatever but that was not the only point made. The video went into detail about the slow addition of powerful perks has made things harder and that the best perks for killer are all nurfed into the ground.
Gen regression outside of DMS+PR is pointless, all anti-heal is so weak its next to useless and perks used to counter or make certain actions more difficult like franklins being nuked so no counter to items then there was the knockout change to make slugging more difficult then the mangled changes to make hit and run worse.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/QAP5ZLKF2FW0/image.png
Meanwhile survs have perks that are all powerful on their own and also synergise with one another like vigil feeding into shoulder the burden into resurgence into conviction into soul guard into unbreakable. Killers just don't have same choice for powerful perks that the survivor role has.
The video was not just about how Hook times being buffed added 80sec of extra time to do gens (which kind of invalidated the gen time increase), heal or whatever but that was not the only point made.
But this is exactly what's so out of touch. How on earth do you get 80 extra seconds of gen time? Every extra second a survivor's left on the hook is -less- gen progress, not more. It's more pressure on the survivors, too. It's bizarre to think of this as some overpowered survivor tool when it's only beneficial if the killer is camping. In other cases, it's in the survivors' best interests to rescue as soon as reasonably possible, to get more hands on gens.
Outside of that, the only salient points it made is that Franklin's got nerfed (which, imo, is relatively minor) and that Conviction is too strong. Jumping straight to 'survivor secretly OP' is nonsense.
-
@Ragna_Rock said:
I think pixel bush did a great video on about it.
I saw that video, it didn't make a lick of sense. Talks about how critically important time efficiency is and subsequently claims that the game got harder for killer because 70 second hookstates means survs will just leave someone on hook.
-
When I saw the Chandler stream and how badly it went wrong, I couldn't help but think that if it had been Digital Extremes, Rebecca Ford herself would've been one of the casters. Megan Everett would've likely been there too.
DE keeps a very close connection to its community, which is why they're so trusted and liked. The closest thing we have to that is Mandy, but Mandy very rarely comes out and I don't think her job description gives her much leeway to do… Anything, really.
Apologies aren't worth much if there's no connection and if there's no understanding of what it is that they did wrong. General platitudes are one thing, but they need to prove they were paying attention by pointing out -exactly- what went wrong and -exactly- what needs to change.
Otz trying to fix the issue and then getting zero comms from BHVR, and promptly getting thwarted is something that needs to be addressed verbatim. Not obscured with fancy language, just legit, out and out:
'Otz tried to hand us a solution and we didn't give him any communication and ended up interfering with his team's attempts to fix it.'
Unless they can repeat to the community exactly what the problems are, we can't be sure if they actually know what went wrong.
-
@ReverseVelocity said:
OP got vaporised before they could finish the post… we'll never know what they wanted to say.
He's been kidnap-teched!
-
IMO, at a certain point in the game, they should spawn in a glyph that gives Killer Instinct if the killer finds it first, or some survivor benefit if they find it first.
Hooking anti-hide up to AFK-detection makes a mess of both.
-
What's OP about insta-heals and on-demand Sprint Burst in 2v8?
-
I saw it as well. I didn't know just how bad the stream had gone. BHVR is basically putting negative effort into the game, being more obstructive to its own content creators than the hackers.
-
@Astel said:
Dwight: The Leader
Meg: The Athlete
Steve: The Seagull
Felix: The Constructor
Ace: The Lucky
Ada: The Spy
Aestri/Baermar: The Bardic
Felix: The Constructor
Wouldn't he be 'The Architect'?
-
@Shroompy said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/QWWESH1TR6CQ/17554603445786367084190868906456.jpg
welcome to dead by daylight
'Welcome to Dead by Daylight. Get out.'
-
I think the time for that has passed and DBD might not have the population left to sustain that.
-
@Foggyguy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3983678#Comment_3983678
Again not really. Don't get me wrong current WS is not great either and is in most cases game throwing. But it's still a decent chunk of time off all gens. It has a few niche uses that are mostly in SWF groups but your rework is still much weaker.
I don't think it is. Weaving Spiders is only usable at the very start of the game, which maximises its cost. The longer you wait, the less value it has, which isn't the case with the suggested rework. This makes WS barely applicable under any circumstance, since its value goes from negative to worse.
The rework dramatically cuts the cost but stabilises it so it's much more flexible.
-
@Foggyguy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982372#Comment_3982372
So, just to be clear how terrible of a suggestion this was. Specialist also permanently adds progress to a gen and does not make you broken and lose a health state, takes far less time, gives you an item, and there's a chest located conveniently in the basement.
I'd also like to add that 10 charges is about 10 seconds. Your suggestion of making it that survivors spend thirty seconds in the basement to not only lose a healthstate but also become broken is downright gamethrowingly bad. Maybe if they made it 40-50 charges it could be viable but it's just so bad.That just further indicates how awful current Weaving Spiders is, since my suggestion, despite being mostly outclassed by Specialist, is still better than current WS.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982693#Comment_3982693
It won't affect both sides in terms of queue times. Because again. Survivor check only MMR of the killer before join. Killer checks whole lobby. 4 vs 1. I’m honestly tired repeat same thing that was being ignored
I'm not ignoring what you're saying.
I'm refuting it.
You're ignoring what I am saying.
To quote:
Matchmaking compiles a match and invites a survivor in accordance to those criteria. There's no separate 'survivor matchmaking' that just flings survivors into random lobbies that a 'killer matchmaker' is trying to curate.
They're under one system. Every lobby has one matchmaking system.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982551#Comment_3982551
Where is your proof for this?Matchmaking rating directly influence on matchmaking itself.
About friend —, for hunter it takes 1-2 minutes. For survivors around 5 minutes (he missed my question at at all lol), and he explained it by survivor abundance. But this is considering ranking system.
In quick matches, situations suddenly different and both roles takes less than minute two. So it just shows MMR influence in queue time along with proportion of players on roles. And this game doesn't dying because one role is more preferable. As well as dbd.
So, I checked. It doesn't show that it starts from scratch, but if one survivor doesn't really suits requirement, it starts again. And when killer can’t find survivor of same MMR, it checks another pull (like if u are in ”gold” killer, system looks for “silver” pull and check whole pull to match the closest one) .
Survivor doesn't need to check MMR of their teammate. It's more simple for the system to matchmake killer with each survivor, than doing survivors vs killer vs every teammate.
Technically killers still host of lobbies, at least in MMR term. And that’s why when system works overall bad and unreliable, it firstly affects killer queue time. That’s why considering killer queue time to prove survivor shortage isn’t that good because we have other factor that affects them as well.
It was in video I linked. This person gathered info from devs, and some people who were using not good methods for looking on game back end. He also asked bhvr to get his personal stats and u can do it as well to gather your own mmr. He has two videos about MMR. Anyway, this theme start going to be so off topic. We just went from tunneling discussion to straight mmr.
So, I checked. It doesn't show that it starts from scratch, but if one survivor doesn't really suits requirement, it starts again. And when killer can’t find survivor of same MMR, it checks another pull (like if u are in ”gold” killer, system looks for “silver” pull and check whole pull to match the closest one) .
Okay, but…
Either you are arguing that the matchmaking is casting a very wide net, in which case matchmaking is currently proceeding faster than intended, which would make the queue discrepancy smaller than it should be, indicating a greater shortage of survivors…
Or
You are arguing that the matchmaking process is slow and cumbersome because it constantly needs to reboot, in which case it is very slow at processing the available survivors, which should be making survivor queues slower too, since they're being processed at a slower rate.
There's an argument to be made that the former is indeed in play, but that's running counter to your argument that MMR is the reason killer queues are slow, since the widened matchmaking would specifically make it easier and quicker to compile matches for killers, not slower.
Survivor doesn't need to check MMR of their teammate. It's more simple for the system to matchmake killer with each survivor, than doing survivors vs killer vs every teammate.
But these are not different systems. This is one system. Matchmaking compiles a match and invites a survivor in accordance to those criteria. There's no separate 'survivor matchmaking' that just flings survivors into random lobbies that a 'killer matchmaker' is trying to curate.
They're under one system. Every lobby has one matchmaking system. So if the problem was there, both sides would be affected.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982498#Comment_3982498
Interesting bit here is that you're making the opposite point to what you're trying to say. If the queue times are better in DBD
*than in DBD. Typo mistake that can’t be edited since edit on forum is bugged. If u read again, u clearly can see I didn’t ask my friend compare queue times in DBD with Iden, I asked about survivors and hunters difference in game he is playing. He explained why it’s longer, and that this is common for every assymetrical game.
Furthermore, BHVR themselves, who probably have more direct access to these kinds of figures, have put in the BP incentives to swing the queue timers, which they wouldn't see a need to if player shortages weren't the problem.
I commented about queue bonus above to other person. U both repeat same things. Why repeat same arguments that was answered before? Can u check whole thread?
What is your proof that MMR is the factor here? Because AFAIK, BHVR hasn't specified that this is how their matchmaking works
Do u know what matchmaking means? It’s a way how the game define with who exactly u will be queued up. BHVR shouldn’t specify it. It means that being able to match 4 people at the same time is harder than being matchmaked with one person only. And in BHVR since the start killer was hosting lobby (they changed server dependency from it, but didn’t change other factors), it still works as it is. Because it increase performance, otherwise both survivors and killers waited extremely a lot (as well in case of survivors shortage, that’s why I don’t find your argument viable) .And BHVR told before, that the way how u change your MMR on survivor is depends on against what killer with what kind of MMR u escaped/died. If u died against stronger player, u’ll lose less MMR than against weaker one. Because they decided group escapes shouldn’t be considered over personal ones. So your MMR is basically:
killer vs lobby
survivor vs killer
So matchmaking system isn’t considered for survivors to analyse their teammates. And it works both for matchmaking itself and evaluating of your MMR. Part of this was covered in video I linked and u probably ignored.
tunnel problem
It’s basically starts irritates when person u talk with don’t read your text even. Situation of tunneling even “worse” (big quotes marks were always here for this reason ) cause in Identity V they don’t have any “anti tunnel”. But their attitude towards tunneling is tolerable. Because game were balanced around it, cause devs understand people won’t stop tunnel in assymetrical games and better strategy is balance game around 3vs1. Whole community even doesn’t consider tunneling as issue even. Because many hunters(killers) have power dependancy on tunneling, slugging, camping. As well as killers in DBD, like trapper and leatherface being good for camping, twins and oni for slugging, onryo and pyramid head for tunnelling.
So it shows tunneling can be balaced in a way it doesn’t bother community and DBD have other core issues in their mechanics. But “out of sight out of min mindset focus on tunneling or genrush as balancing system problems.
U said yourself tunnelling “killing this game”, yet somehow, we have 2times less agressive tunneling in DBD itself after massive changes after 9 years and even more online. If u having decisive strike, otr, kindred, burden, base kit 10 sec endurance, no hook grabs, heal meta and still somehow complaining on tunneling, probably u just except game doing everything instead of you.
Whole my post was about the game in absolute same genre have 0 issues with tunneling nor queue times. And that dbd itself rn have zero issues with it. U just messed up my text, and reverted how u wish to see it. And that’s just upsetting me, seeing such inconstructive and messed up way of debating. Quit
If u read again, u clearly can see I didn’t ask my friend compare queue times in DBD with Iden, I asked about survivors and hunters difference in game he is playing.
And the answer he gave you is that they also have longer killer queues.
He explained why it’s longer, and that this is common for every assymetrical game.
Actually, his explanation makes no sense. If there's more survivors playing, then that would make matchmaking easier, and thus faster. Queues don't get slower if you have more people to match with.
Do u know what matchmaking means? It’s a way how the game define with who exactly u will be queued up. BHVR shouldn’t specify it. It means that being able to match 4 people at the same time is harder than being matchmaked with one person only. And in BHVR since the start killer was hosting lobby (they changed server dependency from it, but didn’t change other factors), it still works as it is. Because it increase performance, otherwise both survivors and killers waited extremely a lot (as well in case of survivors shortage, that’s why I don’t find your argument viable) .And BHVR told before, that the way how u change your MMR on survivor is depends on against what killer with what kind of MMR u escaped/died. If u died against stronger player, u’ll lose less MMR than against weaker one. Because they decided group escapes shouldn’t be considered over personal ones. So your MMR is basically:
killer vs lobby
survivor vs killer
So matchmaking system isn’t considered for survivors to analyse their teammates. And it works both for matchmaking itself and evaluating of your MMR. Part of this was covered in video I linked and u probably ignored.
Yes, this is about how Match-making RATING works, but not about how the matchmaking system itself works.
It is your argument that the matchmaking system itself is doing the following:
The algorithm not only need to analyse the MMR of each player, it needs to check that its average number is not higher than the killer's MMR as well. And then it also needs to check the location of the servers. And as soon as the server finds that one player out of 4 does not meet the requirements, it starts the selection from scratch.
Where is your proof for this?
Because this is the crux of your argument, but this is what's unsubstantiated. Additionally…
What does the survs queue need? View the killer's MMR and common server. That's it. Survivors do not host MMR for lobbies, so they find people instantly.
This doesn't fix it. Survivors aren't on a separate matchmaking system, they're organised by the same one. So if the matchmaking system itself is the cause of the delays, survivors would be feeling it too.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982463#Comment_3982463
… the games were played. And as u can see, players upload their competed games on survivors more frequently. Like x 5.7 times even. It's not simple 1:4 ratio. It's 1:5 ratio. If follows your logic, how this possible? How additional +1 to ratio were able to complete the match?
So people upload completed matches on survivor based on demand. It's not even some required uploads, people upload to NL for tracking their games. And if more games on survivors are tracked, and it's more popular, how then we have shortage of players?
I’m still asking for direct numbers and not killer queue time. Where? I tried to find myself, met with some vague considerations of 20/80 of killed/survivor proportion that was provided by dev but didn't find any direct citations. That’s why I don’t claim survivors are in in abundance. I consider them enough. And to really prove their lack, it is necessary to show proofs
Ah, so the data is tallying survivors per player but killers per game. So it's not even measuring the survivor:killer ratio at all.
But furthermore, it confuses how it is that they tally this. Where are they getting the extra survivors from? Because judging by the game count, they're not in the queue.
Them existing doesn't fix the problem if they're not queuing.
while in similar game situation is even “worse”, but queue time better in DBD.
Interesting bit here is that you're making the opposite point to what you're trying to say. If the queue times are better in DBD than they are in other games where tunnelling is worse, that's supporting my argument that tunnelling is helping to kill DBD. If games with more tunnelling have worse queue times, then it suggests that DBD's queue times would be worse with more tunnelling, too.
You specifically pointed out Identity V as having a bad tunnel problem, and then you ask a friend which is longer in that game: Survivor queue or killer queue. That friend says the killer queue is longer.
Which is the same problem as DBD.
No one responds on my MMR influence on queue here
What is your proof that MMR is the factor here? Because AFAIK, BHVR hasn't specified that this is how their matchmaking works, and additionally, this would be a more universal problem, even when survivor population spikes. You're basically suggesting that the MMR system operates at a snail's pace in all circumstances, which would actually require it to slow survivor queues, too.
Furthermore, BHVR themselves, who probably have more direct access to these kinds of figures, have put in the BP incentives to swing the queue timers, which they wouldn't see a need to if player shortages weren't the problem.
Not to mention the quitting epidemic, which is like a big neon sign that says 'WE DON'T WANNA PLAY ANYMORE'.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982425#Comment_3982425
Can u provide exact proof that killers queue only depends on survivor numbers? And not something else?
It’s just an assumption. So better provide direct prove of survivors shortage and not indirect through killers. Survivors shortage is when ratio < 1:3
We don’t have this numbers. We don’t have direct statistic.
When players tries to upload numbers themselves, we see that ration is > 1:4
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/AL9DSFV84RT9/img-0052.jpeg
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/HS0J4KZQBED7/img-0053.jpeg
No direct numbers, false assumption. Saying that we have specific side shortage requires actual stats and numbers and less subjective topic than discussion of tunneling
Killer queues can be longer by the most primitive reason: 1 person’s mmr need somehow match every of 4 / total mmr sum. And because survivors pull higher, it requires more time to sort it out
This works in every asymmetrical game, not dbd only
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/DQTPZW3NV4N9/img-0055.png
The myth about the lack of survivors comes from a false cause-and-effect relationship of long queues of killers.So again- please, provide direct numbers. Killer queues is about killer queues. It’s 4 vs 1. Matchmaking for one person will run longer because it needs match 4 people and not 1.
When players tries to upload numbers themselves, we see that ration is > 1:4
Hold on a sec, is this nightlight?
Of course the ratio is going to be 1:4 on Nightlight, since that only tallies completed matches. EVERY match has a 1:4 ratio, so any dataset compiled out of completed matches will have an exact 1:4 ratio.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982394#Comment_3982394
And since when we have survivors shortage, when majority of players playing this role? Even looking at night light, proportion of survivors x4 higher than of killers.
No stats proving survivors unpopular role at all. Killers queue more likely having struggles cause of MMR issues or server dependency because they are still mainly hosting lobby (at least searching completely depends from them)
The broken MMR would alleviate the problem, not exacerbate it. Killer queues should be faster if the MMR is too loose. Killers are still getting lengthy queues because there's not enough survivor players around.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982364#Comment_3982364
Tunneling existed since the start of DBD. I’m pretty sure the reason of mass frustration rn is poor technical release of TWD.
In every asymmetrical game with same genre tunneling is so common thing no one complain on.
Identity V (had peak of 80 000 people), so probably the second popular game on same genre, has the same system. No anticamp, no antitunnel, yet survivors can win even after hard tunneling. Because they have clear MMR and ranking system, and they never will face with killer they can't potentially dodge by skill.
DBD is only game, where people toxic towards probably the most evident way of gameplay for a win, e.g. genrush or else. Against good coordinated team tunnelling is something so casual, so doesn't impose threat even. For solo, that’s another story. Because as much as I’m getting tunneled myself, teammates instead of giving me free anticamp going around and freely pause this timer for killer. And no one doing gens. So nice.
9 years of the game, constant buff for anti slug- anti tunnel, and majority still can't dodge the simplest (because everyone knows tunneling for noobs, isn’t?) strategy in this game. Because they loop for 10 sec already and their only hope is ds. Not your every game against ghoul or nurse with blight to justify it yk
Tunneling existed since the start of DBD. I’m pretty sure the reason of mass frustration rn is poor technical release of TWD.
Except the problems didn't start here, and DBD has had a survivor shortage for longer.
Not to mention the knock-on effect it has on general balance, which is also causing frustrations on the killer side.
-
@Foggyguy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3976850#Comment_3976850
That's… even worse? How could you come up with a rework that makes the perk even more terrible? Ten charges from a single gen in exchange for not only a healthstate but also making yourself broken? Dude, please play survivor one time before making another suggestion like that.
Half as long and a third as broken for what's likely to be one third of the value. I'd say that's better. More generally applicable too, don't need to rush it first thing.
Can always be numerically adjusted, much more easily than the current form.
-
@Brimp said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3982331#Comment_3982331
Tunneling is something that needs to stay in the game.
Tunnelling will kill the game in the long run.
-
@PigWithTvs said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3981267#Comment_3981267
uh…what?
i literally didn't say anything about killer or survivor
its literally just a bad idea in general, why did u make this an us vs them all th sudden?
and when was the last time killers got a perk that everyone spammed? oh right chucky with best friends and its not even that effective on certain killers
just saying since u went that route
if u suggested the idea of it being something that doesn't effect the items it would be fine, but since franklin's got removed, this would just make it so the games are more stressful which means more tunneling, BUT CLEARLY SURVIVORS NEED STRONGER PERKS, so i can get tunneled even harder when i don't run them
also just forgot about conviction ?
its literally just a bad idea in general, why did u make this an us vs them all th sudden?
I think the point is more that this was literally and demonstrably fine, given this perk has existed in an unchanged state for years. It had a low pick rate and escape rate. Agitating against it is basically being seen as agitating against a perk that's probably somewhere in D-tier.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3981064#Comment_3981064
To bring the discussion back on topic from the whole “evil killer tunneling” thing: tunneling is definitely a strong, efficient strategy. safe, safe. — so I’m gonna use it. Everyone can play however they want, it’s legit, so that’s fine. Just to steer the thread back on track — the debate about whether tunneling is needed or not really drifted too far, and that one person was right. We can continue that in a private chat if you want, I’m open for it!
Yes, tunneling has a big impact on kill rates. But on the flip side, killers often let people go, play by certain self-imposed rules, stop at two kills per game, or intentionally play “soft” with hooks. That impacts stats just as much as efficient tunneling.
But, back to my orginal point (page 2 I think?) , the biggest problem for me is still the not-so-great MMR system (I explained the 100-100 2). Because that causes entire groups to get crushed if one player underperforms. That, for me, affects kill rates way more than whether killers use efficient tactics or play “loose.”
Many rounds are basically decided because MMR doesn’t work right, and two people end up in a group that should never have been matched with that killer — and then get completely overwhelmed, handing out 4Ks.
DbD isn’t what it used to be. Two survivors can’t “carry” the whole match anymore once the killer gets good. Just 1 or 2 overpowered players in a team can wreck everything. That’s why looking at stats isn’t really worth it as long as the matchmaking isn’t working properly. In my opinion, stats don’t mean much in this case — you always have to watch what actually happens inside the match while good matchmaking is missing.
Until we get better MMR, stats just don’t say much. Just my opinion. Better MMR, better maps, and some reworks have a way bigger impact before you can make any real call about whether something is too strong or too weak.
Because: no matter how weak the killer is, if a survivor spawns in a dead zone with good map structure nearby — and no filler pallets between you and them — that survivor will die. even if it’s a Trapper or a Hag. Instant down.
Exactly, good hit registration and better servers. That often decides whether you get a down or not and plays a big role in those stats.
for me those are still the main points (like I explained earlier)… it’s not that I tunnel. Proper MMR, proper hit registration, proper servers, proper maps… only then am I willing to take things like “kill rates” seriously when judging if something is too strong or too weak. Just my point of view.
to summarize my point from page 2 again:
In DBD, each survivor only brings 25% to the team, while the killer has full 100% control. A lot of survivor teams start off below 100% because matchmaking is off or some players mess up or play weak. That puts pressure on the ones who could bring their full 25%, forcing them into risky spots — like hook trades or covering teammates. Their own 25% that they could bring gets heavily weakened because one person in the group couldn’t bring their 25%. Suddenly, the whole team doesn’t function at full strength anymore. That’s why so many groups fall apart — they don’t consistently bring their full game. Matchmaking needs to ensure every survivor can actually bring their 25%. If the killer spots and punishes those weak points, those teams die fast and the kill rate skyrockets.
Once the killer capitalizes on that… this team is dead. It heavily influences the kill rate. But balance decisions are being made based on these kill rates while issues like matchmaking, better maps, and proper hit registration haven’t been fixed yet? IDK.
I think it’s tricky.
But on the flip side, killers often let people go, play by certain self-imposed rules, stop at two kills per game, or intentionally play “soft” with hooks. That impacts stats just as much as efficient tunneling.
Oh!
So you mean the actual stats are even more killer-sided?
That just means your whole shpiel about 'needing to tunnel' is even more wrong!
the biggest problem for me is still the not-so-great MMR system
And I used to think that this was a big contributor, but I am starting to disbelieve that, because of -you-!
You're not smart. The own-goal you just scored in this very post kinda proves it. You don't know how the game works. You have no macro skills. Heck, I just noticed as well that your latest calculation puts gens at 80 charges, which they haven't been since 6.1.
You are saddled with the exact same wonky matchmaking as everyone else. The only difference is that you switch your brain off to just dumb-tunnel the first person you see.
The average among killers (Who work with the same matchmaking as you do) is around 60% KR. High MMR is a little higher than that.
You are at 85%.
That is the difference dumb-tunnelling apparently makes. Over 20 percentage points.
They could toss in basekit DS with a 10 second stun and it'll probably still not be enough to fix how wide of a chasm there apparently is between a rando tunneller and a competitive tier killer.
I just realised I've been stupid too, since you made this point SO much earlier! You, as some dead-average, random mook, feel confident going up against a hypercompetitive team, specifically because you know that tunnelling will bridge the skill-gap. It's the bloody chess-merchant all over again!
You don't need to be a good killer because you can just tunnel, instead.
You've convinced me, more than ever, about the absolute, critical necessity of aggressive and invasive anti-tunnel changes.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3980597#Comment_3980597
He does… but as long as I’m not on the death hook, I usually don’t care that much against most killers (situationally I want the heal, depending on the situation and the killer). But generally, I have enough game sense to notice when the killer switches and leaves the gen, so I don’t need that “hit- boost” to get a good setup.
Sure, if the killer is applying pressure and wants to take someone out of the game, then I want the heal. That’s when I move. I don’t give my teammates away for free. (You can see that in the Nemesis round—I’m there for Max exactly when it gets “tight,” especially when he’s on the death hook. I was there)
But when the killer goes for fresh hooks, I see zero need. I usually have enough game sense to avoid an insta-down, even when injured, and I know when to run and in which direction, so I have something to work with.
Of course, you can play differently. Everyone can play how they want. And a “super nice playin killer” will be happy about the less pressure coming from your survivor group then, safe safe.
And that'll help you win if you don't unga-bunga tunnel into it.
You’re assuming survivors are bad .. the " insta-downs. " That’s just another gamble — a dice roll. What about the survivors who don’t give you that and actually know what they’re doing?
Exactly. You had no intention of seeking out a middle ground.
You were in an 'I don't care' mode from the very start.
I’ve suggested plenty of things survivors could take on the flip side. Stuff that mostly only SWF would feel, while casuals and new players wouldn’t even notice. A lot.
But you all just wanna keep your toys, and I’m the only one who’s supposed to give up mine.He does…
Therefor healing is more efficient than a DS/UB bodyblock. Everyone's doing the latter, but no one's healing? Seems unlikely, don't you think?
But when the killer goes for fresh hooks, I see zero need.
What, never went up against a Wraith, or a Huntress, or an Oni?
You’re assuming survivors are bad .. the " insta-downs. "
What difference does that make? If anything, if they're really bad, you should unga-bunga tunnel into the DS/UB bodyblock even LESS, since you need less time to secure the down on the protected target and might be able to hook them before the DS/UB user can get to safety.
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3980597#Comment_3980597
idk. let’s strip the emotions out of it and just look at the raw math when both sides play efficiently.
killer’s First contact annd first Hook
Map cross to find first survivor: ~10s
First chase: ~30s (normal survivor, average tiles)
Carry + hook animation: ~10s
Total until first hook: ~50 seconds
survivors in that same 50 seconds
walk to nearest gen: ~10s
Repair time solo: 80s per gen → in 50s, that’s ~62.5% progress per survivor.
Three survivors repairing in parallel: ~1.87 gens done before the killer’s first hook even lands.
if the killer doesn`t tunnel:
- Killer leaves hook to find a “fresh” survivor → ~8s travel
- Second chase: ~30s
- Second hook: ~10s carry/hook animation
While this happens:
First hooked survivor gets rescued ~10s after you leave → healed/reset in ~16s.
Two survivors not in chase are instantly back on gens → +1 gen done during your second chase.
By your second hook, 3 gens are done, survivors are splitting on the last two.
End result: You’re in a hook race — 4 survivors, 3 gens, and no one dead. If they keep playing clean, you lose.
if the killer tmnel instead:
Deny the reset immediately after unhook.
chase takes ~10–15s to down again (no health state to burn).
Carry + hook: ~10s.
Survivor is in death state at ~80–90s total match time.
it works cuz:
Now there are only 3 survivors to pressure.
Gen speed drops instantly.
Survivors are forced into risky plays — bodyblocks, unsafe rescues, heals in bad spots.
Map control becomes easier and snowball potential skyrockets.
the math:
If both sides play optimally:
- No tunnel: You’re trading hooks for gens until it’s 4 survivors vs 1 killer with 1–2 gens left.
- Tunnel: You remove a survivor fast, break their efficiency, and actually have a chance to win.
you can argue about whether the game should work like this, but you can’t argue that this is how it works right now.Again, what are you calculating, if not some hypothetical, unattainable absolutely immaculate survivor play?
And that's not even mentioning that this calculation is also really bad!
walk to nearest gen:~10sExcept they're not all walking to the nearest gen, that maximises the co-op penalty. Survivors split up. So survivors 2, 3 and 4 all walk to the second, third and fourth closest gen.
Except they don't do that either, because if you do four gens on one side of the map, that's a surefire way to get yourself three-genned.
So the travel time is much longer than that.
Repair time solo:80s per gen → in 50s, that’s ~62.5% progress per survivor.Three survivors repairing in parallel:~1.87 gens done before the killer’s first hook even lands.Wrong, it's zero gens done, because there is a very big distinction between three gens at 62.5% and one gen at 100%. One of the two is irreversible and denies the ability to regress the generators.
Which is something you also fail to account for, by the way. Killers can regress generators. Most killers actually do bring perks that do so, too. Or block 'em outright. Just another factor that these 'calculations' fail to account for, because you're basically treating the match as if the hard-tunneller and the non-tunneller play the exact same way, without accounting for other options, like regression, delay tactics, and zone control.
you can argue about whether the game
shouldwork like this, but you can’t argue that this is how it worksright now.Except you yourself have already argued that this isn't how the game is right now:
Yes, I said:
flawless teams are unbeatable—
but literally in the
same breath, I also said:NO ONE IS FLAWLESS.So what is the use of 'calculating' the efficiency of a flawless team?
-
Power creep is just eventually untenable. Even if both sides get power creep, we'd probably be looking at embarrassingly short matches at some point. Plus, if some new killer comes out that powercreeps a bunch of old ones, and then the survivors get powercrept themselves to keep up with that new killer, all the old killers have to be revamped and overhauled to make sure they're viable again.
It's just a ton of work. I'm happy with more 'out there' ideas, but flat-out power-creeping is something that should be avoided where possible.
-
@oecrophy said:
You're not paying attention.
It's the logical conclusion from you claiming that healing is inefficient.
In both cases, the reward is the same: The chased survivor gets extra distance. Except in the case of a heal, it doesn't require the involvement of a second survivor for an extended period of time, and it gives the on-hit sprint, which adds a lot more distance.
Given the same competence and resources, the healthy survivor will give you a longer chase than an injured survivor getting a bodyblock from a teammate. And if said bodyblock is indeed a DS/UB one, the bodyblock costs the survivors far more time, since the bodyblocker has to get into the chase and then pick themselves back up once they go down. AND it costs two perk slots, while healing costs zero.
If healing is inefficient, the DS/UB bodyblock is even more so.
In a situation where one person is hooked and the killer goes for the unhook, that unhooked survivor is usually pretty close to where the chase is happening. If they’re running Dead Hard + Unbreakable, or Conviction + Plot Twist (which is currently a better choice), and they know which way the chase is going, they can aggressively bodyblock if it makes sense.
What happens next? The killer has a few options: try to go around to avoid hitting the bodyblocking survivor, hit and down the unhooker (which is harder), or just accept the block.
If the blocker goes down, the survivor still in the chase gains a lot of distance and saves their health state. Now the killer has to decide whether to pick up the bodyblocker—who just effectively saved the chase—or slug them. It’s a lose-lose situation.
If the killer picks up the bodyblocker, Dead Hard triggers. If they slug and keep chasing the survivor far away, that survivor can trigger Unbreakable—or even get a fast rescue from a teammate. And all this happens simply because the killer didn’t tunnel immediately.
Then you will not prove that the game is unwinnable without these tactics.
Take your pick.
Except you were insistent that your arguments are NOT based on the perfect teams, or even the team Eternals! This is a full-on return to your motte-and-bailey: Make the outrageous claim that the average match is unwinnable without tunnelling, and then when asked to support that claim, you swap out the average team for an impossibly immaculate survivor team!
Need I remind you that the entire baseline argument you came up with is that we can't have anti-tunnel, anti-camp and anti-slug because it would make matches against
averageteams unwinnable?So what is this 'calculation' doing here, when it cannot brook even the slightest bit of inefficiency, to the point where there's not a single heal, not a single step out of place, not a moment of hesitation?
This level of 'efficiency' doesn't exist. You've admitted as much yourself. So why is this 'calculation' here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOghIm7R4Mo
(Picked this match because we played super, super inefficiently and badly — plus the biggest mistake this guy made was letting the recovery heal happen and NOT tunneling right away.)
No Team Eternal. Just duo queue with my friend and me. Normal chill evenin lobby. Totally not warmed up and really trying (2-3 short rounds before he has to go to work)... from his POV, where the recording starts, my mate already been tunneled once. At that moment, he’s just getting a Shoulder of Burden unhook from the cute random fengedi.
The killer made the mistake of patrolling too long and didn’t deny the heal after the unhook—didn’t tunnel right away. So he let a heal go through... watch the HUD. We were super inefficient on the gens, our Claudette barely did anything this round (hello bold totems sometimes). I was busy with cover now and then, also not really efficient. We played really badly and really slowly. Max too. He went down once totally unnecessarily. Just removed. You know, those “short rounds before work.”
y sorry nemi, let this unhook happen with a free reset was to costy for u.
Sure, this Nemesis made mistakes—as we all do. No one played perfectly. And y, we were super, super slow. Just W-shift and drop early if it’s getting hot. I’m the main, he got confused by me once near the end, which was costly. But then maybe he could’ve gotten a kill (I would have been there to block, with my Flashbang ready if needed). So what else could Nemesis really have done?
Or, alternatively, you could
not tunnel, and avoid all the countermeasures!This complaint is basically 'anti-tunnel makes tunnelling slower'. Which is the exact point of anti-tunnel measures.
You do realize people use those perks aggressively against you, even in the moments when you’re not tunneling, right?
I ask you again: Is there anything I could've said that would've changed your mind on this?
idk.
Buddy, I've seen complaints about No Mither and Invocation: Weaving Spiders. Whether you can deal with it or not is not a requirement for something to be complained about. The reality is that most forum killers just aren't focused on these armed-to-the-teeth 4-man swiffers with rampant unhook denial, they just want to stomp lowbies harder. Which is why the focus is always on gen speeds, rather than the things that set these high skill teams apart from the rest
Those kinda accusations just put me straight into “whatever - i dont care” mode real quick. That whole “us vs. them” vibe is stuck way too deep. What’s even the point in trying if .. whatever i say.. or do.. i´m the bad killer that only wants to stomp on scrubs? Like, y, guess I’m always the bad guy who just wants to crush noobs…
on on this way:
No Mither and Invocation: Weaving Spiders are my final boss
Is there anything I could've said that would've put your conclusion out of your head?
Nah, doubt it. It is what it is
In a situation where one person is hooked and the killer goes for the unhook, that unhooked survivor is usually pretty close to where the chase is happening. If they’re running Dead Hard + Unbreakable, or Conviction + Plot Twist (which is currently a better choice), and they know which way the chase is going, they can aggressively bodyblock if it makes sense.
We're not talking about that.
A full-health survivor, given the same competence and resources, makes for a longer chase than an injured survivor getting a single bodyblock.
You can blab about the applicability of a body-block all you want, it doesn't address the claim put before you.
Does a healthy survivor get an extra sprint burst that they DON'T get from a bodyblock, yes or no?
No Team Eternal. Just duo queue with my friend and me. Normal chill evenin lobby. Totally not warmed up and really trying (2-3 short rounds before he has to go to work)... from his POV, where the recording starts, my mate already been tunneled once. At that moment, he’s just getting a Shoulder of Burden unhook from the cute random fengedi.
The killer made the mistake of patrolling too long and didn’t deny the heal after the unhook—didn’t tunnel right away. So he let a heal go through... watch the HUD. We were super inefficient on the gens, our Claudette barely did anything this round (hello bold totems sometimes). I was busy with cover now and then, also not really efficient. We played really badly and really slowly. Max too. He went down once totally unnecessarily. Just removed. You know, those “short rounds before work.”
y sorry nemi, let this unhook happen with a free reset was to costy for u.
Sure, this Nemesis made mistakes—as we all do. No one played perfectly. And y, we were super, super slow. Just W-shift and drop early if it’s getting hot. I’m the main, he got confused by me once near the end, which was costly. But then maybe he could’ve gotten a kill (I would have been there to block, with my Flashbang ready if needed). So what else could Nemesis really have done?
You're changing the subject.
Why is that calculation there, oecrophy?
You do realize people use those perks aggressively
againstyou, even in the moments when you’re not tunneling, right?And that'll help you win if you don't unga-bunga tunnel into it.
Nah, doubt it. It is what it is
Exactly. You had no intention of seeking out a middle ground.
You were in an 'I don't care' mode from the very start.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3980420#Comment_3980420
You down 'em, and leave 'em.
Even if they do pick themselves up with UB, that's two perk slots occupied by a hail mary tactic that requires them to use up a hookstate, then NOT contribute anything to the survivor side until they get a bodyblock in, after which they are incapacitated for an extended period of time.
And according to YOUR own logic, that bodyblock is worthless. Because if it was actually significant…
If they’re smart, you’re not getting both. that bodyblock just gave the chased survivor free distance… or enough time to slam an red syringe on the fly, as a nice little “thanks” for not tunneling the first guy.
and yup, good bodyblocks are strong. Where did i say somethin different? Always have been. They’re part of good teamplay and solid cover. It’s just situational — you can’t overcommit to them. But when they’re done well? Absolutely worth .. and the person on the bottom doesn´t have to use his ub yet, there are other mates that can go for a fast pick up..Healing would NOT be inefficient.
Imagine calling Healing inefficient, but something that takes MORE time, MORE load-out, and gives LESS reward, is somehow incredibly unfair to the killer.
Come off it, dude.
phew. With the new fast heals, sure, it’s become more common… but why would I bother healing if I’m not even on death hook and the killer’s playing soft?
Nobody does in that case. You just slam gens — maximum speed wins the match.
If the killer is applying insane pressure, then y, sometimes you have to heal, even just for trades… that’s when the killer buys themselves time and pressure.
But without killer-side pressure? Why heal?
What kind of lobbies do you get where people play like that? And which killers do you play there?
I mean, with the new healing speed they sometimes they do. But only if from killer side is enough pressure-back.
Absolute nonsense. Everything will be just fine. Sure, you might lose a bit more, especially the addicts will have to take a knock, but you'll develop better skills, you'll get opponents closer to your skill level, and everything will be fine.
What you're presenting here isn't what's going to happen, it's not an estimation of what's going to happen, it's what you -want- to happen, just to prove a point.
But the reality is that killers are currently overpowered, so they can absolutely survive copping a nerf.
Nah, I’m good with losing. I take the L if I get outplayed. Or did too many costy mistakes.
but I’m not losing because I held back in some way.
because..
I don’t wanna lose, okay? Everyone jumps into the lobby to win — Survivors, Killers, even bots!
But seriously, where the hell do I check my skill level? Is there some kinda rank-o-meter or something? Like “DbD Skill-Meter: How much of a noob are you today?” :D
How long would it take you to realise that you can play without?
See, the problem here is that you're addicted to these tactics. That's why you start with your hypothesis, that the game is unplayable without them, and then work backwards from there. That's why you're firing off a lot of arguments, some of them contradictory to one another, because to you, the notion that tunnelling is
requiredis self-evident.But to pretty much everyone else, it isn't. And you have to construct why it is required. And you consistently
fail to do so.Sure, I could to play play without those tactics. Seriously, I could. I could try it. But why would I shoot myself in the foot and then sign up for a marathon?
It’s like running a loop blindfolded, hoping the killer trips over their own feet. Y, maybe it could work — but if you actually want to win, it’s pretty unlikely.
So no, I’m not just gonna toss my tools away — I’m not about to watch the round pass me by in slow motion. A win’s a win, and for that, you need the right gear...
I mean.. what do you expect?
survivors show up to the race with running shoes and energy gels, and I’m supposed to jog in flip-flops and hope for the best.
Buddy, I've seen complaints about No Mither and Invocation: Weaving Spiders. Whether you can deal with it or not is not a requirement for something to be complained about. The reality is that most forum killers just aren't focused on these armed-to-the-teeth 4-man swiffers with rampant unhook denial, they just want to stomp lowbies harder. Which is why the focus is always on gen speeds, rather than the things that set these high skill teams apart from the rest.
You know, it’s exactly these kinds of accusations that just put me in the ‘I don’t care’ mode. I know this community way too well after all these years. Nothing’s gonna change.
So yeah… I don’t care.
And all this just because I’m playing the game the way I can :/
but y. You got me.
You got me completely. That “mean guy” just wants to stomp on lowbies — and it’s kinda sad and bitter that it has to be me.
Once again flippering between 'this is the most unfair thing ever' and 'we already chew through 'em anyway, who cares'.
y. I do. Because if a lot of stuff gets into the base kit, it’ll take even longer during the tunneling process to work through all that—and survivors already have more perk slots ready to go.
Firstly, this isn't inefficient stuff. Survivors do have travel time for example, unless you're going up against such 'high skill' opponents that they opt to just literally teleport from gen to gen. In which case your observations about balance are wrong for an entirely different reason.
But secondly, this brings us back to your Motte-and-bailey!
Remember how you said that the perfect, immaculate survivor team was NOT part of your argument and thus it wasn't supposed to be a motte-and-bailey fallacy?
Well guess what? If your 'calculations' do not allow ANY level of inefficiency, you're arguing based on the immaculate survivor team again! You know, the one that's completely irrelevant to discussions about balance because no one plays perfectly?
It's all just backwards arguing. You start from your conclusion and then look back to grasp at whatever appears to support it, as opposed to looking at what you have and then constructing a conclusion.
It is an act of absolute desperation to think that you can 'calculate' DBD.
It’s not about being “perfect”… Even every average, halfway decent player knows this: max efficiency wins games. Survivors literally set the pace just by playing how they play. As a killer, you’re just trying to keep up with that speed. And .. I’m not even complaining — I’ve got my for u "evil bad candy tools" to do it.
but um..
So, mind if I ask how long your killer games usually last on average? Ever timed it? Just curious.
If they’re smart, you’re not getting both.
What, UB -and- DS?
Well, you kinda do, because without UB to back it up, DS is pretty pointless due to it being in the killer's control.
and yup, good bodyblocks are
strong. Where did i say somethin different?You're not paying attention.
It's the logical conclusion from you claiming that healing is inefficient.
In both cases, the reward is the same: The chased survivor gets extra distance. Except in the case of a heal, it doesn't require the involvement of a second survivor for an extended period of time, and it gives the on-hit sprint, which adds a lot more distance.
Given the same competence and resources, the healthy survivor will give you a longer chase than an injured survivor getting a bodyblock from a teammate. And if said bodyblock is indeed a DS/UB one, the bodyblock costs the survivors far more time, since the bodyblocker has to get into the chase and then pick themselves back up once they go down. AND it costs two perk slots, while healing costs zero.
If healing is inefficient, the DS/UB bodyblock is even more so.
there are other mates that can go for a fast pick up..
Which means even less gens being done, how is that efficient?
Nobody does in that case. You just slam gens — maximum speed wins the match.
Did it ever occur to you that if you tunnel one target, you leave three survivors that have no reason to heal since they're never going to get hit, and one survivor who doesn't get the chance to heal? And that, perhaps, that is why you think no one heals?
but I’m
notlosing because I held back insomeway.This is basically an admission, from you, that the problem will never get fixed unless these methods are utterly inefficient. If anything, this is basically saying that the phase 2 changes better have some real bite to them, or else you will continue to be a problem.
Sure, I could to play play without those tactics. Seriously, I could. I could try it. But why would I?
Because if you want to make an argument about what the balance of the game is like without those tactics, this is the ONLY way to accomplish it. If you want to prove that the game is unwinnable without tunnelling, camping and slugging, against average teams, then that is what you have to do.
So no, I’m not just gonna toss my tools away
Then you will not prove that the game is unwinnable without these tactics.
Take your pick.
You know, it’s exactly these kinds of accusations that just put me in the ‘I don’t care’ mode.
Is there anything I could've said that would've put your conclusion out of your head?
y. I do. Because if a lot of stuff gets into the base kit, it’ll take even longer during the tunneling process to work through all that—and survivors already have more perk slots ready to go.
Or, alternatively, you could not tunnel, and avoid all the countermeasures!
This complaint is basically 'anti-tunnel makes tunnelling slower'. Which is the exact point of anti-tunnel measures.
It’s not about being “perfect”… Even every average, halfway decent player knows this: max efficiency wins games.
Except you were insistent that your arguments are NOT based on the perfect teams, or even the team Eternals! This is a full-on return to your motte-and-bailey: Make the outrageous claim that the average match is unwinnable without tunnelling, and then when asked to support that claim, you swap out the average team for an impossibly immaculate survivor team!
Need I remind you that the entire baseline argument you came up with is that we can't have anti-tunnel, anti-camp and anti-slug because it would make matches against average teams unwinnable?
So what is this 'calculation' doing here, when it cannot brook even the slightest bit of inefficiency, to the point where there's not a single heal, not a single step out of place, not a moment of hesitation?
This level of 'efficiency' doesn't exist. You've admitted as much yourself. So why is this 'calculation' here?
Breaking through that, finding some middle ground?
You are so far off the deep end that you have no idea what 'middle ground' looks like.
'Anti-tunnel is fine, so long as they remove anti-tunnel' is not a 'middle ground' position. That's hardlining the status quo. The fact that you think that that's a 'middle ground' position only suggests that your actual views are significantly more outlandish.
So what’s left? Game on, chat off, and just full-on “I don’t care” mode.
I ask you again: Is there anything I could've said that would've changed your mind on this?
-
While I agree that, definitionally, a cooldown is a limit and thus the usage is not 'unlimited', I also don't think 60 seconds is that long for a survivor cooldown. Survivors have down-time every now and then (Or they're supposed to, anyway), so they can shoulder a 60 second cooldown decently well. I don't think it's wrong to point out that a 60 second cooldown basically translates to it being up every single chase on that particular survivor.
-
@oecrophy said:
Are you joking?
You expect a balance change specifically designed to curtail the overbearing power of camping, tunnelling and slugging to do away with anti-tunnelling, anti-camping and anti-slugging measures?
I've said it as a joke before, but you're actually bringing it out here: 'Anti-tunnel measures are fine, so long as they don't hinder my tunnelling'.
Yeah… I do!
You know why? Guess what: I still get hit with all those perks the moment I don’t tunnel. You hook someone, walk away, and boom — the freshly unhooked survivor runs straight into your next chase. DS and Unbreakable locked and loaded, blocking you in the middle of a chase with someone else… and then what?- Pick them up? – Sure, enjoy eating my DS.
- Leave them on the ground? – No problem, Unbreakable. And if not, then anti-slug measures will just pop them right back up.
End result: you’re stuck in a “I can’t pick up, I can’t slug, I can’t do anything” situation.
Or you just have to eat the DS — as a thank you for not tunnelling.So tell me… what’s the point of these perks if they just get used aggressively against the killer the second I’m not tunnelling/camping/slugging/whatever?
Anti-
FACEcamp.Camping is still perfectly doable. It's why anti-camp doesn't kick in at all if there's other survivors near the hook. All this measure really accomplished was teach people how to camp more effectively!
And that's part of the problem of your opposition to these measures: They haven't even been outlined yet! You don't know what you're agitating against, you're just afraid that your time is up!
Ye, I’m scared of the changes – but not because my “time is up.”
People have always demanded stuff, changes came, people adapted… or they quit. That’s just how it’s always been.If BHVR goes all-in the way you want – making tunneling basically impossible – that just means: no M1 killers for a while. Nurse only. (Which, btw, most killers in my MMR are already doing.) You think people are gonna like that? Guess what? They won’t. And BHVR will eventually walk it back once they see it’s not working.
’(Cause a lot of groups just turn basically unkillable if tunneling, slugging, and camping are completely off the table, but everything else stays exactly the same.)
And honestly, I don’t think you’ve watched much of the dev streams. What we’re probably getting is more like no-collision after unhook (which would actually be a good thing – no more blocking with free BT) … plus something like free OTR or DS or whatever.
My guess? Once “anti-tunnel” drops, you can still tunnel just fine – it’ll still be the most efficient way to play. Killers already chew through those perks right now. We see them constantly. All this will do is give survivors more slots for “fun perks” … and survivors will bring them.
That’s just gonna make even more killers play in ways survivors don’t want. And if they somehow remove camping and tunneling completely, the way you’re dreaming of… how long do you think it takes before everyone sees it doesn’t work? How many players will leave or switch to the “only top” killers?
And if that were truly a problem, we'd probably get adjustments to that, too, but there's barely any complaints about that stuff! It's always, always, always just a generalised complaint of 'I lost, fix it'.
I'm absolutely on board with nerfs to hook denial, but I also feel like I'm the
only oneon the forums that has that stance!It’s not a problem right now — and that’s because the killer actually has the tools to deal with it. The exact tools you want removed.
If someone tries to sabotage me — just look at my Huntress games:
I can slug. I Proxy.
I can take out the sabo player with direct tunneling whenever the opportunity arises.Right now, what survivors bring to the table isn’t that bad, because the killer’s base kit — independent of perks — includes counters for all of it.
It only becomes a real problem if everything you want gets removed.You can already kinda see what a problem that could turn into in matches with people who, no matter what happens, still try to be “super nice and friendly” and just take everything that’s thrown at them. Always playing by the “rulebook.” And when they finally complain about feeling powerless, the answer is always the same: slug… tunnel.
And those complainers get quiet again. Because right now, that stuff works. But what if it really goes 100% how you want it to?
Show me your math then. Let's see you compile
every
single
factor
in your 'calculations'.
The examples you want me to include just don’t work…
the penalty for having more people on one gen? Survivors know that. That’s why nowadays people do single-gens. And my math doesn’t even include toolboxes, brand new parts, etc. Healing? When? Why? With most killers, you stay injured. Healing is often not efficient because of the time loss.
People are whining right now because they want to bodyblock and cover during tunneling, or because someone’s on a dead hook. But if you play on fresh hooks, most survivors won’t heal anymore against the majority of killers. Why would they? They only heal if the killer is putting insane pressure (which usually comes from tunneling or proxy camping), so they can take hits or trade.
and say it again:
The examples you want me to include just don’t work…
You can’t just throw inefficient stuff into the calculation. By that logic, I could also say, “what if the group clears all bold totems before touching the first gen…”
You gotta base it on the situation that the team plays efficiently.
I mean..
If I start adding inefficient stuff into this equation, I might as well include: “What if the killer just strolls around the map for 30 seconds checking RNG, then casually drops by the survivors to politely ask if their little squad is ready to slowly start the whole kill process?
You know why?
Guess what: I still get hit with all those perks the moment Idon’ttunnel. You hook someone, walk away, and boom — the freshly unhooked survivor runs straight into your next chase. DS and Unbreakable locked and loaded, blocking you in the middle of a chase with someone else… and then what?You down 'em, and leave 'em.
Even if they do pick themselves up with UB, that's two perk slots occupied by a hail mary tactic that requires them to use up a hookstate, then NOT contribute anything to the survivor side until they get a bodyblock in, after which they are incapacitated for an extended period of time.
And according to YOUR own logic, that bodyblock is worthless. Because if it was actually significant…
Healing is often not efficient because of the time loss.
Healing would NOT be inefficient.
Imagine calling Healing inefficient, but something that takes MORE time, MORE load-out, and gives LESS reward, is somehow incredibly unfair to the killer.
Come off it, dude.
If BHVR goes all-in the way
youwant – making tunneling basically impossible – that just means: no M1 killers for a while.Absolute nonsense. Everything will be just fine. Sure, you might lose a bit more, especially the addicts will have to take a knock, but you'll develop better skills, you'll get opponents closer to your skill level, and everything will be fine.
What you're presenting here isn't what's going to happen, it's not an estimation of what's going to happen, it's what you -want- to happen, just to prove a point.
But the reality is that killers are currently overpowered, so they can absolutely survive copping a nerf.
Killers already chew through those perks right now.
Once again flippering between 'this is the most unfair thing ever' and 'we already chew through 'em anyway, who cares'.
how long do you think it takes before everyone sees it doesn’t work?
How long would it take you to realise that you can play without?
See, the problem here is that you're addicted to these tactics. That's why you start with your hypothesis, that the game is unplayable without them, and then work backwards from there. That's why you're firing off a lot of arguments, some of them contradictory to one another, because to you, the notion that tunnelling is required is self-evident.
But to pretty much everyone else, it isn't. And you have to construct why it is required. And you consistently fail to do so.
It’s
nota problem right nowBuddy, I've seen complaints about No Mither and Invocation: Weaving Spiders. Whether you can deal with it or not is not a requirement for something to be complained about. The reality is that most forum killers just aren't focused on these armed-to-the-teeth 4-man swiffers with rampant unhook denial, they just want to stomp lowbies harder. Which is why the focus is always on gen speeds, rather than the things that set these high skill teams apart from the rest.
the penalty for having more people on one gen? Survivors know that. That’s why nowadays people do single-gens
Until they can't anymore. Once there's three gens left, with four survivors on the field, they are significantly less likely to split up. At that point, a gen has to be done in the shortest possible time because the killer's pressure naturally ramps up. Which means grouping up. Which means slower repairs.
Healing? When? Why? With most killers, you stay injured. Healing is often not efficient because of the time loss.
I've seen plenty of people talk about a 'healing meta', but go off, I guess.
You can’t just throw inefficient stuff into the calculation.
Firstly, this isn't inefficient stuff. Survivors do have travel time for example, unless you're going up against such 'high skill' opponents that they opt to just literally teleport from gen to gen. In which case your observations about balance are wrong for an entirely different reason.
But secondly, this brings us back to your Motte-and-bailey!
Remember how you said that the perfect, immaculate survivor team was NOT part of your argument and thus it wasn't supposed to be a motte-and-bailey fallacy?
Well guess what? If your 'calculations' do not allow ANY level of inefficiency, you're arguing based on the immaculate survivor team again! You know, the one that's completely irrelevant to discussions about balance because no one plays perfectly?
It's all just backwards arguing. You start from your conclusion and then look back to grasp at whatever appears to support it, as opposed to looking at what you have and then constructing a conclusion.
It is an act of absolute desperation to think that you can 'calculate' DBD.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3979935#Comment_3979935
This is really not the argument you want to be making here when trying to defend tunnelling, camping and slugging, after showing up with an 85% kill rate while averaging not even 6 hooks.
It's the strongest, the most efficient, the most reliable, it is head and shoulders above all competition.
In other words,
it is long overdue for a nerf.I’m maybe, maybedown if they nerf some stuff on the survivor side too? Like, slow down genspeed a bit, and make those crazy perk synergies impossible? Ged rid of some survivor fun perks then? If we gotta nerf the killer’s most efficient strat, then the same treatment should go to survivors’ best strats. OTR; DS; SHOULDER; Unbrekable, conviction, babysitter, ftp, bu, sg, deli, reassurance?
all this “anti-tunnel/anti-slug” stuff can leave the game forever then, right?
Yes, but BHVR making decisions you, personally, don't approve of, is not evidence that they haven't done that.
In some cases it's obvious, like the Clown changes, but in some cases, it's just something you'll have to swallow.
There are no 'big questions' left to be asked about tunnelling, camping and slugging. All of them have been on the table for years now. We've been over them, again and again and again, and there's simply no way around it anymore: It has to change.
But… we do have an anti-camp. How big is that supposed to be? What if someone’s getting chased right next to the hook like here? Then the killer turns back to the hook, and someone just rushes the unhook right in front of me?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4TDXhUz1Wg
Am I just supposed to stand there and watch in situations where survivors are playing super open and straight-up dumb? And if suddenly everyone is running around me, am I not even allowed to slug anymore… even though literally everyone’s right on top of me and thinks it’s smart to run around a Nurse in the open?
Chase near the hook, then even back towards the hook, then an unhook right under my nose… and I’m not allowed to tunnel? And if suddenly everyone shows up, I’m not even allowed to slug? Even though everyone’s running all around me?
Why am I supposed to just overlook stuff like this and let it happen, even if I’m playing strong?
The benchmark isn't 'tunnelling Hag', it's the opposing team.
The benchmark is simply that the game is an arms race on both sides. Survivors bring the strongest stuff they’ve got — same as I do.
So what, then, is the problem?
I can often win in different ways, but it’s not my job as the killer to spot every little mistake survivors make and just slide through. Survivors don’t do that either — they bring everything they’ve got. And thats totally fine. It’s a PvP game.
If the killer’s struggling and can’t get a hook for ages, survivor groups don’t care — they’ll still sabotage, deny the first hook with flashy plays, bodyblock, and all that. Even if the killer hasn’t gotten a single hook after 4 gens, survivors won’t just hand over free stuff. Zero chance. They’ll still go down for a pallet safe, they’ll still hit the killer right in front of the gen and keep working on it while the killer wipes the weapon.
And that’s totally fine. Survivors don’t owe the killer anything in that situation — and that’s okay.
Why is the killer always expected to hold back, but survivors never have to
Or just look at endgame situations. Even when there’s a hook in the endgame, survivors still run in, bodyblock, and do everything to secure the full 4-man escape. They don’t just hand the killer that one kill.. Thats the game.
You really don't. The vast majority of teams you go up against will not be of such a high level that you 'need' to tunnel, camp or slug. This one has actually been proven.
But the problem here is, again, any match that you win with these tactics will immediately be considered a match that you couldn't have won without, even though you don't know how the match would've gone if you hadn't used them. It's a form of confirmation bias.
The only way to confirm your claims about the game being unwinnable in the absence of these tactics is to play without them. And since this attitude:
A lot of matches I simply wouldn’t win without it — you can calculate that pretty easily. Past a certain point, you mathematically need an early kill with most killers, otherwise the time available in the match just doesn’t add up. And with many killers, it’s simply not mathematically possible to achieve that goal through only fresh hooks — there just isn’t enough time in the round.
You can take a first chase from match, analyze it, and check whether there was any mistake the killer made that could’ve shortened that chase. If the answer is “no” and the first hook still happens at that time, you’ll quickly realize it just doesn’t add up mathematically.
i mean.. look, against a efficent squad it goes like this:
Survivors need about 450 seconds to pop all 5 gens. With 4 people, that’s around 110 seconds per person.
If you get a kill, there’s only 3 left, so those 450 seconds get split between 3 — about 150 seconds each, which means roughly 40 extra seconds per player.
Sounds nice, right? But here’s the catch: the first chase usually takes like 30 seconds, plus 5 seconds to get the hook up — so about 35 seconds before that hook’s done.
That leaves you with around 40 seconds bonus time per survivor after the kill. If you don’t tunnel, you’re basically handing them the time they need to keep gens moving.
If you don’t keep the pressure up and tunnel, they just use that extra time to finish gens faster than you can catch up.
So ye, tunneling isn’t just some toxic “cheap” play — it’s straight up necessary if you wanna keep up
And..
just out of curiosity—would you call what I do in my Nurse rounds ‘camping’? Like, I stay near the hook because there’s a survivor trying to save, and instead of peeling off and running, they even turn back toward the hook? like … they’re playing right into it
is this already campin for u?
I’m maybe, maybedown if they nerf some stuff on the survivor side too? Like, slow down genspeed a bit, and make those crazy perk synergies impossible? Ged rid of some survivor fun perks then? If we gotta nerf the killer’s most efficient strat, then the same treatment should go to survivors’ best strats. OTR; DS; SHOULDER; Unbrekable, conviction, babysitter, ftp, bu, sg, deli, reassurance?
all this “anti-tunnel/anti-slug” stuff can leave the game forever then, right?
Are you joking?
You expect a balance change specifically designed to curtail the overbearing power of camping, tunnelling and slugging to do away with anti-tunnelling, anti-camping and anti-slugging measures?
I've said it as a joke before, but you're actually bringing it out here: 'Anti-tunnel measures are fine, so long as they don't hinder my tunnelling'.
But… we
dohave an anti-camp.Anti-FACEcamp.
Camping is still perfectly doable. It's why anti-camp doesn't kick in at all if there's other survivors near the hook. All this measure really accomplished was teach people how to camp more effectively!
And that's part of the problem of your opposition to these measures: They haven't even been outlined yet! You don't know what you're agitating against, you're just afraid that your time is up!
If the killer’s struggling and can’t get a hook for ages, survivor groups don’t care — they’ll still sabotage, deny the first hook with flashy plays, bodyblock, and all that.
And if that were truly a problem, we'd probably get adjustments to that, too, but there's barely any complaints about that stuff! It's always, always, always just a generalised complaint of 'I lost, fix it'.
I'm absolutely on board with nerfs to hook denial, but I also feel like I'm the only one on the forums that has that stance!
Why is the killer always expected to hold back, but survivors never have to
Because when survivors are supposed to be reined in, it's BHVR that does it. Case in point: Fog Vials mildly inconvenience a handful of killers for two days and immediately get dumpstered.
Meanwhile, these three issues, of camping, tunnelling and slugging, have been untouched for years. You're expected to hold back because you have something TO hold back. When survivors get something to be held back, BHVR takes it away.
Or just look at endgame situations. Even when there’s a hook in the endgame, survivors still run in, bodyblock, and do everything to secure the full 4-man escape. They don’t just hand the killer that one kill.. Thats the game.
Would you rather they didn't? Because four people NOT leaving the game is four people that can all still get killed. Yes, they can get the fourth man out, but they can also trip up and get 4Kd with open gates.
A lot of matches I simply wouldn’t win without it — you can calculate that pretty easily.
Show me your math then. Let's see you compile
every
single
factor
in your 'calculations'.
Survivors need about 450 seconds to pop all 5 gens. With 4 people, that’s around 110 seconds per person.
Take this, for example. It's your very first attempt at 'maths', and you're already missing factors. Not only do survivors have travel times, but there's also the co-op penalty, which reduces their repair speed.
You're also then not accounting for the fact that survivors do things -other- than gens, and no, not just to throw. Every rescue and every heal adds to the time survivors need.
If you get a kill, there’s only 3 left, so those 450 seconds get split between 3 — about 150 seconds each, which means roughly 40 extra seconds per player.
Not only is this incorrect because by the time you've killed one, a portion of those 450 seconds will already have passed, and thus the split would end up lower…
But it's also completely oblivious to match flow.
The real reason tunnelling is so powerful and why a 3v1 is so impossible for survivors is because, in a normal, healthy loop, the killer has one survivor in chase, one on hook, and one going to the rescue. This leaves the fourth survivor as the only one able to do gens.
Kill one survivor, and now no one can do gens anymore.
THAT is why an early kill is so strong.
You're actively trying to sell the importance of tunnelling via 'maths' and you already failed to account for its greatest value. I've heard 'forum killer math' too many times by now, and let me tell you; you don't bother with these kinds of calculations.
DBD is far too complex to be 'calculated'. Give up. You will never be able to make any case for why the game is 'mathematically impossible to win without tunnelling' because you can't make any case about match specifics in DBD through 'calculations'.
I recognise that this may have been a bit of a 'hail mary' because you're losing faith in your arguments, but this is the worst direction to take.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3979301#Comment_3979301
And that's all well and good, but that also means that tainted perspectives need to be called out.
Your opinion on these tactics will always be skewed by your extreme reliance on them. People who don't overly rely on it might have a clearer picture than you do. And that needs to be called out, too.
Y, but let’s be real — that tactic has proven to be the strongest, most efficient, and most reliable option available. And even then, it’s not a guaranteed win. It’s just the best shot you have in a game that’s stacked against the killer in coordinated settings.
Its not just "my opinion" at this point:
J
That tactic has proven to be the strongest, most efficient, and most reliable option available. Just look at any comp game from the past few years — camping, slugging, and heavy tunneling are basically standard practice. It’s not even subtle anymore; that’s simply how killers stay competitive at that level. And all of this happens despite strict survivor perk limitations — no Dead Hard (or just one per team), no Decisive Strike, no Off The Record, shoulder, red syringes, no double Exhaustion perks, a limited map pool, and no medikits, flashys or BNP allowed.
I mean, ye, we didn’t want to focus on comp games or the top tier stuff, only "the normal matches" but in these matches it’s clearly shown that this is the strongest tactic.
They really don't, they certainly pick who they listen to and don't just jump on the majority bandwagon. Often to the forums' chagrin, like sticking with the Clown changes, or refusing to killswitch Streetwise.
But this 'seriously reflecting and asking deeper questions' also seems like a deflection, like a stalling tactic. If they come to a conclusion you don't like, you can always claim they 'didn't ask the deeper questions'.
Maybe they did, and you just don't like the answer.
t’s not about who asks the “deeper questions,” but about the fact that certain patterns only become clear when you actually analyze matches properly. And there are plenty of recorded games that provide meaningful data for this — allowing you to ask: What options does the killer have in this situation? What about the survivor? Are the gens being done too slow or too fast? Are the chases too short or too close? Has the player ended up in a zone where they can’t do anything at all? And in the early game — when that really shouldn’t happen — are there areas with no resources available?
I can open a Kill Your Friends lobby in 3-4 tries today with Window of Opportunity equipped, and my mate joins as Billy. After a few attempts, I’m pretty sure I’ll have a recorded game where there’s literally no useful resource nearby (yay, insta-downs thanks to RNG). Meanwhile, my mate rushes me down as lethal Billy.
It’s not that hard to analyze rounds and situations and say: This is bad design and can’t be countered. Sure, both sides get stuck in uncounterable situations sometimes — that’s part of the game. But in the early game, which is always the most decisive phase, these things can be identified and addressed.
I mean, the devs knowthe killers and their limits, the survivors and their limits, perks and their limits. They could easily realize — not by opinions, but by simple analysis and math — that some things are just flat-out broken.
Take the Hag match for example. One thing that immediately springs to mind for me is that it takes you much longer to get your second down because two survivors are blocking you in order to try and take the heat off of her. They likely wouldn't be doing that if you weren't tunnelling, giving you access to quicker downs. Which in turn means you can rotate faster, which means Nicolas Cage is gonna get less free time on a gen.
might have gotten the faster down in that specific situation. But on a macro level, an early 3v1 is exponentially more efficient than a slightly faster down on a fresh hook. You trade a few seconds’ advantage on that down for removing a player from the match much sooner, which slows the overall pace of the game significantly. A fresh hook means "nothing".
and the team in this moment?
the fresh hook surv is further away from the death hook, so the team feels less pressure — they know it’s their first hook. Everyone can freely push gens… they know they have some breathing room. No need for cover or accepting that we lost a player yet.
Thirdly, again: A match that includes camping, tunnelling and/or slugging cannot be used as a basis for arguments about how matches would go without these tactics. Every decision you make causes survivors to react, which in turn causes your decisions to change, which in turn causes survivors' reactions to change, resulting in a domino effect that ultimately massively changes the match's landscape.
You can often still win, of course. In many rounds, you could “slow down a bit.” Normal lobbies are just normal lobbies. But there’s always this expectation from survivors that the killer should “go in less hard” than they actually can… and for what, really? You can think, “Oh, super casual lobby, I’ll play chill early on” — only to still face all those ‘survivor fun’ perks that you can actually counter pretty well by applying strong early pressure.
Sure, you can “slowly and friendly” pick apart some teams, but the moment you do something that those typical casual lobbies don’t like — even if it’s just coming back for a hook when someone blindly rushes to unhook right in front of you — the reaction (especially in casual lobbies) is exactly the same as if you went all-in right away.
And honestly, what’s the point? I mean, you’re the killer, not a teammate. You pick and use the strongest tools you have, just like survivors do on their side.
Sure, I’d rather just play my round normally and chill than constantly facepalm over what’s happening again and who’s feeling “totally unjoyed” this time. And if it’s not something really nasty from the killer kit like slugging or tunneling, there’s always some “evil” perk popping up that’s supposedly totally wrong and unfun.
but all in all:
but often you just have to.
just play more M1 against better players, then you’ll see for yourself where the limits really are.
Y, but let’s be real — that tactic has proven to be the strongest, most efficient, and most reliable option available. And
even then,it’s not a guaranteed win. It’s just thebestshot you have in a game that’s stacked against the killer in coordinated settings.This is really not the argument you want to be making here when trying to defend tunnelling, camping and slugging, after showing up with an 85% kill rate while averaging not even 6 hooks.
It's the strongest, the most efficient, the most reliable, it is head and shoulders above all competition.
In other words, it is long overdue for a nerf.
t’s not about who asks the “deeper questions,” but about the fact that certain patterns only become clear when you actually analyze matches properly.
Yes, but BHVR making decisions you, personally, don't approve of, is not evidence that they haven't done that.
In some cases it's obvious, like the Clown changes, but in some cases, it's just something you'll have to swallow.
There are no 'big questions' left to be asked about tunnelling, camping and slugging. All of them have been on the table for years now. We've been over them, again and again and again, and there's simply no way around it anymore: It has to change.
might have gotten the faster down in that specific situation. But on a macro level, an early 3v1 is exponentially more efficient than a slightly faster down on a fresh hook.
But now you're making Hag compete with Hag, not with the survivors. Yes, hard tunnelling will get you the win faster than not tunnelling, but that doesn't mean that not tunnelling makes you lose.
The benchmark isn't 'tunnelling Hag', it's the opposing team.
You can often still win, of course.
So what, then, is the problem?
And honestly, what’s the point? I mean, you’re the killer, not a teammate. You pick and use the strongest tools you have, just like survivors do on their side.
Because this feels like a mask-off moment. No longer is the argument that the game is unwinnable without these tactics, it's more just that you have lost all perspective on a game without it.
You're essentially an addict.
but often you just have to.
You really don't. The vast majority of teams you go up against will not be of such a high level that you 'need' to tunnel, camp or slug. This one has actually been proven.
But the problem here is, again, any match that you win with these tactics will immediately be considered a match that you couldn't have won without, even though you don't know how the match would've gone if you hadn't used them. It's a form of confirmation bias.
The only way to confirm your claims about the game being unwinnable in the absence of these tactics is to play without them. And since this attitude:
And honestly, what’s the point? I mean, you’re the killer, not a teammate. You pick and use the strongest tools you have, just like survivors do on their side.
Is so pervasive, we're not going to get that data from the playerbase.
So it's up to BHVR to step in and change the game.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3979213#Comment_3979213
Whether it's intentional or not doesn't matter. It's still a very small perspective that disregards the game at large.
whether it’s intentional or not, that doesn’t matter. It’s still a very small perspective that ignores the game as a whole. … Yeah, safe, safe, 100%. It’s my own small, narrow perspective. But honestly, I think it’s really dangerous to look at the game only as the “big picture.” Small perspectives matter. And I don’t mean that I think my little perspective is so important that I want to blow it up or that I want to be heard just because it’s me. No, what I mean is that many small perspectives are important — from all sides.If we always only look at the big picture, then all we get are stats. Numbers. Without asking: what’s actually happening? And how does that really come about?Otherwise, it always ends up like the stuff we keep seeing — where BHVR looks only at the “big picture” and ignores the small perspectives. They change something based on stats or numbers that nobody asked for. Things nobody wanted come in. Stuff gets changed that didn’t need to be changed. And things that really need changes get left alone.All because the focus is always exclusively on stats and numbers and never beyond that...
(only my opinion)
It's not really a big mystery. Tunnelling, camping and slugging are bad for gameplay and they should get addressed. They're obstructive to game balance as well, as there's lot of things you can't do because of the impact it'll have on these tactics.
uwm.. … I know some people don’t like it. I know. I’m doing it anyway.
I can’t just shut it off — doing things where I’m like:
“sorry, but this just has to happen right now.”
Give me more ways to playBut that's leading to cherry-picking. Browsing through a vast collection of matches to pick out the handful that -might- support your point.
That's what I mean with 'scope'. Three matches is a drop in the ocean, and is not representative of general gameplay. It won't push the needle if those three go from wins to losses, as there's thousands of matches per day.
hw… yupp, sure — if the community does that alone, every voice individually, then ye, it starts looking like cherry-picking. But that’s exactly where the responsibility should shift to the devs. It’s not the community’s job to build the full picture. People are allowed to share their small, personal perspectives. It’s then BHVR’s job to take all of those small views and create a broader, balanced perspective from them. Not the community’s.
As soon as the community tries to do that, it always ends in cherry-picking. Yeah, it’s a more complicated and time-consuming process for the devs — but honestly, I think it’s a way healthier approach than just: “We looked at the stats and changed something.”
The way BHVR handles it is what frustrates me the most: They just stare at certain stats or go by what the loudest voices are yelling — the screaming “majority” — instead of seriously reflecting and asking deeper questions.
It’s always the loudest, the biggest, or the most inconvenient opinions that get the reaction. And then they rush something out — like we’ve seen with so many killers, or now with the Fog stuff. BHVR often refuses to take a deeper look at what’s actually happening in the game itself. Sure, that takes a lot of work, especially evaluating all these different perspectives — but it’s necessary.
But you are still treating them as one and the same. You have still not put forth any argument as to why the average team would be unbeatable without tunnelling, camping and slugging.You are happy to admit that even the best players in the world will make mistakes, but at the same time, you expect to pass the notion that these will be identical in outcome to teams that make no mistakes.I don't think you understand how extreme of a claim it is to say that something is 'unbeatable'. To claim that killers will be left 'standing there, watching them escape
I’ve shared a lot of perspectives from matches with you. You’re the one who’s basically implying that I can win without camping, slugging, or tunneling. So tell me—how exactly? Like, take the Trapper match for example: how do I play better without camping or tunneling? Or what about that Sadako match? (wasn´t even a win there, was a draw) And please don’t say, “Just leave and pray they mess up hard...” I’m serious, tell me how to play differently and win without those tactics. Not “Yup, 1-2 kills are enough.” — when I go in, I’m playing for the 4K. (Survivors also hit ready with the intention to win, not with the mindset of “2 escapes are enough.”)
YOU are supposed to figure that out. YOU are the one making the claim that you -know- how these will turn out. But there's no evidence to support that, other than your conjecture. You just assume that you will lose. You don't look into things you could've done differently, you don't look into all the tools you still have at your disposal even when you don't camp, tunnel and slug.
You just take a situation where one of those tools helped you win a match and go 'well, now it's unwinnable', when you don't know that at all.
You're just building up hypothetical scenarios that assume everything goes exactly as you planned it out.
It's like… (Not paraphrasing, just using an example)
'Well I was tunnelling this match and two people got out, so if I hadn't tunnelled, it would've been a 4E!'
Or perhaps if you hadn't doubled back to the hook at a certain point, you could've pushed someone off a gen and that generator would never have gotten done, swinging things to a 4K.
You get what I mean? Using matches in which tunnelling, camping and slugging were used immediately invalidates them as proof of what happens when you -don't- tunnel, camp and slug.
You can't prove what happens without a certain factor by pointing to things that happen
withthat factor.Me standing outside, in the rain, with a pink bucket on my head does not prove that the absence of said pink bucket would make it stop raining.
ye, because it’s not that hard to analyze a round, like that Sadako match for example: The first flashy safe was risky, but how was I supposed to avoid it? Slugging? Okay, that costs time. They probably wouldn’t try to unhook, and the person nearby would just bodyblock or pallet-stun. I had to risk going for the unhook.
And the chase they gave me after that wasn’t that long—almost 3 gen done. That’s normal when people play efficiently. That’s just how it is at high MMR
So then what? How do I continue without tunneling onMarigold?
You can break down the same stuff for the Trapper match. How do I play it differently? Please tell me. Should I just give up the slug and the hook at the same time? Then what?
lready addressed it: They didn't. Anti-tunnel got a counterweight nerf, and we got no anti-camp (it's anti-
facecamp, not anti-camp), and no anti-slug.The closest thing we've gotten to anything to deal with this issue is +10 seconds on hook timers.
Which is compensatory for the +10 seconds on generators being a direct buff to tunnelling and camping, so it's returning to the status quo after having spent a long time in a nerfed state.
These issues have not been addressed. They've been dragging their feet but can't afford to any longer.
Can you share the dev logs/streams about that? Like from 6.1 where they promised more than what came?
This is the only thing I have. Nothing about ‘more things’ that we haven’t already received
Wow.
These stats are -painful-.
First off, I hope you understand how difficult it is for anyone to take seriously an argument of 'I'll never be able to win again' from someone with an EIGHTY-FIVE PERCENT kill rate, right?
But secondly, this also makes these tactics look horrendous for game balance. If relying on them slingshots you to the single most busted killrate in the game's entire history, then surely we can agree that these things -desperately- need to be nerfed, right?
I mean, I'm pretty sure that's a higher killrate than the CoBRuption meta used to have.
I knew this would coming. That’s why I didn’t want to share it. But you started so hard with stats, and I said before: I’m ready to share everything. So here it is. I knew this would come up. :/ But.. but? BUT… maybe if we don’t just look at the kill rate, but at the why and the how? Maybe it’s not that we need more anti-everything measures… but maybe the gap between those who try everything to win and the “we’re just here for fun, memes, and whatever” crowd is huge. And the people who play efficiently will always dominate the “just wanna have fun” folks — no matter the side. Because efficiency usually wins. And as a killer, you’re solo with the mindset “all in, no matter what.” Survivors need four people to come together with that same mindset to really push for the win.
And DBD is kind of a big exception compared to all the other PvP games I play (Hunt, Tarkov, etc.)… because in those, a lot of people — seriously, a huge number — never go in with that ‘I want to 100% win with everything I’ve got’ mindset. In DBD, though, people tend to play more laid-back, chill, . .
whether it’s intentional or not, that doesn’t matter. It’s still a very small perspective that ignores the game as a whole. … Yeah, safe, safe, 100%. It’s my own small, narrow perspective. But honestly, I think it’s really dangerous to look at the game only as the “big picture.” Small perspectives matter. And I don’t mean that I think my little perspective is so important that I want to blow it up or that I want to be heard just because it’s me. No, what I mean is that many small perspectives are important — from all sides.
You know what? That's fair. Sometimes stats don't paint the full picture.
But it's also disingenuous to talk about this as though it's your perspective, or experience, or an evaluation of what actually happens in matches. Because it's not.
It's conjecture. It's theorising about what might have been with matches that never were. This isn't something that's happening in the game, it's something that you are convinced will happen, despite there being no evidence of it.
hw… yupp, sure — if the community does that alone, every voice individually, then ye, it starts looking like cherry-picking. But that’s exactly where the responsibility
shouldshift to the devs. It’s not the community’s job to build the full picture. People are allowed to share their small, personal perspectives. It’s then BHVR’s job to take all of those small views andcreatea broader, balanced perspective from them. Not the community’s.And that's all well and good, but that also means that tainted perspectives need to be called out.
Your opinion on these tactics will always be skewed by your extreme reliance on them. People who don't overly rely on it might have a clearer picture than you do. And that needs to be called out, too.
The way BHVR handles it is what frustrates me the most: They just stare at certain stats or go by what the loudest voices are yelling — the screaming “majority” — instead of seriously reflecting and asking deeper questions.
They really don't, they certainly pick who they listen to and don't just jump on the majority bandwagon. Often to the forums' chagrin, like sticking with the Clown changes, or refusing to killswitch Streetwise.
But this 'seriously reflecting and asking deeper questions' also seems like a deflection, like a stalling tactic. If they come to a conclusion you don't like, you can always claim they 'didn't ask the deeper questions'.
Maybe they did, and you just don't like the answer.
I’ve shared a lot of perspectives from matches with you. You’re the one who’s basically implying that I can win
withoutcamping, slugging, or tunneling. So tell me—how exactly?Firstly: I am not the person to tell you, I'm not some super-competent killer who can pick your games apart and tell you every exact trick or tip. I'm sure there's coaches out there that would be willing to give you a hand.
Secondly: It is not my obligation to prove that these matches are winnable. YOU are the one positing a claim here, so the burden of proof lies with you. You need to prove that these matches are unwinnable.
Thirdly, again: A match that includes camping, tunnelling and/or slugging cannot be used as a basis for arguments about how matches would go without these tactics. Every decision you make causes survivors to react, which in turn causes your decisions to change, which in turn causes survivors' reactions to change, resulting in a domino effect that ultimately massively changes the match's landscape.
Take the Hag match for example. One thing that immediately springs to mind for me is that it takes you much longer to get your second down because two survivors are blocking you in order to try and take the heat off of her. They likely wouldn't be doing that if you weren't tunnelling, giving you access to quicker downs. Which in turn means you can rotate faster, which means Nicolas Cage is gonna get less free time on a gen.
As @AmpersandUnderscore says, this isn't good pressure.
Can you share the dev logs/streams about that? Like from 6.1 where they promised more than what came?
This isn't something BHVR has said, but it's distilled from the general community sentiment in the lead-up to 6.1.
I knew this would coming. That’s why I didn’t want to share it. But you started so hard with stats, and I said before: I’m ready to share everything. So here it is. I knew this would come up. :/ But.. but? BUT… maybe if we don’t just look at the kill rate, but at the why and the how? Maybe it’s not that we need more anti-everything measures… but maybe the gap between those who try
everythingto win and the “we’re just here for fun, memes, and whatever” crowd is huge.Doesn't fix your argument though.
Firstly, it's a bit of a distraction tactic. Positing these questions of 'what if it's something else?' when it's very well possible that BHVR has already asked those questions as well and just reached a conclusion you don't like.
Secondly, it's really hard to argue that tunnelling, camping and slugging aren't problems from a gameplay perspective. They make for really boring and frustrating matches, after all, and they've been complained about for as long as the game exists. That does suggest that there's something wrong with it.
Thirdly, again, your stats don't help your argument. Because this idea of it just being the product of you trying your best and your opponents being more free-form can probably explain some of the disparity…
But an 85% killrate is astronomically far out of bounds, and suggests that even if you DO come up against survivors that toss in everything and the kitchen sink in an effort to eke out a win, these tactics are so busted overpowered that you STILL demolish them.
Keep in mind, even the high MMR 4-mans, which would eliminate the 'party pete weak link' factor that you're theorising about, don't hit 50% escape rates, and they don't make up this big of a gap.
-
@fussy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3979194#Comment_3979194
Literally used Vials against FttE and BBQ so many times and even won some matches because of it, managed to finish hot gen.
Idk, it's probably biggest community skill issue I saw so far, everyone post their screenshot with survivor on their feet and act like it should do something in this situation.
This community seems to need some Hens or Ayrun video to realize how to use them properly, because I never saw so much struggling.
Here is my super-giga-pro tips to everyone who is struggling with using Vials:
– You need some distance. Attention: drop it under killer's feet won't do anything.
– You need some good pathing. Drop it and just run straight line/expected way won't work.
– You need to understand where to drop it. Yes, it won't do much in the corner of the map, you need to make killer choose among several ways where you could run.
– Ideally you need to be healthy, because killer can track you with blood pools, but on map with high grass it mostly doesn't matter.
You're welcome.
Literally used Vials against FttE and BBQ so many times and even won some matches because of it, managed to finish hot gen.
Haha, that sounds so comical!
'Hmm, I didn't get a BBQ reading, now I don't know which gen the survivors are at!'
And then you see the two gens and one of 'em just has a giant smoke dome over it.
Yes, good job hiding your location.
-
@oecrophy said:
Oh, I know you were. But none of the stuff you're thinking of actually has anything to do with bailing you out of your mistakes, and they all have to do with counteracting something that is entirely within the killer's control.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7YuLUWOq7o
is entirely within the killer's control.
fight back?
Sure, slugging could’ve been an option — but I would've just ended up lying under the pallet.
I had already checked for Lightborn earlier, so I knew I could greed the pallet, and one of the randoms was nearby in case I needed help.(Could’ve played way more efficiently and just pre-dropped the pallet, but nah, gotta be greedy as always)
Or were you thinking of chasing my duo partner? He mains there. You're not catching him that easily, even injured.
The time that buys is enough for me to get back up.
Yuh, you could try baiting and then doubling back, hoping to get a quick down on the random out in the open — but the pallet’s still up.
→ And if I do get away: ou’ve already lost two gens.
But y, I know the killer knows that too.
And we both know: I’m not getting out this game.So at that point, my job’s just to buy as much time as I can for the team.
This round, I’m the one who’s gotta go. It is what it is.(And I know you know that I’m about to say this.
I think you might be living in my head a little at this point :D)Yes, you have. Again, you are grasping at anecdotes, cherry-picking a small handful while ignoring the overarching datasets. The last time BHVR released stats, they were absolutely dire, with the top 5 killrates, both in all MMR and isolated high MMR ALL being 65%+. The highest average escape rates were for 4-man swiffers in high MMR, and they only got to 48%, with the overall high MMR escape rate being 42%.
You getting a handful of higher escape rate folks on the line doesn't change the overall reality that survivors are losing far more than they are winning.
Well… it’s not intentional.
I’m just sharing what I can — my own small, humble perspective.It’s not like I’m deliberately cherry-picking a few examples.
I’m just trying to look at things from a different angle, beyond just raw stats.
(My stats are way too high anyway, I know that.)But the question I keep asking myself is: Why?
What’s causing that?
Is it really because we need all these anti-everything mechanics?
Or is something else going on?I just don’t like looking at statistics all that much —
I prefer looking at what actually happens in the matches.I already tried to explain that on page 2...
(here’s my short “intro” to it)for me: I know where the survivor role struggles. I do.
DBD has changed a lot. The devs are pushing it
hardinto a direction where it’s actually atrue 4v1.
No more 1v1s, no more “2 people carry and the rest do whatever.”
Sure, you still get those matches – bad MMR, new killers, killers playing super soft – but once the killer actually understands their role and plays somewhat seriously, DBD turns into a proper4 vs 1against a lot of killers.It’s 25 + 25 + 25 + 25 vs 100.And BHVR keeps balancing the game more and more to make that scale work.
and on the way to that goal,
a lot of survivor groups fall apart.Why? Because the killer just has the more stable position at that point.
Ye, it sucks being solo as killer sometimes – but at least you can fully control yourown 100%.
As survivor, you only ever control yourown 25%. And that’s where the problem lies.I’ve played since release, both sides, and .. um.. honestly – for me (only for me, only my option, only my pov) : I
knowwhy groups break.
I alsoknowI’ve got a super high kill rate (way, way way above 60%, which ye, is kind of dumb),
but that’s exactly why I don’t really care about stats.
What matters is for me iswhat actually happens during the match.And most of the time, survivor teams
don’t bring their full 100%.Most groups have
at least one personwho’s already a -25 from the start.
Sometimes it’s two people, and the team is basically starting at -50%.
Like that one Huntress match I had where two survivors went for some random sabo plays right at the start – and they weren’t even good at it.
So I’m playing 100 vs 50 before I even get warmed up.But you probably have an idea where this post of mine from page 2. in this thread is going:
I see things differently on this topic than most othersThat said, it’s hard for me to change my opinion without also checking out perspectives from other rounds,
where I can analyze stuff like:
When did things start going downhill, and at what point did this group break?For me, it’s not really about anti-slug, anti-camp, anti-tunnel, or anti-killer stuff (not at all). "lookin at the stats and after those numbers we have to balance everything stuff..
It’s mostly about the crappy matchmaking we have, which in very rare cases actually ensures that every survivor can deliver their 25%.
Not because they don’t have the tools for it — in most cases they do — but because they often simply lack the experience. They just dont know how to use them.
I mean, yes, maps have gotten worse. Insta-downs happen, even to good groups.
But how the group handles it, and how quickly they break from it — that mostly comes down to way more mistakes on the survivor side.And if 1 or 2 players are overwhelmed by the killer they got, it always ends up with the killer playing at full strength against a team that’s basically half weakened.
This doesn't fix your problem. You're still leveraging the idea of the immaculate survivor team being unbeatable to try and argue that the average joe can't be bested without tunnelling, camping and slugging.
If anything, it worsens your argument, because you have to admit that you're going off into the hypothetical, meaning you have
even less groundto stand on.This claim that killers will be 'forced to just sit there and watch even mediocre teams escape' is based on absolutely nothing, and goes against all statistical indicators. Worse, it has already been effectively disproven by a number of content creators.
Why do you always twist my words like 500%?
Do you even read what I’m writing?
I’ve already addressed this.Yes, I said: flawless teams are unbeatable —
but literally in the same breath, I also said: NO ONE IS FLAWLESS.
(And I even quoted myself in my last reply, where I pointed that out — including how the “Team Eternal” example you brought up isn’t flawless either.)These flawless teams don’t exist.
We’re not machines. We’re human. And humans make mistakes. Everyone does. Even the best.
Perfect groups don’t exist. That’s just a fact.
And I’ve never claimed otherwise.You brought up the top 4% and Team Eternal.
All I said was: those are also just people who make mistakes — and killers can always capitalize on that. That was simply my counter to your claim that I keep talking about top 1% teams.
Which I don’t.Not because I’m scared of those groups —
but because they aren’t the standard. They’re not the norm.Standard matches look more like the POVs I’ve been sharing.
And yes — POVs do matter, because they let you analyze what actually happens in a match.Most groups have one or two players who just can’t perform at full capacity against a given killer.
(Like the Michaela who runs straight into me near hook, gives me a free down, and just stays there…
Or the David who chases me instead of doing a gen.)And no — this isn’t about saying players should be flawless.
People make mistakes. On both sides.
That’s human. It’s natural.But when a match spirals out of control, it’s never because of just one thing. It’s a lot of little things adding up:
- Two people don’t go for the unhook in time.
- No one trades early.
- Michaela stays on the ground instead of crawling away, letting me bodyblock and keep the hook.
And look at how close these matches are.
Now tell me — how are these supposed to go if you take away my tools?Even with these major survivor mistakes happening, if I didn’t use camp, tunnel, or slug, I’d have zero pressure.
Where is it supposed to come from?
Tell me how I’m supposed to play it “better.”That’s why I kept asking:
What happens in matches where those big survivor mistakes don’t happen?
And I’m not allowed to do anything?Those teams would get out — because of their own mistakes —
if I weren’t allowed to do the stuff you don’t like.Why are we always pulling at the balance rope,
always full focus on stats —
instead of just watching what actually happens in matches?And for me, the answer always, always, always leads back to one thing: matchmaking.
As long as we keep messing with balance back and forth,
and only stare at stats instead of asking why things happen in the actual rounds,
it’s never going to change.You feeling sorry for yourself is not grounds to leave everyone else stuck in the muck. Survivor gameplay is in a dire state and it needs help. This particular problem, of camping, tunnelling and slugging, has been rotting at the game's core for ages now, even hindering killers, and it just kept getting kicked further and further down the road.
Wait, but they did happen?
The changes that were promised with 6.1 were never delayed — they were actually patched into the game relatively quickly back then
All the promised changes have already been implemented:Free BT has been in the game for ages,
and the anti-camp radius too.
These changes have been live for a while — they’re already in the game.steer the game's overall design with it.
as u do too?
You're allowed to think you can't do anything against Joe Schmoe without tunnelling and camping and slugging, but I'm, in turn, allowed to disabuse you of that notion.
Absolutely, always open! Share your POV, share your matches — I’m more than happy to go over every single situation where a match starts to fall apart and analyze it together. Always open for that, always, seriously.
Something more than conjecture. Run it, try it, get stats, expand scope, put in the work. Don't just play a match and cross your arms in a huff when things don't immediately go your way. You need scale to make the kind of point that you're making, and that's not gonna work off a small handful of matches with one or two killer players.
Since stats seem so important to you — oky, ouuf, here you go:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/KOYLQTE9WSVJ/2323232.jpg
But what’s the point of all these stats if we can already see and experience in so many matches why these stats come together — and most of the time, the answer to everything is: the MMR is bad.
Survivor groups rarely play anywhere near their full potential. A lot of people treat this game like "a bit of TeamSpeak, some skill checks, and time with friends" — meanwhile, the killer is going all-in. People make major mistakes because they’re overwhelmed and didn’t belong in that lobby to begin with.
In so many of my matches, I can honestly blame MMR. And on some maps, it’s just downright miserable for survivors — dead zones into nothing, into maybe one strong structure, into nothing again...?
But most of the time, when I ask myself why things go the way they do (just from my perspective), it all comes down to bad MMR and RNG/maps. Not "survivors need way more buffs" or "killers shouldn’t be allowed to...
I had already checked for Lightborn earlier, so I
knewI could greed the pallet, and one of the randoms was nearby in case I needed help.Alright, so what was the mistake that you got bailed out of, then?
Because this all sounds like you had a plan and executed it, not like you made a mistake.
Well… it’s not intentional.
I’m just sharing what I
can— my own small, humble perspective.Whether it's intentional or not doesn't matter. It's still a very small perspective that disregards the game at large.
But the question I keep asking myself is:
Why?What’s causing that?Is it really because we
needall these anti-everything mechanics?Or is something
elsegoing on?What's causing what?
It's not really a big mystery. Tunnelling, camping and slugging are bad for gameplay and they should get addressed. They're obstructive to game balance as well, as there's lot of things you can't do because of the impact it'll have on these tactics.
I prefer looking at what actually
happensin the matches.But that's leading to cherry-picking. Browsing through a vast collection of matches to pick out the handful that -might- support your point.
That's what I mean with 'scope'. Three matches is a drop in the ocean, and is not representative of general gameplay. It won't push the needle if those three go from wins to losses, as there's thousands of matches per day.
Why are we always pulling at the balance rope, always full focus on stats — instead of just
watching what actually happens in matches?But you're not looking at what actually happens in matches.
You're looking at what happens in a very select, hand-picked number of matches.
That's not reflective of how the game actually plays out in general. That's cherry-picking.
Yes, I said:
flawless teams are unbeatable—
but literally in the
same breath, I also said:NO ONE IS FLAWLESS.But you are still treating them as one and the same. You have still not put forth any argument as to why the average team would be unbeatable without tunnelling, camping and slugging.
You are happy to admit that even the best players in the world will make mistakes, but at the same time, you expect to pass the notion that these will be identical in outcome to teams that make no mistakes.
I don't think you understand how extreme of a claim it is to say that something is 'unbeatable'. To claim that killers will be left 'standing there, watching them escape'.
Now tell me — how are these supposed to go if you take away my tools?
YOU are supposed to figure that out. YOU are the one making the claim that you -know- how these will turn out. But there's no evidence to support that, other than your conjecture. You just assume that you will lose. You don't look into things you could've done differently, you don't look into all the tools you still have at your disposal even when you don't camp, tunnel and slug.
You just take a situation where one of those tools helped you win a match and go 'well, now it's unwinnable', when you don't know that at all.
You're just building up hypothetical scenarios that assume everything goes exactly as you planned it out.
It's like… (Not paraphrasing, just using an example)
'Well I was tunnelling this match and two people got out, so if I hadn't tunnelled, it would've been a 4E!'
Or perhaps if you hadn't doubled back to the hook at a certain point, you could've pushed someone off a gen and that generator would never have gotten done, swinging things to a 4K.
You get what I mean? Using matches in which tunnelling, camping and slugging were used immediately invalidates them as proof of what happens when you -don't- tunnel, camp and slug.
You can't prove what happens without a certain factor by pointing to things that happen with that factor.
Me standing outside, in the rain, with a pink bucket on my head does not prove that the absence of said pink bucket would make it stop raining.
Wait, but they
didhappen?Already addressed it: They didn't. Anti-tunnel got a counterweight nerf, and we got no anti-camp (it's anti-facecamp, not anti-camp), and no anti-slug.
The closest thing we've gotten to anything to deal with this issue is +10 seconds on hook timers.
Which is compensatory for the +10 seconds on generators being a direct buff to tunnelling and camping, so it's returning to the status quo after having spent a long time in a nerfed state.
These issues have not been addressed. They've been dragging their feet but can't afford to any longer.
Since stats seem so important to you — oky, ouuf, here you go:
Wow.
These stats are -painful-.
First off, I hope you understand how difficult it is for anyone to take seriously an argument of 'I'll never be able to win again' from someone with an EIGHTY-FIVE PERCENT kill rate, right?
But secondly, this also makes these tactics look horrendous for game balance. If relying on them slingshots you to the single most busted killrate in the game's entire history, then surely we can agree that these things -desperately- need to be nerfed, right?
I mean, I'm pretty sure that's a higher killrate than the CoBRuption meta used to have.
Survivor groups rarely play anywhere near their full potential.
Yes.
This also goes for killers, though.
And that part is consistently glossed over.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3978588#Comment_3978588
Now apply that to killer.
sure, happy to
It’s really not that hard, right?
If I play badly as survivor — go too YOLO, misjudge something, get too greedy or take risky plays, mess up my chase — then yup, the consequence is that I’ll probably die that round.Sure, I can still try to recover, give it 100% in the next chase, especially if I notice my team is actually trying... but in the end: I don’t know how long I’ll last. I don’t know how long I can keep playing clean. If I make a mistake — it happens. Sorry, team. I just hope I bought you enough time.
Same goes for killer:
If I misjudge things, mess up my chases, lose too many mindgames, fall for dumb stuff — the natural consequence is that I’ll probably lose that match.
That’s just how it is, right?But you don't. You're happy to demand better from your survivor gameplay, but NOT from your killer gameplay. So you instead resort to the argument that you -cannot- win, even though you obviously can.
I’m not demanding anything — who am I to make demands? I don’t expect anything from survivors or killers. Play however you want. Go for it. Have fun with whatever works for you.
But you also can’t expect to win if there are a lot of misplays — whether you’re playing killer or survivor. That’s just how it is.
I mean, at the end of the day, DBD is a PvP game.
I’ll still give someone a headshot in tarkov or hunt:showdown even if they’re clearly memeing.One.The hatch.
Everything else has nothing to do with 'misplays'. Getting tunneled, camped or slugged are not things that are in the survivor's control, and therefor they cannot be their 'misplays'. They are things that the killer unilaterally decides.
And no, going down is not a 'misplay' either. You are not supposed to hold chase indefinitely. That's why infinites were removed, why Bloodlust is still here.
kinda sweet that you brought up hatch… <3 because, well… hatch is actually one of the few things I do still have quite a bit of control over as killer.
Hatch is something I can deny you in most matches. If I want it, it’s usually mine. That situation tends to lean heavily in the killer’s favor.
I was more thinking about other stuff, though.But yup, totally agree:
If I tunnel you, it means I want you. I’m not half-committing.
You can’t really control that — you’re gonna go down, just like in any regular chase.
The only difference is, you’re starting that chase already injured (which sucks for you and benefits me),
and the tunnel just keeps dragging you closer to death hook.So at that point, it’s super important your team is doing gens — or at least trying to take hits or do something.
It won’t fully stop what’s happening, but it can buy a lot of valuable time.
And your team really needs to use that time while you’re the one getting tunneled.Slugging and proxy camping, though?
You can usually deal with that a bit better — there's more you can do in those situations compared to tunneling.In the end, it’s a matter of how much your team pushes forward, because the timer is ticking.
Gu... I've seen the whole 50/50 balance and more comeback mechanics thing mentioned multiple times in this thread already — and I was specifically referencing that in my comment.
(You can scroll through the replies I was responding to if you're unsure what I meant.)For example,..
“Fully agree with you, there should be catch-up mechanics implemented to prevent the easy snowballs.”
Or this line:
“In theory, these snowball matches would be much less frequent if the kill rate target was a fair 50%.”
xcept 50/50 balance, comeback mechanisms and 'more of this, more of that' aren't on the menu.
The devs blatantly came out and stated that they balance the game to make survivors lose more and this is, what, the second thread in YEARS, and it's not even arguing for 50/50!
The only thing people have been asking for is anti-camp, anti-tunnel, anti-slug, to limit the way in which the killer can just bar people from gameplay and ruin the game for everyone else. Survivors have been losing for ages, and the only complaint is about HOW they lose, not THAT they lose.
I keep hearing that survivors have been losing for years.
But whenever I ask people for their stats, it often turns out they have a solid 50–60% escape rate.
I mean… maybe I’m just asking the “wrong” people, I don’t know.But yup, i mean.. as i said already.. stats don’t tell the full story in my opinion — they don’t show what actually happens during the match.
And sure… anti-camp, anti-tunnel, anti-slug — I understand the desire for that.
But then… where is the killer supposed to get their pressure from?
Or is pressure only allowed in insta-down lobbies now?t's a motte-and-bailey.
First you try to take the more reasonable position that the game is unwinnable when survivors play absolutely immaculately. But then you try to swap out the 'immaculate survivor team' for a 'halfway decent group'.
And that's where your argument becomes fallacious, because while the top 1% of swiffers can be argued to be unbalanced, possibly even 'unbeatable', you can't make the same argument for 'halfway decent groups', since the vast majority of them get routinely stomped. We -know- survivors, across the board, are losing the majority of their matches. Even the high MMR 4-man swiffers of nightmares do not average an escape rate over 50%.
But you don't need them to, because you set up the perfect DBD gods in a hypothetical 4-man team of doom and then go on to suggest that Bucko & Pals with 300 hours between them are exactly as problematic.
It's a motte-and-bailey. Flipper between two different positions and pretend they're the same.
The 'halfway decent group' is not a problem for a competent killer.
First you try to take the more reasonable position that the game is unwinnable when survivors play absolutely immaculately. But then you try to swap out the 'immaculate survivor team' for a 'halfway decent group'.
That’s not exactly what I said.
what I said was (to quote myself):
But yup, I’ll say it too:
It’s physically impossible to win if the survivor team plays perfectly.
Zero mistakes.
But…
nobodydoes that. No one.
Not even Team Eternal, since you brought them up as an example.
And that’s exactly where killer have their chance — they have stronger tools to
capitalizeon mistakes.
I’m totally fine admitting that if a survivor team plays 100%perfect, , I’ve got no shot.But that just… doesn’t happen.
Everyone makes mistakes. I make them as killer — and so do survivors.So yipp I'm pressing
Readyagainst Team Eternal on the current state. (Yep, I’m from EU too.)(cuz i knew, - mistakes can happen. and atm i can caitalize)
But with all the stuff that’s being asked for lately —
more 50/50 balance, more comeback mechanics, more of this, more of that…
and then throw in anti-slug, anti-tunnel, and whatever else is coming…I also said that I’d currently hit ready against any team. For now. In the current state of the game.
Because — and I’ve said this before — killers can still heavily capitalize on team mistakes.
But that includes all the stuff a lot of survivors don’t like: tunneling, camping, slugging.And my final point was this:
If these upcoming changes really go through — where killers can’t tunnel, camp, or slug effectively anymore, and they don’t get anything in return — then killers will be powerless.
And we’ll be forced to just sit there and watch even "mediocre, average teams" escape.
Maybe hope for 1–2 kills at best.your answer to this was just:
But the second the devs turn their attention to survivors, 'killers get nothing!'.
That's still a terrible argument, because the entirety of the past couple of years, that massive care package IS the compensation for the upcoming changes.
Prior to 6.1, it was generally considered acceptable to buff killers in exchange for getting rid of tunnelling, camping and slugging. Then 6.1 rolled around, we got the killer buff part, and we never got the compensatory anti-tunnel, anti-camp, anti-slug that was supposed to come with it. We got slap-on-the-wrist basekit BT and a NERF, of all things, to what was at the time the ONLY anti-tunnel.
The entire washing list of killer buffs were supposed to be balanced out by anti-slug, anti-tunnel, anti-camp, but those changes were delayed. Now we're finally (potentially) getting the compensation that survivors were supposed to get.
It's like two kids both being promised a present, kid A gets theirs a week early, and then when kid B finally gets theirs, kid A throws a tantrum that B got something and 'they never did!'
You're the one ripping things out of context. You can't argue that these changes are being made against a blank slate and just ignore multiple years of shifting the balance further in favour of killers, just so you can demand extra goodies when survivors finally get parity.
Uh, what you’re waiting for has already happened a long time ago?
all of that actually happened—just like BHVR promised. They never said they would completely remove tunneling, camping, or slugging. BHVR delivered what they said they would.
Patch 6.1 came out in July, and pretty early on, the promised anti-tunnel change arrived in the form of free bt. Later on, the anti-camp mechanic—the self-unhook near the hook—was added as well.
This already happened ages ago.
Everything that was promised at that point has already long made its way into the game.
That is proven by literally nothing, and all data and statistics point in the opposite direction. What you're talking about is forum killer dogma. It's a story with nothing to back it up, and no one is allowed to question it.
proof 1:
normal "not this good average" group.kinda meme perks,.. No impressive chases, no top 1% player performance you like to lean on. Michaela makes a huge mistake by giving insane double pressure with a down right near the hook.
Yup, slugging not allowed, right? Camping neither? And tunneling definitely not. Yup. how so?2.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QN7lU_orSMA
good SOLOQ lobby..
Not many mistakes on the survivor side, but got heavily hit by the killer-sided event mode + a really, really bad survivor map + in the end an overcommitment on the cover on the Sable.
3)
Super close draw. It would’ve been a win if David hadn’t wasted so much time with the whole “I chase you, killer” stuff and instead focused on gens after a certain point.
That means the game didn't get harder at all, you're just not left with any survivors at your own skill level because they all got 'balanced' out of the game.
Skill level? DBD isn’t rocket science. Eventually, almost everyone in the lobby knows the important stuff, just hopes for a good map + good RNG, a lucky win or loss in a 50/50, some advantage for their side—and just grinds it out.
By improving.Or, potentially, by going up against survivors of their own skill level again once they return to the game.
Either way, you may have to deal with losing the occasional match. But at least it won't be as bad as the devs saying you -should- lose the majority of your matches, and people on the forums then telling you that you should lose -even more-.
Sure… you can always improve.
But skill in DBD just isn’t rewarded that much.
What’s the point of perfecting Huntress crossmap shots if you get no real value out of them and the survivor is already back on their feet by the time you get there?DBD, on both sides, is more about efficiency and pressure than raw "skill".
I’ve been playing pretty actively since almost the release — +10,000 h —
so what kind of survivors am I supposed to face that truly “match my skill level,” just so I’m allowed to have an opinion on whether anti-slug, anti-tunnel, anti-camp, or a general shift toward a more 50/50 state is good for the game ?At what point do I have the right to form an opinion about the fact that the stats are difficult — not because of lack of “survivor goodies” — but rather because of what I personally see as the core issue (which I’ve already outlined in this thread): the matchmaking system being far too lenient or in some cases outright non-functional?
Like I already tried to explain in my post about the 25+25+25+25 vs. 100 from the killer's side...
and no one is allowed to question it.
Sure, anyone can ask. Go ahead — why not? Just ask.
But if you say “It’s a story with nothing to back it up” … then what exactly do you want from my side? What are you expecting? Just ask. Ready to share.Mind showing me how you win against people who kind of understand the game — without using any pressure tools whatsoever?
I was more thinking about other stuff, though.
Oh, I know you were. But none of the stuff you're thinking of actually has anything to do with bailing you out of your mistakes, and they all have to do with counteracting something that is entirely within the killer's control.
I keep hearing that survivors have been losing for years.
But whenever I ask people for their stats, it often turns out they have a solid 50–60% escape rate.
I mean… maybe I’m just asking the
“wrong”people, I don’t know.
Yes, you have. Again, you are grasping at anecdotes, cherry-picking a small handful while ignoring the overarching datasets. The last time BHVR released stats, they were absolutely dire, with the top 5 killrates, both in all MMR and isolated high MMR ALL being 65%+. The highest average escape rates were for 4-man swiffers in high MMR, and they only got to 48%, with the overall high MMR escape rate being 42%.
You getting a handful of higher escape rate folks on the line doesn't change the overall reality that survivors are losing far more than they are winning.
That’s not exactly what I said.
I also said that I’d currently hit ready against any team.
For now.In the current state of the game.
Because — and I’ve said this before — killers can still heavily capitalize on team mistakes.
But that includes all the stuff a lot of survivors don’t like: tunneling, camping, slugging.And my final point was this:
If these upcoming changes really go through — where killers can’t tunnel, camp, or slug effectively anymore,andthey don’t get anything in return — then killers will be powerless.
And we’ll be forced to just sit there and watch even "mediocre, average teams" escape.
Maybe hope for 1–2 kills at best.This doesn't fix your problem. You're still leveraging the idea of the immaculate survivor team being unbeatable to try and argue that the average joe can't be bested without tunnelling, camping and slugging.
If anything, it worsens your argument, because you have to admit that you're going off into the hypothetical, meaning you have even less ground to stand on.
This claim that killers will be 'forced to just sit there and watch even mediocre teams escape' is based on absolutely nothing, and goes against all statistical indicators. Worse, it has already been effectively disproven by a number of content creators.
all of that actually happened—just like BHVR promised. They never said they would completely remove tunneling, camping, or slugging. BHVR delivered what they said they would.
Except they didn't, did they? Because what they delivered failed to accomplish anything on one of the three, and on the other two components, they haven't done anything yet.
the promised anti-tunnel change arrived in the form of free bt.
It also came paired with a buff to tunnelling in the form of DS getting halved, leading to a surge in tunnelling. Generally, tunnelling was much stronger after 6.1 than it was before it, so it's hard to count this as 'anti-tunnel'.
Later on, the anti-camp mechanic—the self-unhook near the hook—was added as well.
Ah, but here's the rub, as a LOT of people on this forum will tell you: That's not anti-camp.
It's anti-facecamp.
In other words, it only stops the killer from breathing down your neck while camping, it did nothing to deter camping itself. And every time someone complains about the fact that this thing does nothing against a camping killer, people are quick to point out that this update was 'anti-facecamp, not anti-camp'.
So no, we don't have any anti-camp yet.
Everything that was promised at that point has already long made its way into the game.
And we've completely skipped over anti-slug.
proof
The plural of 'anecdote' isn't 'data'.
Not to mention that none of this is 'proof' that killers would not be able to win if they couldn't camp, tunnel or slug. It's not like the killer just ceases to exist for the entire duration where they would normally do those things and the match is otherwise identical, is it? The match flow would be changed entirely, making these matches completely irrelevant.
And let me be fair to you and give you a piece of advice: You cannot 'prove' a negative. You can't 'prove' that matches are unwinnable. You have to find some kind of indicators that support your theory.
Like what I do with data.
What’s the point of perfecting Huntress crossmap shots if you get no real value out of them and the survivor is already back on their feet by the time you get there?
How is it 'no real value' if you incapacitate a survivor for an extended period of time? Eruption broke the game on that kind of stuff. Just because you didn't get a hook off of it, doesn't mean you didn't get value.
I’ve been playing pretty actively since almost the release — +10,000 h — so what kind of survivors am I supposed to face that truly “match my skill level,” just so I’m allowed to have an opinion on whether anti-slug, anti-tunnel, anti-camp, or a general shift toward a more 50/50 state is good for the game ?
Oh, you're allowed to have an opinion.
But you can expect to get that opinion called out and challenged when you sink into defeatism and self-fulfilling prophecies and attempt to steer the game's overall design with it.
You're allowed to think you can't do anything against Joe Schmoe without tunnelling and camping and slugging, but I'm, in turn, allowed to disabuse you of that notion.
You feeling sorry for yourself is not grounds to leave everyone else stuck in the muck. Survivor gameplay is in a dire state and it needs help. This particular problem, of camping, tunnelling and slugging, has been rotting at the game's core for ages now, even hindering killers, and it just kept getting kicked further and further down the road.
This drivel about how the game will be completely unwinnable for killers is based on nothing, and goes in against everything we do know, so you can't expect it to be taken seriously or weighed very heavily in overall discussions.
The reality is that your argumentation just doesn't have much of a leg to stand on. That's all.
But if you say
“It’s a story with nothing to back it up”… then what exactly do you want from my side? What are you expecting? Just ask. Ready to share.
Something more than conjecture. Run it, try it, get stats, expand scope, put in the work. Don't just play a match and cross your arms in a huff when things don't immediately go your way. You need scale to make the kind of point that you're making, and that's not gonna work off a small handful of matches with one or two killer players.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3977556#Comment_3977556
Precisely what I'm talking about.
If you lose as survivor, there's three other survivors you can blame, before you have to resort to blaming the game, or yourself.
As killer, if you lose, you can blame yourself, or do exactly this: Just insist there was nothing you could've done about it, and it's the game's fault.
.. just wanna say first: as a survivor, I always look at myself first before blaming teammates. And at the overall situation.
Yup, it’s easy to just blame the team or the killer, but I know that a lot of it often comes down to me — like overextending loops, being greedy, the classic “one more loop” or “I can definitely make that pallet” stuff. So yea, lots of sloppy plays on my end sometimes.That's caused this particular argument to take shape where a bunch of forum killers are insistent it is physically impossible to win, with none of them having the skill to back such a claim up. And it's really tiresome to see this argument regurgitated over and over and just drilled in like dogma.
It's Option B: Blame the game. And then demand it gets validated.
hh— uhm... big um,
Why does it always turn into a “you just suck, just get good” thing the second you lose as killer and say there was nothing you could do?Like, ye— as killer I’m apparently supposed to play at 100% perfection at all times.
Never miss a shot, hit validation always flawless, can’t lose a single 50/50, gotta win every mindgame...Meanwhile… how many “I misplayed but got bailed out by X” mechanics do survivors have again on their side?
Yeah, killers have strong tools too right now…
And sure, some matches feel straight-up unwinnable — no denying that.
But most of the time, you still have some chance — even if it’s just a tiny one.
And still, you need survivors to make mistakes. That’s just reality.But if we’re really talking about 50/50 balance, and it’s always like
“we need this, and we need that to make it fair,”
and then you stack on anti-camp, anti-slug, anti-tunnel, anti-everything…Come on. Seriously?
Are killers just supposed to stand there and watch every halfway decent group that understands the game escape… and just be okay with that?
So why did it cop so many nerfs, then?
I’m not on the dev team, obviously, but based on my experience, I can make a pretty strong guess as to why:
It’s probably just in favor of healthier overall game balance.
Against a stealth group, you always had way more time. Those matches were usually the easier ones.
Because let’s be honest — if you're hiding, you're not doing generators.The most efficient thing in DBD is constant progress: gens, gens, gens.
Stealth players are often the ones who are just kinda “doing nothing” while the killer applies pressure elsewhere.And as killer, I know where my pressure comes from — I’d rather get someone hooked and immediately start a tunnel than waste time checking bushes, lockers, and dark corners.
That’s where the hook into the direct tunnel comes in.
And if that’s happening, and the rest of the team is still deep in stealth mode with no gen pressure or proper support, that group basically dies because of stealth.That was always the case, even back then. You always had the option to just ignore overly stealthy teams and not get pulled into that pacing.
The only difference was: there were just way more resources back then. Like, a lot more.
Sometimes triple what we have now — I remember counting 32 pallets on one map once.So, the person getting chased for their life used to have way more tools to actually last in that situation.
But with all the killer buffs, all the pallets slowly getting removed, the strong windows being permanently shut (or literally replaced by open doors),
stealth kinda got nerfed indirectly too —
Because with every patch leaning more and more toward killer-favoritism, it became more important than ever that every survivor contributes efficiently to the team’s objective.
Everyone has to bring their 25%. And up, sometimes that also means sacrificing your own hook stage — because even hook states are a resource.And especially in solo queue, that became a huge problem.
The more stealthy the match was, the more likely you'd have people doing the “super stealth for personal escape” playstyle…
…while the rest of the team slowly dies.Yes, I know, that's the only thing you guys ever talk about. The 'literally unbeatables', the top 0.01%, the Team Eternals. Screw the rest of the game, let it all burn down, but If I, as a dead-average killer player, have to lose one match? That's awful, and survivors should lose more to compensate.
But yup, I’ll say it too:
It’s physically impossible to win if the survivor team plays perfectly.
Zero mistakes.
But… nobody does that. No one.
Not even Team Eternal, since you brought them up as an example.
Too much happens in a single match, and people are human. Humans make mistakes.And that’s exactly where killer have their chance — they have stronger tools to capitalize on mistakes.
I’m totally fine admitting that if a survivor team plays 100%perfect, , I’ve got no shot.But that just… doesn’t happen.
Everyone makes mistakes. I make them as killer — and so do survivors.So yipp I'm pressing Ready against Team Eternal on the current state. (Yep, I’m from EU too.)
(cuz i knew, - mistakes can happen. and atm i can caitalize)
But with all the stuff that’s being asked for lately —
more 50/50 balance, more comeback mechanics, more of this, more of that…
and then throw in anti-slug, anti-tunnel, and whatever else is coming…Like, how?
And it’s not even about the top 4% .. (or like u said 1% .)
if we change all this thinks like asked: It’s about your average groups — the ones who understand the game just enough and can run in a straight line for more than 3 seconds.
Even those start becoming a problem under these kinds of proposed changes.
Even when they misplay a lot. Even when they play badly.But hey, we keep that survivor-side escape rate stat alive by matching killers against super weak, insta-down lobbies…
So the numbers still work.Yeah... "just play better."
I know the line.
I’m tired.No it didn't! Yeah, they had faster gens, but they also lacked a lot of protection that they have now. Swivel hooks, +10 second hang time, basekit BT, gen kick limit. Survivor basekit didn't use to be 'way' stronger at all, they've sidegraded more than downgraded.
Killers got way, way more powerful with a series of deliberate basekit buffs and nerfs to survivors.
But all of that, the entirety of this text:
Uhh... but like— every map, every window, and every pallet was part of the survivor base too, right?
And… what did we actually have back then?
Sorry, but I had so much "stuff" that protected me as a survivor, I could literally hold the killer for 5 gens sometimes— if he actually tried.
(Those days are just gone now… well, at least once the killer knows what they're doing.)Back then, survivors were way stronger in their basekit.
There were massive nerfs over time — especially to pallets, windows, and the overall structure of tiles.
That alone heavily nerfed the survivor base.And yeipps— killers were made weaker too, for a while.
But then MMR hit and get involved… and it showed very clearly:
The moment you get a few good and efficient people together in a match, those 5-gen games stop being a rare mixed-lobby fluke — and start becoming the norm.So … all these changes were honestly healthy balance decisions.
They just made it more and more obvious how broken the game used to be in favor of survivors in old DBD.Is all a distraction from how wrong you are to claim that killers got 'nothing'. You can't say 'Killers got nothing', and then when I point out a washing list of improvements made to killers, retort with 'remember when survivor was strong?'
Is all a distraction from how wrong you are to claim that killers got 'nothing'. You can't say 'Killers got nothing', and then when I point out a washing list of improvements made to killers, retort with 'remember when survivor was strong?'
Huh? I never said killers got nothing. They’ve received plenty of buffs — and many of them were important to actually bring the game into a more balanced state.
You're taking things out of context here.What I did say is that with things like anti-slug, anti-tunnel, etc. coming, killers are getting nothing to compensate.
Not that they’ve never received anything in the past. (Same goes for survivors, by the way.)But what we got were necessary balance changes. That has nothing to do with the fact that what’s coming next is about to throw the whole thing back into a completely lopsided state — unless killers also get something in return.
You were referring to that like:
Killers have gotten so much in 6.1 and onwards. Hatch nerf, Medkit nerfs, toolbox nerfs, improved gen regression, shorter on-hit sprint, shorter on-hit cooldown, quicker actions, smaller maps, hiding nerfs, updates to weaker killers...
But the second the devs turn their attention to survivors, 'killers get nothing!'.
After almost a decade, the one biggest complaint from the survivor side
mightfinally get addressed, and forum killers pull out the 'I am feel uncomfortable when we are not about me?' meme.I am feel uncomfortable when we are not about me?' meme
And I responded that it’s not about feeling uncomfortable — it’s about the fact that even with all the balance changes that favored killers, we still can’t create a situation where upcoming changes or calls for “more 50/50 balance” don’t end up pushing the game back into a state where, as killer, you just can’t do anything again.
You were the one that tossed in CoBruption meta to claim that killers' gen regression hadn't improved.
Yup... so what do we even have today? Scourge Hook? You need hooks for that. Only top killers get those quickly and consistently. Good teams don’t give them to you that for free. (Sure, in weak lobbies you’ll get Scourge value after Scourge value while they keep feeding you...)
Buthalf decent players? They hold first chase longer, don’t rush for instant unhooks, and keep the pressure going, denying you tons of perk value that only bad or casual groups hand over.
Dead Man’s? Good players don’t just instantly drop every gen. They tap an “unimportant” gen somewhere to block some irrelevant one for 30 seconds, giving the team breathing room.
Deadlock? Casuals just sit next to the blocked gen for 30 seconds... while efficient teams just rotate and push another gen 30 meters away.
Pop? Got massively nerfed.etc..
Did they, or did the fodder just quit?
Because what I started to suspect after killers got buff after buff after buff, only to turn around and become MORE insistent that the game is unwinnable, is that the game didn't actually get harder…
There's just fewer weak opponents left. The party petes were starting to quit. So killers go up against better opponents.
And do the killers then adapt to better opponents by, themselves, improving their gameplay?
Or…
With most killers, you’ll just be standing there watching this team win — nothing you can do about it.Did they pick Option B?
Y, on this journey, a lot of casuals have either quit or gotten way better. It’s a good thing because survivors now actually have to improve their gameplay—no more easy rounds. Makes it harder for killers, but the game’s more balanced and skill-based overall.
Did they pick Option B?
And … about Option B — how exactly are killers supposed to win when matches are already super close, and then all these changes people want (anti-camp, anti-slug, more comeback mechanics, 50/50 balance) get added? I’m genuinely curious.
.. just wanna say first: as a survivor, I always look at myself first before blaming teammates. And at the overall situation.
Yup, it’s easy to just blame the team or the killer, but I
knowthat a lot of it often comes down tome— like overextending loops, being greedy, the classic “one more loop” or “I can definitely make that pallet” stuff. So yea, lots of sloppy plays on my end sometimes.Now apply that to killer.
hh— uhm... big um,
Why does italwaysturn into a “you just suck, just get good” thing the second you lose as killer and say there was nothing you could do?Like, ye— as killer I’m apparently supposed to play at
100% perfectionat all times.
Never miss a shot, hit validation always flawless, can’t lose a single 50/50, gotta win every mindgame...But you don't. You're happy to demand better from your survivor gameplay, but NOT from your killer gameplay. So you instead resort to the argument that you -cannot- win, even though you obviously can.
Meanwhile… how many “I misplayed but got bailed out by X” mechanics do survivors have again on their side?
One.
The hatch.
Everything else has nothing to do with 'misplays'. Getting tunneled, camped or slugged are not things that are in the survivor's control, and therefor they cannot be their 'misplays'. They are things that the killer unilaterally decides.
And no, going down is not a 'misplay' either. You are not supposed to hold chase indefinitely. That's why infinites were removed, why Bloodlust is still here.
But with all the stuff that’s being asked for lately —
more 50/50 balance, more comeback mechanics, more of this, more of that…
and then throw in anti-slug, anti-tunnel, and whatever else is coming…Like,
how?Except 50/50 balance, comeback mechanisms and 'more of this, more of that' aren't on the menu.
The devs blatantly came out and stated that they balance the game to make survivors lose more and this is, what, the second thread in YEARS, and it's not even arguing for 50/50!
The only thing people have been asking for is anti-camp, anti-tunnel, anti-slug, to limit the way in which the killer can just bar people from gameplay and ruin the game for everyone else. Survivors have been losing for ages, and the only complaint is about HOW they lose, not THAT they lose.
Are killers just supposed to stand there and watch every halfway decent group that understands the game escape… and just be okay with that?
It's a motte-and-bailey.
First you try to take the more reasonable position that the game is unwinnable when survivors play absolutely immaculately. But then you try to swap out the 'immaculate survivor team' for a 'halfway decent group'.
And that's where your argument becomes fallacious, because while the top 1% of swiffers can be argued to be unbalanced, possibly even 'unbeatable', you can't make the same argument for 'halfway decent groups', since the vast majority of them get routinely stomped. We -know- survivors, across the board, are losing the majority of their matches. Even the high MMR 4-man swiffers of nightmares do not average an escape rate over 50%.
But you don't need them to, because you set up the perfect DBD gods in a hypothetical 4-man team of doom and then go on to suggest that Bucko & Pals with 300 hours between them are exactly as problematic.
It's a motte-and-bailey. Flipper between two different positions and pretend they're the same.
The 'halfway decent group' is not a problem for a competent killer.
Huh? I never said killers got
nothing. They’ve received plenty of buffs — and many of them were important to actually bring the game into a more balanced state.
You're taking things out of context here.What I
didsay is thatwith things like anti-slug, anti-tunnel, etc. coming, killers are gettingnothingto compensate.
Not that they’ve never received anything in the past. (Same goes for survivors, by the way.)That's still a terrible argument, because the entirety of the past couple of years, that massive care package IS the compensation for the upcoming changes.
Prior to 6.1, it was generally considered acceptable to buff killers in exchange for getting rid of tunnelling, camping and slugging. Then 6.1 rolled around, we got the killer buff part, and we never got the compensatory anti-tunnel, anti-camp, anti-slug that was supposed to come with it. We got slap-on-the-wrist basekit BT and a NERF, of all things, to what was at the time the ONLY anti-tunnel.
The entire washing list of killer buffs were supposed to be balanced out by anti-slug, anti-tunnel, anti-camp, but those changes were delayed. Now we're finally (potentially) getting the compensation that survivors were supposed to get.
It's like two kids both being promised a present, kid A gets theirs a week early, and then when kid B finally gets theirs, kid A throws a tantrum that B got something and 'they never did!'
You're the one ripping things out of context. You can't argue that these changes are being made against a blank slate and just ignore multiple years of shifting the balance further in favour of killers, just so you can demand extra goodies when survivors finally get parity.
And I responded that it’s not about
feelinguncomfortable — it’s about the fact thateven with all the balance changes that favored killers, we still can’t create a situation where upcoming changes or calls for “more 50/50 balance” don’t end up pushing the game back into a state where, as killer, you justcan’t do anythingagain.That is proven by literally nothing, and all data and statistics point in the opposite direction. What you're talking about is forum killer dogma. It's a story with nothing to back it up, and no one is allowed to question it.
Yup... so what do we even have today? Scourge Hook? You need hooks for that. Only top killers get those quickly and consistently. Good teams don’t give them to you that for free. (Sure, in weak lobbies you’ll get Scourge value after Scourge value while they keep feeding you...)
Aside from the fact that all of that stuff is all -after- 6.1 and thus part of the upward trend of regression, you're also constantly talking your way around the basekit gen regression buffs.
This is not stuff that's tied to perks, this is stuff you benefit from no matter what killer you play and no matter what perks you bring.
Yes, it's not as game-breakingly overpowered as CoBRuption was, but it's still undeniably much, much stronger than anything pre-6.1.
Y, on this journey, a lot of casuals have either quit or gotten way better. It’s a good thing because survivors now actually have to improve their gameplay—no more easy rounds. Makes it harder for killers, but the game’s more balanced and skill-based overall.
That means the game didn't get harder at all, you're just not left with any survivors at your own skill level because they all got 'balanced' out of the game.
And … about Option B — how exactly are killers supposed to win when matches are already super close, and then all these changes people want (anti-camp, anti-slug, more comeback mechanics, 50/50 balance) get added? I’m genuinely curious.
By improving.
Or, potentially, by going up against survivors of their own skill level again once they return to the game.
Either way, you may have to deal with losing the occasional match. But at least it won't be as bad as the devs saying you -should- lose the majority of your matches, and people on the forums then telling you that you should lose -even more-.
-
@Coordi said:
Streetwise does not meet the criteria for a Kill Switch. It sucks to have to say that that plainlyt, as the last thing I want to do is minimize player concerns or frustrations. The team is aware, it's being monitored, but it is not breaking the game.
What is the reason for this restraint with the killswitch? Is it damaging or cost-intensive to use in some way?
-
@oecrophy said:
Earlier you mentioned that it's a benefit to killers that they are 100% in control and don't split responsibility 4-ways with strangers.
Huh, did you not get the math? If every survivor in a group puts in their 25%, they reach 100% together (even a bit more, which is fine) — while the killer gives their 100% solo. To me, that’s almost a balanced scale, maybe even slightly tipped in favor of survivors. Which is okay, so the balance in 3v1 situations doesn’t completely break in favor of the killer
And no one likes option A. Which is why the developers can openly state that the game is balanced in favour of killers, why the stats constantly show killers coming out ahead, why we've got winstreaks in the hundreds (Sometimes thousands), and killers are STILL insisting they just can't win at all.
I also have a really high kill rate. I’ve tried to explain why — because the 100% vs 100% between both sides… it’s like: many survivor groups don’t play at full strength. One person doing “whatever” is already a 75 vs 100 (from my side, the moment I go all in) for me. And yes, I can win. I win very often. I have a chance against super strong groups. But that’s only because I have lots of tools survivors want to take away. I have my 80+ kill rate because I don’t always get those 100 vs 100 situations, where both sides play at full strength, but instead 1-2 survivors drop off and it becomes like 50 vs 100 while I’m still going all in and give form me side the full 100 percent… and because of all the tools I can use — like slugging, tunneling — all the stuff that’s supposed to get taken away with the changes.
But if that’s taken away, .. (anti slug, anti tunnel, more balance into a 50/50) then you have nothing left against strong teams... so basically, you’ve got really nothing.
With most killers, you’ll just be standing there watching this team win — nothing you can do about it.The counterpoint for a tactic getting butchered is to point out that no one uses that tactic since its butchering anyway. Love that.
Nah, that’s not what I meant. That tactic just isn’t the most efficient. Back then stealth was easier because two people could carry the round while the rest did stealth stuff. But even then, pure efficiency and a more aggressive playstyle were the strongest way for survivor groups to win fast and clean. There were already super efficient teams .
Today, most teams understand this — whether good or bad — pure efficiency wins the round, and sometimes it’s even necessary with the pallet count now. Back then you could still compensate stealth (because you had double or triple the resources, better tiles, better windows). That playstyle was never strong and always meme imho. (but more possible because of the unbalanced amout of reccources u had)
But I was talking about good, efficient groups — not meme playstyles that waste so much time. (because of the strong loops, good tiles, and the abundance of strong pallets, you simply had time for everything back then — all kinds of things. Including a lot of stealth.)
But we're not talking perks. We're talking -basekit-.
Smaller maps are usually an advantage for survivors in the base kit — good teamwork can really hit hard there, good teamplay, nice blodyblocks.. which is also needed given the amount of pallets we have today.
And y.., back then survivors in the base kit were way stronger if they were good and used everything on the map right. But you gotta remember how unbalanced that was...
But killers also had strong basekits.. like the pre-nerf Spirit (or prayer beads (but we dont have to talk about the addons, basekit was much much MUCH stronger too), Huntress with multiple one-shot hatchets, insta-saw Billy, the old Nurse... even Trapper was way more favored on the old maps with the old grass.
edit: but yes.
survivor basekit used to be way stronger — so strong that the game felt more like a 1v1 in chase rather than a 4v1, where the killer actually needs strong advantages, downs, and hooks to create pressure on the whole team.
I mean.. survivors were just super boosted in the old days. A lot of groups simply didn’t understand that, and instead enjoyed other aspects of the game — they played more stealthy and never fully used their potential or all the tools they had available.
so idk.
Should we really be using some of that wildly unbalanced stuff from th past as an argument for today’s issues in the game?
The moment we are lookin in the past:
I mean, back in 2016 I could literally see straight through shack — it was so full of holes that you always knew if and when the killer turned around. With some old builds I could fully heal before the killer even finished wiping their weapon. With the old Brand New Parts, we could pop 4 gens in 30 seconds and then all escape through hatch as a 4-man 1-2 minutes in match.
A lot of stuff back then was super broken. Unfair. Totally unbalanced. And it got removed for exactly that reason.
Then MMR came along, and they finally the devs realized how broken their game actually was. (the loops, the tiles, the maps) With update 6.1, the necessary balance changes finally began.
but… beside this: DBD had a completely different pace back then i n most of the matches — different playstyles, different tactics. You really can’t compare it all that easily.
It’s never that simple to look at things from just one side or to idealize one side over the other.
Nostalgia is nice, I feel it often too.
But idealizing the past is dangerous.With most killers, you’ll just be standing there watching this team win — nothing you can do about it.
Precisely what I'm talking about.
If you lose as survivor, there's three other survivors you can blame, before you have to resort to blaming the game, or yourself.
As killer, if you lose, you can blame yourself, or do exactly this: Just insist there was nothing you could've done about it, and it's the game's fault.
That's caused this particular argument to take shape where a bunch of forum killers are insistent it is physically impossible to win, with none of them having the skill to back such a claim up. And it's really tiresome to see this argument regurgitated over and over and just drilled in like dogma.
It's Option B: Blame the game. And then demand it gets validated.
That tactic just isn’t the most efficient.
So why did it cop so many nerfs, then?
But I was talking about good, efficient groups
Yes, I know, that's the only thing you guys ever talk about. The 'literally unbeatables', the top 0.01%, the Team Eternals. Screw the rest of the game, let it all burn down, but If I, as a dead-average killer player, have to lose one match? That's awful, and survivors should lose more to compensate.
survivor basekit used to be
waystrongerNo it didn't! Yeah, they had faster gens, but they also lacked a lot of protection that they have now. Swivel hooks, +10 second hang time, basekit BT, gen kick limit. Survivor basekit didn't use to be 'way' stronger at all, they've sidegraded more than downgraded.
Killers got way, way more powerful with a series of deliberate basekit buffs and nerfs to survivors.
But all of that, the entirety of this text:
Smaller maps are usually an advantage for survivors in the base kit — good teamwork can really hit hard there, good teamplay, nice blodyblocks.. which is also needed given the amount of pallets we have today.
And y.., back then survivors in the base kit were way stronger if they were good and used everything on the map right. But you gotta remember how unbalanced that was...
But killers also had strong basekits.. like the pre-nerf Spirit (or prayer beads (but we dont have to talk about the addons, basekit was much much MUCH stronger too), Huntress with multiple one-shot hatchets, insta-saw Billy, the old Nurse... even Trapper was way more favored on the old maps with the old grass.
edit: but yes.
survivor basekit used to be
waystronger — so strong that the game felt more like a 1v1 in chase rather than a 4v1, where the killer actually needs strong advantages, downs, and hooks to create pressure on the whole team.I mean.. survivors were just super boosted in the old days. A lot of groups simply didn’t understand that, and instead enjoyed other aspects of the game — they played more stealthy and never fully used their potential or all the tools they had available.
so idk.
Should we
reallybe using some of that wildly unbalanced stuff from th past as an argument for today’s issues in the game?The moment we are lookin in the past:
I mean, back in 2016 I could literally see straight through shack — it was so full of holes that you always knew if and when the killer turned around. With some old builds I could fully heal before the killer even finished wiping their weapon. With the old Brand New Parts, we could pop 4 gens in 30 seconds and then all escape through hatch as a 4-man 1-2 minutes in match.
A lot of stuff back then was super broken. Unfair. Totally unbalanced. And it got removed for exactly that reason.
Then MMR came along, and they finally the devs realized how broken their game actually was. (the loops, the tiles, the maps) With update 6.1, the necessary balance changes finally began.
but… beside this: DBD had a completely different pace back then i n most of the matches — different playstyles, different tactics. You really can’t compare it all that easily.
It’s never that simple to look at things from just one side or to idealize one side over the other.
Nostalgia is nice, I feel it often too.
But idealizing the past is dangerous.Is all a distraction from how wrong you are to claim that killers got 'nothing'. You can't say 'Killers got nothing', and then when I point out a washing list of improvements made to killers, retort with 'remember when survivor was strong?'
Also
Nostalgia is nice, I feel it often too.But idealizing the past is dangerous.
You were the one that tossed in CoBruption meta to claim that killers' gen regression hadn't improved.
And since 6.1, survivors have seriously improved — because they
had toafter all the killer buffs.Did they, or did the fodder just quit?
Because what I started to suspect after killers got buff after buff after buff, only to turn around and become MORE insistent that the game is unwinnable, is that the game didn't actually get harder…
There's just fewer weak opponents left. The party petes were starting to quit. So killers go up against better opponents.
And do the killers then adapt to better opponents by, themselves, improving their gameplay?
Or…
With most killers, you’ll just be standing there watching this team win — nothing you can do about it.
Did they pick Option B?
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3977454#Comment_3977454
It’s not about me feeling “uncomfortable” when it’s not all about me.
It’s about having basically no chance against some groups with the upcoming changes — and right now, it’s already a damn tough fight.I agree… some maps are just way over the top — not because they’re big, but because of the missing pallets and lack of filler tiles.
But just because 2 or 3 maps are bad for Survivors, that’s no reason to call everything 50/50 or to sugarcoat all upcoming changes.
And smaller maps? Survivors actually benefit from those sometimes just as much as killers do.(It’s always nice to have at least one teammate on a gen nearby — for a bit of cover, a fast bodyblock, a quick flashlight save, or just turning a situation into a "down into a palli moment. " That kind of support is something you really miss as a survivor squad on those still overly large maps)
Hiding? What good group even does that in 2025 anymore?
And gen regression?
"Back in the day, gens took about 10 seconds difference
But old slown perks were significantly stronger — like, way stronger
You can definitely feel the negative impact on killers today.Survivors got a huge buff here too — let’s not pretend they didn’t.
And the biggest difference: that all came with MMR or shortly after. MMR doesn’t work perfectly, has a lot of flaws and issues, but do you know how easy rounds were compared to now? Against many groups it was just “chase someone else.” That was the main advice back then.That strategy basically died around the time MMR was introduced.
It can still work today, but it’s a huge gamble.
Back then, average groups were way, way, WAY more mixed.It’s about having basically no chance against some groups with the upcoming changes
Earlier you mentioned that it's a benefit to killers that they are 100% in control and don't split responsibility 4-ways with strangers.
Counterpoint: It also means that when things go south, the only things left to blame are A) yourself and B) the game.
And no one likes option A. Which is why the developers can openly state that the game is balanced in favour of killers, why the stats constantly show killers coming out ahead, why we've got winstreaks in the hundreds (Sometimes thousands), and killers are STILL insisting they just can't win at all.
that’s no reason to call everything 50/50 or to sugarcoat all upcoming changes.
Certainly not a reason to call it 50/50, since killers got considerably more over this stretch, but even more is it a reason to NOT claim that killers got "nothing", wouldn't you agree?
Hiding? What good group even does that in 2025 anymore?
The counterpoint for a tactic getting butchered is to point out that no one uses that tactic since its butchering anyway. Love that.
But old slown perks were
significantlystronger — like, way stronger
Yes, I know, like 80% winrate stronger. But if that's your benchmark, you really do need to just quit, because you're not getting auto-wins like that back and you'll forever be 'UP' in comparison.
But we're not talking perks. We're talking -basekit-.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3977357#Comment_3977357
Maybe if you came at it with this attitude from the start, nobody would've assumed otherwise.
Nah, I... I can’t anymore. I’ve read too many things I probably shouldn't have.
Maybe I’m just tired. Maybe I’m mad. I don’t even like “fighting” —but i have the feeling I have to fight.And I don’t feel the need to speak for Survivors.
I feel like I constantly have to fight for the Killer side.What are Survivors about to get?
Better MMR.. all the other upcoming stuffAnti-slug.
Anti-tunnel.
More “basekit protections”… more restrictions.
What do Killers get?
Nothing. Or worse — the same restrictions, but turned against them.
It feels like everything is slowly turning into anti-Killer.
And I know exactly what many of my matches will look like once I'm not "allowed" to slug or tunnel anymore.
(I assume tunnel will still be the most efficient option in many cases — so people will continue doing it anyway, just while being punished harder by design.)
But what I do know is:
Against strong, well-coordinated groups?
A 4K will be impossible, unless they mess up badly.And yes — I go into my matches with one goal:
I want my 4K. That’s what I fight for.Y.. I`m the evil Killer. I know ..
but..
Survivors fight too. They sweat. They don’t give you anything for free. And that’s fine. That’s how it should be.
But when anti-slug, anti-tunnel, and eventually 50/50 balance people ask her for becomes the norm…
Then it feels like Killers are being forced to accept:
"If your opponents are really good — you’re not supposed to win."
Meanwhile, those same top-tier SWFs?
They always have a reliable win — as long as they play clean.
4 out, 3 out, doesn’t matter. They control the game.And to make the stats look “balanced,” I’m supposed to enjoy stomping bad soloQ, casual SWFs, or random lobbies just to keep the average win rate in check?
Just to make the 50/50 charts work?
Even if that means I never have a real chance against the coordinated teams?That’s what this is heading toward, isn’t it?
Anti-slug.
Anti-tunnel.
And on top of that, 50/50 balance?but.. BUT:
I don’t want the satisfaction of dominating bad groups.
I don’t care about those matches.I want a shot against the groups where every single player has thousands of hours and knows what they’re doing.
That’s where I want to be challanged.
That’s where I want a chance to fight — not a guarantee to lose.What do Killers get?
Nothing.
Killers have gotten so much in 6.1 and onwards. Hatch nerf, Medkit nerfs, toolbox nerfs, improved gen regression, shorter on-hit sprint, shorter on-hit cooldown, quicker actions, smaller maps, hiding nerfs, updates to weaker killers...
But the second the devs turn their attention to survivors, 'killers get nothing!'.
After almost a decade, the one biggest complaint from the survivor side might finally get addressed, and forum killers pull out the 'I am feel uncomfortable when we are not about me?' meme.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
A 60% kill rate means on average flipping between a 2k and a 3k. That maths out to having a 49% win rate on average (62.5k for an even 50% on average). Yes, 4ks can happen, and yes, 0ks can happen. We are talking about the average across multiple matches.
PSA: This is 100% incorrect, as this model also predicts a full 0% winrate off a 50% killrate. RPTheHotrod is aware this model is incorrect and is simply trolling by regurgitating this at every opportunity.
-
@Ragna_Rock said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3976897#Comment_3976897
"To be totally fair too, Killers are more fragile than Survivors. I don't mean that in a snotty way, but if I've noticed anything in the last 3 years, it's that Survivors will continue to queue up for the worst experiences while Killer won't. I'm not really sure how to make the game more balanced while avoiding that loss in the process."
How else is this not a snotty thing? Its pure us vs them.
Also survs never quit before!? Are we playing the same game? The dev had to put in a "go next" prevention system because they keep giving up.
"And even with Dead Hard, they just pulled a 180. Survivors could use it to win a palette race, so they nerf it and make it so Killers can win the palette race instead with a lunge. It's like they're allergic to a 50/50 chance when it comes to changes."
Old MFT nearly killed the game as it made playing anything but blight and nurse painful as the 3% was enough to get an extra run at a lot of loops the dev recognised this and did the 6.1 patch to make killer less miserable.
Old dead hard nearly did the same as it meant you could extend chases for free and just say no to death.
Old MFT nearly killed the game as it made playing anything but blight and nurse painful as the 3% was enough to get an extra run at a lot of loops the dev recognised this and did the 6.1 patch to make killer less miserable.
MFT came well after 6.1. Did you mean something else?
-
@nakedcat said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3976850#Comment_3976850
If it only works for one gen, why then would you run it instead of just using BNP? You don’t have to worry about eating 30 seconds in the basement (on top of however long it takes to find the basement) or being broken until you’re hooked if you just use a BNP. And if you have to keep applying it then that’s even worse because you’re spending potentially 100s of seconds off gens or healing other survivors or distracting the killer to get a meager effect.
Because a BNP is consumed within the trial, while a perk is reusable. You wouldn't need to keep spending BP on it.
-
Ultimately, I don't think there's a way to get a perk that requires you to go into the basement and stay there for 60 seconds, after which you lose either a hookstate or a permanent health state, to work. The investment required to prime this perk demands a pay-off that has to be agonising the killer, which would make it terrible for both sides.
The cost needs to come down, and so does the benefit. For example, instead of 60 seconds and perma-broken for 10 charges off all gens, how about 30 seconds and broken until hooked for a single-use BNP effect?
-
@ratcoffee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3972265#Comment_3972265
"you can lose really quickly if you don't use any one of a huge mix of perks, many of which are available for free" is bad, but it's nowhere near as bad as "you get told you're so bad that you might get banned for trolling, for the game for not using a perk locked behind a character you need to pay real money for." comparing the two just feels massively out of touch
Oh, you know how it is.
'Survivors banned for being too UP, killers most affected.'