Firellius
Firellius
About
- Username
- Firellius
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,210
- Last Active
Comments
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801176#Comment_3801176
I disagree, the longer you stay in the game, after last gen pops the worse you play, the hooked person is a result of that play.
I mean, that's an oversimplification. If someone takes the last chase that clears the final two gens, is that a bad play just because the killer camps them out after?
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800310#Comment_3800310
One solution instead of a reduced EGC could be that survivors bleed BP the longer they stay in the game after the exit gates are powered (not open). One of the main arguments when NoED got nerfed was that it rewarded bad play, one could also arguing that the longer survivors stay in the map after the last gen is done the worse is the play, even if that means that they are trying to save someone.
I always wonder why people pop last gen if someone is on the hook, this will most likely cause the killer to camp the hook, making a rescue harder. Why not just save and then pop the gen.
one could also arguing that the longer survivors stay in the map after the last gen is done the worse is the play, even if that means that they are trying to save someone.
That invalidates the argument though. If they're trying to get an extra save, then it's not universally a 'worse play' to stick around.
I always wonder why people pop last gen if someone is on the hook, this will most likely cause the killer to camp the hook, making a rescue harder. Why not just save and then pop the gen.
Most killers will probably not make much of a distinction between a gen that's about to pop and one that has already popped and will just start doing an EGC kill secure camp even if the gen hasn't popped yet, but in case they don't, if you get the save but you can't finish the gen because it's being defended, that could end up being more costly.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801142#Comment_3801142
well, if we wanna talk about RNG, there is one 4% RNG that affects matches more than all other kinds of RNGs combined lol. The one that is inflating killrates so much that if it was excluded from stats and actual optimal matches were taken into consideration, killrates would be extremely lower
That's a complete change of subject and you know it. It's not even subtle.
It's entirely irrelevant to your erroneous claim of 60% killrate = 50% winrate.
-
@MrMori said:
Predator is not going to be a meta perk, and in 95% of your matches you won't meet someone running it unless it's a Wraith going for adept. It's a perk to help newer players not lose chase as often. Killer perks completely countering survivor perks is not a new or controversial thing.
Also, Distortion hard counters Predator. Literally. Take chase, you get your Distortion back. Lose chase, the killer aura reads you, but your Distortion blocks it. What is the problem here exactly? The chances of running into Predator when you bring Deception or Dance With Me are statistically extremely low and to point it out as a serious issue feels disingenous to me. If you want a misdirection build to work, you can choose to bring Distortion now and it'll work perfectly. I wouldn't personally because again, I guarantee you won't run into many serious killers running predator.
If you think the Distortion nerf is unfair, you can say that. I personally think the nerf is very clever, and it won't affect players that take chase often as players that avoid taking chase the entire match. And you'll still be denying the killer lots of info with this new version, even if you can't be hidden from auras the entire match.
Neither the Predator rework nor the Distortion nerf are a problem, but I doubt anything anyone in this entire thread can change your mind on that. I'm curious, have you played killer with mainly aura reading against very good survivors? It doesn't help as much as you think compared to gen regression.
You, too, are completely missing the point.
Killer perks completely countering survivor perks is not a new or controversial thing.
But it is a problem when this killer perk gets reworked to hard-counter a trio of perks that just got buffed in order to bring them up to viability and pickrate.
This does not make sense from a design perspective. Why bring this perk up, only to immediately dunk it down again? And as I've mentioned before, it falls in line with what happened with chest perks: Give survivors perks that encourage them to do chests, and then give killers perks that punish exactly that.
The design of survivor perks is now corralling survivors into getting punished by the associated killer perks.
And it is that trend that is the issue.
If the developers do not want survivors to hide, make it clear and be decisive in the design, instead of leaving the option open but then punishing them for taking it. Because that's just bullying.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801135#Comment_3801135
5 outcomes of the match (0,1,2,3,4K), each outcome counts itself as 20%. 60% average killrate equals to 2k on average, which is a tie on killer side. Literally basic percentages and maths lol.
Except the outcomes are not evenly distributed at all, with 2Ks, for example, taking up a significantly smaller proportion across the board.
Your model assumes totally equal chances of every outcome when the game's mechanisms aren't just sheer 100% RNG. DBD doesn't work like that. You can't apply 'basic percentages and maths' to a complex problem.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801088#Comment_3801088
simple to say, even though killrates are near the perfect state (60% on average = 50% winrate), nonexistent MMR is basically what gives the illusion of good balance because even these killrates are massively inflated by player related factors.
60% kill rate =/= 50% winrate, it's much higher than 50%.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799638#Comment_3799638
You have to keep in mind there's actually no such thing as a draw in the game. Draws require both sides to neither win or lose which is not possible in this game. Survivors aren't actually a "team". The game is set up to be 4 individual 1 v 1 situations going on simultaneously. That's why at the end of the survivor screen, there's no "survivors win". You, as a survivor, either survive or you don't - you personally either win or lose. There's no situation where the killer and a survivor neither win nor lose (except for server crashes, ha). That means a 2K is a loss, as you can't draw. Again, draws require all parties to neither win or lose. If 2 survivors escape, then that means 2 survivors lost, 2 survivors won, and the killer is stuck in a grey area where generally the community has agreed that a 3k+ is required for a win. With that thought process in mind, then the killer would lose in this situation. Even if you ignore the devs statement that the game is 4 individual 1 v 1's going on at once per match and assume that the survivors are together as a team, it still wouldn't be a draw, as again, a draw requires NO part has any wins or losses. You can't have the killer not win and the survivors partially win - that literally is against the definition of a draw. If the killer doesn't win, and the survivors even partially win, then clearly the survivors are the winners. Again though - that's only if you assume survivors are a team that wins together (which they aren't in DBD).
Now it's true that a 2K is considered MMR neutral, but MMR adjustments are historically not tied to win\loss conditions. MMR only cares about one thing - trying to balance the game. That's why in MMR systems (ie ranking systems), you can have situations where you can win but not go up in rank, or lose and not go down in rank - Chess is an example of this. It doesn't care if you win or lose, it cares about the balance of the whole system and tries to adjust accordingly to make future games more balanced. BHVR uses a very simple ranking system, so they decided to go with 0-1K can reduce your MMR (though not always - you do have a minimum threshold to prevent people from MMR dumping), 2K is neutral, and 3-4K can increase your MMR (up to the ceiling).
Hold on though, you can't swap the definition of wins and losses out arbitrarily.
If a survivor getting sacrificed is considered a loss for the survivor, then their opponent won. That means every time a survivor dies, the killer wins.
If the killer doesn't win, and the survivors even partially win
But you yourself stated that survivors don't 'partially win'. They either win or lose. So if you want to treat the game that way, a 2K is a net neutral for the killer, with two wins and two losses.
You can't call it a loss based on how 1v1's work because it's not a loss for the killer in that setting. It's two wins and two losses. What you're doing is swapping between two different perspectives on wins and losses in order to pick-and-choose whichever supports your argument.
There's a reason pretty much everyone agrees a 2K is a draw for the killer.
-
@CrossTheSholf said:
"Don't play Nurse, Spirit, Billy, or Blight"
"Don't Use Gen Regression"
"Don't Use Gen Blocking"
"Don't Use Aura Reading"
"Don't take my items"
Gonna ask for killers to not be able to hit survivors soon.
"You can't do gens. Running away is boring too. You also shouldn't be allowed to hide. And you shouldn't be able to unhook. Or stop the killer from hooking. Or protect another survivor during chase."
Hardly a one-way street.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799956#Comment_3799956
Did we get confirmation on lockers being changed?
Also, no, I didn't misunderstand you. I'm saying if a killer has all aura read to the point people think they do, they're more than likely not going to win unless they're Nurse, or they're also good at loops. Heck I've seen BBQ by itself complained about and I've personally been called a hacker a few times using it on Dredge.I wasn't talking about killers bringing in 4 aura perks, and I don't know why you think that I was.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799938#Comment_3799938
Probably because they're geared towards doing that?
NTH prevents survivors from sticking too close to a gen constantly, Lethal helps with early game and some extra auras to make sure it's not wasted after the first 6 seconds of the game, BBQ is to incentivize going far from hook, Floods of Rage for finding a target post unhook or going for the unhooker and only gets value on unhook, etc etc.
Killers aren't running all of these at once either, they need to pick aura reads to fill in the spaces for their build or killer. Aside maybe Nurse, who we all agree could use a decent nerf to prevent her from being too overbearing with aura reads. And even then, aura read doesn't automatically make you good in chase, it just helps you locate your next chase quicker or assists in mindgames in very specific situations. For example Sadako's Distorted Photo, which I love to use to assist in early mindgames at loops, is ONLY useful in specific situations and doesn't stop survivors from throwing pallets and vaulting windows to keep away.I don't think you understand my point.
BBQ & Chili kept pressure up on survivors by directing the killer towards survivors, but the newer aura reading perks do that too, on top of completely removing the survivors' ability to hide. (Save for lockers, which are next on the chopping block)
I know that these perks are working as intended. But just because it is intentional powercreep, doesn't mean it's not powercreep, or not a problem.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799800#Comment_3799800
Distortion still saves you from NTH once every chase after this change, so situations like that can still work fine unless the Myers decides to come back before the gen is done because he couldn't find anyone else.
And BBQ still has a range requirement? You can be near the hook and the aura read doesn't work on you. And misdirection is still going to be good because:- Chase doesn't end that abruptly, perks like QnQ and Deception/Head On will still work. Especially since it involves lockers.
- Not every killer is going to jump on that perk. Plus it does have a generous cooldown that if you outlast it, you're winning in chase and buying your team time to do gens.
And BBQ still has a range requirement?
Yes, but none of the newer aura reading perks do. Those all highlight you, even if you're hiding nearby.
-
@HexHuntressThighs said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799565#Comment_3799565
Wow. I’m genuinely impressed that you can’t see two things being true at once. For example Distortion tells you exactly what perks the killer has but at the same time any survivor can still figure out aura reading perks without it using basic common sense.
For example, a killer is looking for you at a Gen and can’t find you. They then kick the Gen and immediately head right for your position. Common sense indicates that they have Nowhere to Hide, however if you had Distortion it would eat a toke when they kick the Gen. Meaning both are true at the same time. Distortion simply removes the skill needed to deduce what perks the killer is using.
No the survivor doesn’t have to figure out which perk it is. In a one off scenario where a survivor is unhooked while the killer is searching a locker (which would be extremely rare) the survivor can simply notice if they are within a lockers distance or if other unhooks has consumed tokens as well. Simple.
I vault a window and lose a token? I’m All Ears. A survivor is hooked while I’m far away and I lose a token? BBQ and Chili. A survivor is unhooked and I lose a token? Floods of Rage. A survivor is hooked, I’m injured and close to the hook? Alien Instinct. A Gen is kicked and I lose a token? Nowhere To Hide. I open the gate and lose a token? Bloodwarden. Should I go on?
Yes Distortion can actually lead to more killer wins, I never said that it didn’t. That’s why a lot of survivors don’t like Distortion teammates. I myself have tunneled out survivors because I could find the distortion user. Leading to some of the most boring an easy wins on the planet because they want to be stealthy. Which is their right and choice but it is also my right to not want to play hide and seek for 20 minutes which is absurdly boring to me.
I never once said SWF is the reason it should be nerfed so please stop lying. I merely pointed out that it can also be even more devastating in SWF but on its own is insane how strong it is and should be nerfed on its own. I can literally use Distortion and call out “killer has BBQ” and they can see anytime a survivor is going to get hooked and the whole team can get in lockers to deny the aura read WITHOUT DISTORTION. You can even save stacks by hiding in a locker which is insane.
Hopefully this helps, it’s not very complicated. Distortion is way overtuned for a survivor perk. I believe Boon Shadow step should be the end all be all for countering a killers aura build. Boons are supposed to be strong, Shadow Step totally denies all aura reading permanently without tokens. There is literally zero reason to run Shadow Step with Distortion being as it is now. Use that perk if you’re tired of aura reading.
I’ve actually ran into it several times and it was very frustrating to hit someone with a hatchet and instead of getting a 7 second aura read, I only got 2 seconds because they immediately ran to their shadow step and cancelled it. But I wasn’t mad because it’s a boon perk, with a limited range that takes set up to use for an insane effect.
For example Distortion tells you exactly what perks the killer has but at the same time any survivor can still figure out aura reading perks without it using basic common sense.
Okay, so that's NOT something Distortion does. So why, then, did you say this:
It also tells you
EXACTLYwhich perks the killer has and can be called out in SWF to let your team know when to get in lockers to shut down the aura reading. Causing
ONE SINGULAR SURVIVOR PERKto shut down all of the killers perks for ALL FOUR SURVIVORS.
Because if Distortion isn't required to do this, then this is not a Distortion problem. Which makes this remark irrelevant.
No the survivor doesn’t have to figure out which perk it is. In a one off scenario where a survivor is unhooked while the killer is searching a locker (which would be extremely rare) the survivor can simply notice if they are within a lockers distance or if other unhooks has consumed tokens as well. Simple.
Yes, also still not Distortion telling survivors -exactly- what perk is in play. You basically argued against your earlier stance, because this is pretty explicitly 'not being told what perk is in play'.
Yes Distortion can actually lead to more killer wins, I never said that it didn’t. That’s why a lot of survivors don’t like Distortion teammates. I myself have tunneled out survivors because I could find the distortion user. Leading to some of the most boring an easy wins on the planet because they want to be stealthy. Which is their right and choice but it is also my right to not want to play hide and seek for 20 minutes which is absurdly boring to me.
Okay. I don't care. I like stealth play. I think it's exciting and the closest DBD gets to being actual horror. So with the gameplay design of this being subjective, why does this:
I actually have a match on YouTube where I got 9 hooks and ZERO AURA READS lol.
Mean the perk deserves to get buried?
I never once said SWF is the reason it should be nerfed so please stop lying.
Again, you argued that the reason it wasn't fair, was because ONE perk could cancel out up to FOUR killer perks. When I pointed out that Distortion doesn't cancel those perks out unless it is picked up by all four survivors, your rebuttal to that was that in a swiffer, one survivor could use Distortion to deduce which perks are in play, and then pass that info to the other survivors.
So your initial argument for why this perk needed a nerf is predicated on its use in a swiffer.
I do not see any other way to interpret this, unless you've been wasting time with irrelevant remarks that were added apropos of nothing.
'Please stop lying'
Please stop being disingenuous.
Distortion is way overtuned for a survivor perk.
Not really, because at baseline, there is no aura reading. Which means at baseline, Distortion does literally nothing. Its power is literally tied to the info powercreep on the killer side. This could not be a more balanced perk.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799787#Comment_3799787
Right, that's the gamble, but it's also just the first layer of the gamble, if you follow.
Layer one is, say, a survivor wanting to use Quick & Quiet and Dance With Me as a pair, since they finally have the same cooldown. With those two perks, the risk is that the killer has I'm All Ears, or after this patch if nothing changes, Predator. Those are the two specific perks they're gambling on the killer having because those are the direct counters.
Already on layer one we can see the odds aren't that bad. I'm All Ears is hardly a no-show in anyone's matches, but it's not top ten either, so there's a good chance the killer won't have it. That survivor could, if they wanted, make their other two perks pretty much whatever they want and just take that dice roll.
If the survivor wants to be a bit more safe, though, we hit layer two. A survivor who wants to tip the dice roll more in their favour would have tools available to stop the killer's aura reading mid chase, specifically after they activate their perks.
The best options for that, after this patch, would be Distortion or Shadow Step. A survivor who wants to be safe from aura reading just in case the killer has something that'll counter their two perks might pick one of those two, and leave their fourth as a flex pick if they're comfortable dedicating that much of a build to their particular gimmick. A survivor who wants more flex pick perks would take the risk and adapt as they go if the killer does have the few perks that make their build harder to use.
This same concept applies to other perks, too. If a survivor really wants to use Lucky Star for whatever reason, they'd pair that with Quick & Quiet too to muffle the sound, and wouldn't need to be as concerned with aura reading at all.
It's not that info perks just, automatically, by default, "cancel out" deception perks. It's that specific tools have specific use cases and specific weaknesses, either of which can be bolstered with extra perks or taken as-is. That's a good thing, it promotes thinking about your builds and considering more options instead of using the same-old overtuned best in class every time.
As for Distortion, it's not that it was "an answer" to aura reading, because the other two haven't been nerfed- clearly, answers existing is fine. It's that it was THE answer to aura reading by being 100% accurate, 100% passively. Retooling it to be a viable mid-chase hiding perk is a perfectly reasonable thing to do so there are actually reasons to weigh your options instead of going for the obvious best choice in all scenarios.
Right, that's the gamble, but it's also just the first
layerof the gamble, if you follow.It's not. It's several layers down already.
The first layer is actually having the opportunity to use it, which requires LoS blockers so that you can actually lose the killer. The second is the mindgame, because you need to make sure the killer doesn't anticipate your movements.
But on top of these perks being innately both hard to use and unreliable, the companion perk that you could use to cancel out their hard-counters got nerfed, and more hard-counters were added, so they became even less reliable.
These perks basically entered the field with a broken left leg, then BHVR handed them a crutch in the last patch, and then this patch they broke the right leg. This isn't gonna work.
It's that specific tools have specific use cases
But the specific use cases for info perks keep getting wider, and the specific use cases for deception perks keep getting more and more narrow. This isn't reasonable balancing or game design.
It's that it was THE answer to aura reading by being 100% accurate, 100% passively
So why did Predator get the buff that it did, then? Because that now falls afoul of the same issue.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799775#Comment_3799775
And I agree as far as locker hopping is concerned, that should be addressed.
However, it still doesn't fix stealth players who aren't using lockers as well. As long as you're in a TR, you're immune to aura reads. And killer doesn't proc aura as often as people claim. If a killer is burning all your stacks, it's usually from perks like Weave Attunement (which makes distortion useless itself) and Gearhead, which requires actually doing gens.
However, I think aura read creep is being overly complained about. The only perk that can grant basically infinite aura read is WA, which we know is getting changed soon. Survivors also have a ton of aura read perks, I personally run Wiretap+Repressed Alliance to give me a ton of value out of it, or blood amber key+OoO, Alert, Troubleshooter for tons of it and do extremely well. Despite what survivors think, killers can't get constant aura value even if they run full aura read builds, and if they do they lose pressure in gen defense or chase depending on the killer.Despite what survivors think, killers can't get constant aura value even if they run full aura read builds
They don't need to, it's enough to the point where actually avoiding the killer is non-viable as a gameplay aspect.
One fond memory I have is playing on the Black Rose map against a Myers. I was doing the gen on the big steamliner, and had a good view of the area. Every time Myers came over, I would walk away from the gen, out of sight, and because I had Fixated/Self Aware, my action radius was bigger than he expected. Three times, he came up to that gen, kicked it, spent some time looking for me, and then leaving again, until he finally clocked on to the fact that I wasn't as close to the gen as he had expected and caught me.
If he had NTH, I would've lit up like a christmas tree.
And you can forget about using the misdirection perks that were buffed last patch if the killer brings in Predator, as that perk invalidates all of them.
The default state of the game has just shifted away from 'killers need to find survivors' to 'killers know where you are'. Doesn't matter whether it's through NTH, Weave Attunement or some other perk, but the excesses of aura reading being scattered about have made hiding a losing strategy now.
Compare to the old aura reading of BBQ & Chili, which added the strict stipulation that it didn't work on survivors that were close enough, meaning that while it gave the killer an indication of where you -were-, it never showed the killer where you -are-. That distinction is one that got removed with pretty much all the new aura reading perks, which do both. And that, in my book, is powercreep.
Maybe it would've been better if Distortion just enforced the BBQ & Chili rule and only activated if the survivor was within X meters of the killer.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799764#Comment_3799764
Okay, couple things to go over here.
First and biggest, you seem to be acting like "info perk" as a category just immediately, wholly cancels out "deception perk" as a category, but they don't all work the same way. A killer who brought I'm All Ears will be able to counter Quick & Quiet and/or Dance With Me, but won't have anything to counter Deception, Diversion, or Lucky Star, just as an example. They don't all work the same way, and only a handful really activate with the same conditions as the average survivor deception perk to begin with.
Second, sort of following on from that, I'm not sure why Shadow Step and Off The Record aren't considered reliable. OTR may require you to get hooked first, which certainly could make it less desirable compared to Shadow Step and Distortion, but those other two are designed to help you in chase, especially with Distortion's changes. Those two perks very much stop the kind of info perk you're worried about.
Third, I honestly have no idea what you mean by that last part. What "didn't fly" for Distortion…?
First and biggest, you seem to be acting like "info perk" as a category just immediately, wholly cancels out "deception perk" as a category
Well, this is where the uncertainty of the game comes in. Because survivors don't get notified of any aura reading, they can't tell whether their gambit has any chance of success. These perks are hard enough to get value out of to begin with, but now there's every chance you run afoul of a perk that fully blocks it, because they all have multiple counter-perks. And if they do block it, there's a good chance that the attempt to get value out of these hard-to-use perks ends up costing you instead.
Why would you bring these perks when there are so many hard-counters scattered throughout the game?
It's like bringing Exultation, Streetwise, Built to Last and Appraisal, except instead of it being just Franklin's, BHVR decides to tack item destruction onto half a dozen other perks.
These kinds of builds and concepts just fall off the wagon when their counters become more powerful, and more readily available. So what was the point in buffing them if they get nerfed immediately after?
Second, sort of following on from that, I'm not sure why Shadow Step and Off The Record aren't considered reliable. OTR may require you to get hooked first, which certainly could make it less desirable compared to Shadow Step and Distortion, but those other two are
designedto help you in chase, especially with Distortion's changes. Those two perks very much stop the kind of info perk you're worried about.Shadow Step needs set-up time and has a restricted range, and announces itself to the killer. If the killer notices aura reading not going off, they know you haven't left the area. The information perk gets muddled, but not blocked. And that is IF you get the opportunity to actually pull off a vanishing act within that specific radius, because you're also dependent on totem spawns. If a totem spawns in the wrong spot, you can't use the aura blocking in that area in conjunction with the vanishing perks.
Off the Record can only be used twice per match and only lasts 80 seconds. If the killer isn't tunnelling, there's a good chance this perk is only active when you don't need it.
What "didn't fly" for Distortion…?
The idea that things should have answers on opposing sides. Distortion was an answer to the rapid powercreep of aura reading perks, but that didn't save it from getting nerfed.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799766#Comment_3799766
I believe the issue was both.
Hiding in lockers, getting stacks in the killer's TR, and leaving to drop/pickup items to avoid crows and move to another locker while distortion kept you hidden.
The Distortion change is healthier this way, forcing survivors to actually assist in a match. If they want to hide in lockers all game, they now have SOME risk other than completely being under the radar.It doesn't force them to assist in the match though. They can still just sit in lockers for most of the game and rat it out that way. That's the problem with the distortion nerf. It doesn't fix the alleged problem, it just axes counterplay to the powercrept aura reading.
-
@RoastedGarlic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799751#Comment_3799751
they already hide in lockers as well.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799748#Comment_3799748
if your doing it at the expense of your own team who are not using distortion, you're actively punishing them and that is why this perk needs this much needed healthy change. Do you understand yet? You will never improve your chase game if all you do is avoid avoid avoid.
they already hide in lockers as well.
Then I assume you understand that the Distortion nerf is completely pointless, yes?
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799731#Comment_3799731
"Cancels out" is really loaded phrasing, info perks don't cancel out misdirection perks. They just add a little extra risk to them.
Crucially, that risk is not something the survivor player just has to hold, though. If it were, if there were no way of mitigating that risk, you might have a point- but there are at least three perks that hide your aura reliably in the game.
What's wrong with someone who wants to play in a stealth/misdirection heavy way incorporating Distortion, Shadow Step, or Off The Record into their gameplay? That's just the three that focus specifically on hiding your aura- some of the buffed perks in the last patch and this one involve lockers, which also hide your aura. Is there something that stops those from being usable in these builds/playstyles?
To answer that last question: Generally speaking it's good for things to have answers on the opposing side, to promote a little back-and-forth.
"Cancels out" is really loaded phrasing, info perks don't cancel out misdirection perks. They just add a little extra risk to them.
No, the value in these perks only comes out if the killer fully loses track of your position, which they can't if they can just see your aura. You're already dependent on LoS blockers to get value out of these perks, and now, in even more cases, that won't be enough. That's not 'a little extra risk', it just invalidates the perks.
Hiding your scratch-marks means squat when the killer can just see you.
Crucially, that risk is not something the survivor player just has to hold, though. If it were, if there were no way of mitigating that risk, you might have a point- but there are at least three perks that hide your aura reliably in the game.
No, there aren't. Shadow Step and Off the Record are anything but reliable. Shadow Step has a set-up time and a limited radius, and Off the Record only works for a limited time after being unhooked. Neither of these can reasonably be considered 'reliable'.
'I want to use my perks, better go and get hooked by the killer to make them usable for 80 seconds'.
some of the buffed perks in the last patch and this one involve lockers, which also hide your aura. Is there something that stops those from being usable in these builds/playstyles?
Lockers also give info to the killer if you try to use them in chase. And one of the perks specifically doesn't work with locker hiding!
And that's also assuming the aura reading doesn't catch you -before- you get into the locker, in which case you just give the killer a free down instead.
Generally speaking it's good for things to have answers on the opposing side, to promote a little back-and-forth.
Except that didn't fly for Distortion so why would it fly here?
-
@RoastedGarlic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799309#Comment_3799309
the whole reason it is being changed is to make people take chases and stop hiding so your missing the entire point of the nerf.
I don't think that's the point, because Distortion isn't going to do that. People can just sit in lockers if they want to never be found. Distortion just allows them to help the team without getting a large neon sign slapped on their back that says 'KILL ME NOW'.
-
Survivor perk: *Gets any kind of use whatsoever
Forum killers: "Needs nerf." -
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3798354#Comment_3798354
I have to admit, I'm not sure I'm seeing the issue here.
The only connection I can draw would involve assuming your position is that those perks should work 100% of the time with no risk and no counter on the killer side, but I don't want to assume someone's position is that extreme. Is there something I'm missing here? What's wrong with the killer having some answers to playstyles/builds on the survivor side?
Because that's also the reason Distortion got axed.
But just generally, my stance is as I've explained. The perks in question were high risk perks, very difficult to use, then they got a buff to make them slightly more comfortable to use, and then the very next patch, they get heavy context nerfs. It's similar to the rush of chest perks leading up to the release of Weave Attunement and Human Greed, where the survivor perks are now encouraging survivors to engage with the game in a way that benefits the killer's perks.
Let me flip your question on its head: What's wrong with the killer -not- having a perk that cancels out these high risk, high skill perks?
-
@DarKStaR350z said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3797704#Comment_3797704
Killer can’t force survivors to leave and EGC kills aren’t counted towards kill rate. Survivors can literally bang all gens out in 6 minutes and refuse to leave even though they won just to not increase their MMR
Likewise, killers can get everyone on two hooks with extra downs with two gens left and then just AFK or farm to reach a 4E and not go up in MMR.
I don't know why so many people think this stuff is all one-way territory.
-
@HexHuntressThighs said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799484#Comment_3799484
It denied all 4 of a killers perks for one survivor specifically, meaning that one survivor wouldn’t be found leading to the rest taking the heat and losing a mate early.
It also tells you EXACTLY which perks the killer has and can be called out in SWF to let your team know when to get in lockers to shut down the aura reading. Causing ONE SINGULAR SURVIVOR PERK to shut down all of the killers perks for ALL FOUR SURVIVORS.
I actually have a match on YouTube where I got 9 hooks and ZERO AURA READS lol. That perk needed to be buried.
Nothing is wrong with aura reading at all. You can figure out which perks the killer has easily even without distortion. It is NOT overpowered. On Nurse, Blight and Billy it is and very annoyingly oppressive but just because 3 killers are god tier with it doesn’t mean the other 30 killers should suffer.
It denied all 4 of a killers perks for one survivor specifically
And for the other three it does nothing, so you're still getting value out of your perk. Distortion never blocked all your perks with just one survivor picking it up.
meaning that one survivor wouldn’t be found leading to the rest taking the heat and losing a mate early.
Now you're making it sound like it wasn't a counter at all and was instead giving killers more wins! How are you complaining about your perks getting blocked if it's making you win more?
It also tells you
EXACTLYwhich perks the killer has
No it doesn't. The player still has to figure out which perks are actually in play. They only get to know when their aura is read. For example, if a killer opens a locker at the same time as someone gets pulled off a scourge hook, the perk doesn't tell you if it's Darkness Revealed or Floods of Rage, it ONLY tells you that your aura has been read.
Causing
ONE SINGULAR SURVIVOR PERKto shut down all of the killers perks for ALL FOUR SURVIVORS.
No, counterplay does. Which a lot of aura reading perks don't have.
You can figure out which perks the killer has easily even without distortion.
Which is it? Does a survivor with Distortion tell the entire swiffer team which perks the killer has, or can they figure it out without distortion anyway?
Either distortion getting nerfed was desperately necessary, or not a big deal, you can't have both.
On Nurse, Blight and Billy it is and very annoyingly oppressive but just because 3 killers are god tier with it doesn’t mean the other 30 killers should suffer.
That's rich, considering you argued that how distortion works on swiffers is a reason for it to be nerfed for everyone.
-
@HexHuntressThighs said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799500#Comment_3799500
That’s not stealth that’s evasion.
Stealth would be avoiding the killer entirely and never starting chase to begin with, much like when this game first released.Evasion is losing the killer mid chase and going back to working on gens or saving team mates. DWM, and Decption are perks used mid chase to shake the killer.
Diversion is more along the lines of a stealth perk but can be used to throw mid chase to make a killer think you vaulted or gained more distance than you did.
All of these perks are still going to be useless if the killer still gets to know your exact location, though.
-
@HexHuntressThighs said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799048#Comment_3799048
Serious stealth hasn’t been part of this game in over 7 years….
It literally died the moment survivors found out Hitboxes were smaller for them so they could loop tighter. And the devs embraced it and abandoned the hide and seek aspect.
If that's the case, why'd they bother buffing Dance With Me, Deception and Distraction last patch?
-
@HexHuntressThighs said:
There is ONE killer
There are FOUR survivorsKiller perks should be stronger than survivor perks one to one.
ONE survivor perk could counter FOUR killer perks at ONCEDistortion needed to be nerfed
Except that that one survivor perk -didn't- counter those killer perks. Someone having distortion didn't disable your perks, it didn't allow you to read the aura of -one- survivor.
This is also being put up without any consideration for overall game balance, as aura reading has been powercrept to hell and back.
-
@ratcoffee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3797916#Comment_3797916
This is more about the buffs to Zanshin and Predator than it is the nerfs to Distortion
It's about the generally terrible optics of first buffing underused perks to open the game up a bit more to a playstyle of misdirection and using stealth, and then the very next patch, massively buffing aura reading to counter it.
It feels like the perk design's primary intent here is to guide survivors into getting punished.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3796473#Comment_3796473
This is true, they balance for a 60% kill rate, the problem though? Is that their kill rates show that "everything is fine guys"
But i have a "conspiracy theory" around kill rates.
Kill rates are massively inflated due to survivors giving up so quickly. If i play 10 games in a day, half of them someone is going to give up in the first chase and kill themselves on hook, or just be afk. Then the other 5 matches might play out as normal.
Lets say that the true kill rate when survivors play out the game is actually 25% (i have no proof this is what it is, just using this as an example to show the math)
So those 5 matches where the survivors gave up immediately, led to an obvious 4k each game, and in the other 5 matches, the killer only killed 1 person in each game. What would the data show?
Out of a possible 40 kills, the killer got 25 kills, which would be a 62.5% kill rate. So i guess the game is balanced then right?
Their data is including when survivors kill themselves on hook, and it is massively inflating kill rates. I feel this probably is less impactful at lower ranks, but at the highest MMRs, i suspect the kill rate is SIGNIFICANTLY lower than reported due to this.
Kill rates are massively inflated due to survivors giving up so quickly.
Kill rates in high MMR are higher than kill rates in overall MMR, and I would assume that high MMR has more dedicated players that won't suicide that much, therefor it would stand to reason that this kill rate inflation is not that impactful.
and it is massively inflating kill rates
That is an assumption on your part and one you don't have any data for. Keep in mind as well, and I feel like this is something a lot of people overlook with regards to this subject: Not every match with a survivor that gives up would've been a survivor win if that survivor hadn't quit on hook. I wager that, in most cases, if they give up on hook, there's a good chance that if they hadn't, it still would've been a 3K+ anyway, meaning it didn't affect the kill rates at all.
You also have to remember that this is a two-way street, and there's killers that throw matches too, deflating the kill rate.
-
@jesterkind said:
I find it kind of weird that people frame this discourse as though Distortion is the only counter to aura reading, when there's two I can think of just off the top of my head. As I'm writing this, I'm remembering they added another in this dev update, if I'm remembering what the effect is properly.
Maybe the idea is less "killers should have no obstacle to aura reading" and more "Distortion shouldn't be the absolute uncontested king of all stealth perks forever".
They did not add another one.
@Brimp said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3797630#Comment_3797630
"It would be better for survivors if they knew the killer can see your exact location" gosh gee willickers… its almost like thats a perk survivors can run called Object of Obsession that shows the killers aura whenever the killer can see your aura. Either way the point is there is MUCH worse things than a killer running multiple aura reading perks.
Also half of distortion still does it's job well which is basically TELLING YOU which aura reading addon/perk the killer has.That's the point of this thread. Instead of making survivors pile on yet more band-aid perks, just make aura reading ubiquitous so you don't have to deal with any of that and can just safely assume the killer knows where you are hiding at all times. It sends a clearer message than this update, mixed with the last one.
@Iron_Cutlass said:
Predator has a cool-down, so Im sure it wont be that bad. I really dont see this perk being used a lot outside of a few niche cases or for people with disabilities/impairments.
I have a friend who has colorblind issues who loved the change since it helps them stay in chase when they lost a Survivor due to not being able to see them.
Also Boon: Shadow Step still exists, and isnt even that bad, especially on Indoor Maps where the diversion and misleading play-styles typically thrive. It also benefits the whole team and not just a single person!
Predator has a cool-down, so Im sure it wont be that bad. I really dont see this perk being used a lot outside of a few niche cases or for people with disabilities/impairments.
40 seconds is not a meaningful cooldown in the scope of the game. You're not going to lose chases to that extreme frequency. Unless, of course, as you mention, there's accessibility issues, in which case the cooldown suggests that this perk is not meant for that.
But furthermore, it is just bad design, IMO, to go through the dumpster of forgotten survivor perks, pick out three perks whose only purpose is to give survivors the ability to break a chase, and in the first next patch, you render all of them useless because you buff aura reading and even make a specific perk to nullify all of them.
What was the point of buffing Dance With Me, if you're just going to dunk it back down a tier in the next patch?
Is this the new trend? Survivor perk design being guided by killer perks that hard-counter them? It's what happened with the chest perks popping up around Weave Attunement and Human Greed.
Also Boon: Shadow Step still exists, and isnt even that bad
It's going to be if it sees any kind of usage, because all the complaints about Distortion will apply to Shadow Step too, meaning it'll go right on the chopping block.
-
@Brimp said:
If a killer is running more than 2 aura reading then they are basically throwing.
Practically any environmental object and any action taken now has an aura reading perk associated with it, up to and including 'losing the killer in chase'. If you try to hide off the assumption that they cannot see you, you are likely to give the killer a free hit if you gambled wrong on which of the aura reading perks the killer might have.
It would just be better for survivors if they knew the killer can see their exact location at all times, because you won't try and hide and get punished for it.
EDIT: Plus, you're not going to bother with all of these perks that -just- got buffed because they're literally invalidated by aura reading anyway.
-
@DarKStaR350z said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3796863#Comment_3796863
Borrowed Time and haste from unhook basekit, anti camp guarenteed self unhook, PTB basekit Unbreakable test.
You can argue that these haven’t solved the problem for you but you can’t say they don’t jump to try and deal with these things that have been complained about.
Basekit endurance and haste is the only thing that's really impacted the game. Anti-camp is only anti-facecamp and has not helped at all, and the basekit unbreakable didn't go through.
So for the entirety of DBD's runtime, which is 8 years by now, we've had -one- meaningful change to address these issues, . That's not 'jumping to try and deal with these things', especially not since it took six (6) years to get to this point.
-
@PuddleOfBludd said:
”Why do killers think the game is survivor sided?”
Because it is. You can eliminate every single persons argument in the fact that whatever survivors want to happen to the game does happen. If they complain that they are not being able to do generators without interruption, the game is changed to make it more so. Survivors ridiculously ask for the game to be tailored to the killer not doing anything that is favorable to the killer, but to play as favorably to the survivor as possible, and the game is changed in order to reflect that. That is why the game is survivor sided.Tunnelling, Camping and Slugging have been the number one complaint from survivors for years and none of them have been properly addressed yet, in -years-.
Do tell me how survivors get everything they want, because the patch history aint showin' that.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3796150#Comment_3796150
Counterpoint:
- The devs constantly release kill rates and various other stats that people care about from a competitive point of view.
- The game has MMR and matches you based on that
- They make balance decisions from a competitive point of view (I.E. they nerfed blight hug tech, something that casual blight players never used, but was very important in competitive play)
How many party games use MMR? Do you think mario party uses MMR, or mario Kart?
Mario Party has no public matchmaking, but doesn't Mario Kart use a rating system?
-
@WaveyTrey said:
My experience in DbD was far better prior to MMR.
As survivor I end up with incompetent players because all the better ones are pairing up even more to increase their odds of escape. Since escape boosts MMR.
As killer it’s either 4 lemmings, or 4 navy seals. So the trial ends super fast either way. I learn little to nothing these days. That’s why I stopped learning new killers.The best killers out there may agree that SWFs are a hit or miss. It’s because average SWFs abuse comms and perks (exploit) to reach higher brackets against average killers, but that can only take you so far.
That’s why we see big streamers stomping so many groups. Those players they face boosted themselves to the top via exploits, but are no match for a big fish even with their boosts.
MMR makes us obsess, and sweat over something we cannot see.
MMR doesn’t allow people to learn. Especially new survivors, or whenever you want to learn a new killer. You sink and sink and sink.Essentially all MMR really does is force us to get paired up with and against players we shouldn’t be with... The exact opposite of its original intention.
Why can’t everyone realize this?
We all need to demand that the devs change MMR in some way...
1.) Let us see our MMR once upon every reset.
2.) Rework how we rank up. Pipping should still count.
3.) Remove MMR altogether.It’s because average SWFs abuse comms and perks (exploit) to reach higher brackets against average killers, but that can only take you so far.
Using perks is an exploit now?
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794476#Comment_3794476
You['re mixing up 60% kill rate and 60% win rate. A 60% kill rate isn't a 60% win rate. A 60% kill rate is very slightly higher than getting a 2K on average per match (which would be 50%). A 62.5% kill rate would be 2.5 kills on average. Essentially, a 60% kill rate means roughly 2.4% kills per match when averaged over several matches. This ends up meaning, on average, killers get a 2K vs a 3K every other match which generally gives them slightly under a 50% win rate if you define a 3k+ as a win.
At some point, this take needs to be a bannable offense, because you keep spreading this and people keep explaining to you why this is dead wrong.
You and the guy you learned this from need to stop doing this, because at this point, you are wilfully misleading people.
For anyone who is actually interested in knowing why this is wrong:
The method of calculation this person uses to calculate win-rate from kill rate does not consider the variance of outcomes outside of the two closest to the average kill count. In this case, since 2.4 is between 2 and 3, they assume that all outcomes will fall in those two categories in order to arrive to their winrate assertion. However, DBD is a complicated mess, and in the overall, snowbally nature of the game, 2Ks are by far the rarest outcome across the board. This complicates matters.
0-1K are both losses, but weigh differently in kill rate.
3-4K are both wins, but weigh differently in kill rate.
The method Hotrod uses dismisses all of this nuance and tries to compile an average winrate from things that aren't winrates. Which is mathematically incorrect.
As a practical example of how wrong this model is: Assuming a 50% kill rate across any number of matches, this method would point to an average winrate of 0%. The only way you can get an average of 0 is if there's either negative values in the dataset, or no value above 0, otherwise you can't get an average of 0. So according to the method used by Hotrod, a killer with a 50% kill rate physically can not ever win any match. According to them, it is impossible for a killer to get a 1K match and a 3K match back to back.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794607#Comment_3794607
95% of killer roster being put into absolute lose-lose situation against anti-tunneling builds, no matter what they do. But looks like this is like nuclear physics for an average "just don't tunnel" people watching at anti-tunneling perks from such a b&w perspective
How is it a lose situation for the killer if the offending survivor is slugged out? Even if they're not on a hook, they're incapacitated while the killer is free to go after someone else.
And hey, -someone- on these forums insisted that survivors create pressure by getting hooked, so slugging them out is really a win-win situation then, no?
Or are hooks suddenly good again when you need to faceplant your way into the most controllable perk and then cry about getting punished for it?
-
@Leachy_Jr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794812#Comment_3794812
What if the said "thing" the perk does is too powerful and/or encourages people to play the game in unfun ways?
Considering neither of these perks are top picks, nor are they pushing killrates down below balanced points, I think you'll have a hard time making these perks out to be 'too powerful'.
And -everything- encourages killers to play in unfun ways, because these same people will pull a fine comb through every change to see which way they can exploit it to their advantage. The solution isn't to just keep nerfing survivors, the solution is to make killers not want to camp/tunnel. Even if you did nerf these perks down, squarely out of viability, you'd still be out there tunnelling your heart out.
If camping/tunnelling were legitimate concerns for forum killers, we'd see them try to come up with a solution outside of simply 'keep nerfing survivors', instead of vigorously defending it and hailing it as 'a valid playstyle', except when it can be used to complain about survivor perks.
-
@Leachy_Jr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794798#Comment_3794798
That's exactly the issue. The speed of which they reset is simply not balanced, akin to something like old circle of healing. I don't want to leave that hook since I know they'll be healed in 2.4s instead of 28+s if I were to separate the unhooker and hit the unhooked into DW.
So either: Stay around hook, hit unhooked into DW to counter OTR and Res, chase unhooker to separate the Well make it. Guaranteed 28s heal assuming no other reset perks.
OR
Chase someone else further away. 2.4s heal.
Old COH did the exact same thing. Why spread pressure when everyone could heal in 20ish seconds? Why not tunnel when my health states mean nothing? Perks that directly punish the killer for leaving the hook need either a complete rework or a significant nerf.
Maybe if they had an activation requirement? Eg, resurgence would require 1 protection hit, WMI could require the killer to be within 24m of the hook while you're unhooking.
Sometimes survivor perks should be allowed to do a thing. Just because killers keep breaking the game doesn't mean survivors should be punished for it by constantly dumpstering their perks.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794608#Comment_3794608
To be fair, the value pitch for Potential Energy is "This generator goes faster at the cost of that generator going slower", so it breaking out to lower repair speed is kind of the point. It's for completing specific risky generators faster, not for doing gens faster overall.
The problem with Potential Energy is that you lose all your tokens on hit, making it an even bigger risk than it's meant to be. If they changed that to only losing tokens on down or hook, the perk would be a lot more solid overall.
Considering you have to ferry back and forth, even if the tokens were 1:1, it'd still be notable slowdown in the killer's favour. The fact that you lose not just some, but -ALL- tokens when you lose a health-state by any means is just icing on the cake and dumps the perk squarely down in K(iller)-tier.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794465#Comment_3794465
The problem with that is there is basically nothing the killer can do to stop you. You can run-through them, eat a hit and then still dump the stacks into a high progress gen with no counterplay available to the killer.
Potential Energy's issue is that it has potential for a strong reward, but in a limited scenario... and even in that scenario is high risk, not just in regards to being hit and losing stacks, but also the additional time penalty you're incurring that can become a major throw if you don't use the perk wisely.
This is especially true with it's vulnerability to gen regression perks becoming more impactful as a result of the extra time to complete gens that you're taking, and the ways you tie your own and allies hands.
- You stop working on gen progress yourself.
- Slow allies repairs speeds and your own perk build up on the same generator.
- Actively make gen repair overall less efficient for yourself.
- All while running a great risk of having that time investment completely erased.
One thing that would help it massively is if it didn't slow both you and your teammates repair speed while building it up. Currently it's kinda functional with Prove Thyself, but it's basically trash without it due to absolute requirement to find a "safe gen" on its own (which then has travel times included).
Alternatively giving it a small haste bonus based on the number of charges after not being in chase for 10 seconds might also be useful to reduce those travel times.
The problem with that is there is basically nothing the killer can do to stop you. You can run-through them, eat a hit and then still dump the stacks into a high progress gen with no counterplay available to the killer.
There doesn't always need to be counterplay. By the time someone's bee-lining for a generator with a fully stocked Potential Energy, they already did their work on another gen, taking extra seconds on that gen, then also cutting off 33% of the charges they did, and then it can all be undone anyway if the gen is contested.
Survivors are already so deep in the hole that killers not being able to stop these charges from being dumped into it by the time the survivor is running up to the gen would merely make the perk 'fair'.
As it stands, it's just more of a killer perk than a survivor perk because it has really bad investment cost AND really powerful counterplay, as opposed to just picking one and sticking with that. It's currently just buried under so many drawbacks that it can't make up for it.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794469#Comment_3794469
welcome to the era in DbD where most powerful usage of DS and Reassurance isn't against tunneling and camping :)
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794474#Comment_3794474
Potential Energy and Weaving Spiders have conditions that make them much more of a high risk-high reward, while e.g. DS and Reassurance are a minimum risk perks that give extremely good results if you know what you are doing.
Potential Energy maxes out at -33% repair speed, and Weaving Spiders has an even worse return on investment. That's not 'high risk, high reward', that's 'massive risk, high punishment'. Both of these help killers more than survivors.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794468#Comment_3794468
it worked for 3s against almost every killer if you knew where to force a down. All that was needed was "disable killer power" for like 5-10s because of Nurse and Blight, which would make it work against them too, but instead...we got 5s DS first, that was impossible to deal with as 95% of killer roster, after shich it was nerfed to 4s.
Again, thinking 3s is not enough against most of the killers is a pure sign you are not familiar with what forcing a down at specific spot means
we got 5s DS first, that was impossible to deal with as 95% of killer roster
95% of the killer roster automatically press spacebar?
-
Who on earth would call for a nerf to DS, Reassurance, Balanced Landing, Boon: Exponential, Prove Thyself and Troubleshooter, among others, and then go on to call Potential Energy and Weaving Spiders 'balanced'?
…
Oh.
It's you again.
-
@GrimReaperJr1232 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794136#Comment_3794136
I'm going to contest this point.
You said nerfed to uselessness. I was around pre-6.1.0 when it did have deactivation conditions (just didn't have the Conspicuous Action umbrella term), and that perk was almost ubiquitous.
The only difference between now (regarding the perk itself) is that it has a 1 sec shorter stun. 4 seconds is not useless. And if you bring up the likes of Nurse, then quite frankly, 5 wasn't enough against them, but that's a killer specific issue.
The thing is that DS, after getting the deactivation conditions, became a very specific perk. It only works under one specific circumstance, with the killer having full control over said circumstance.
With such a situational perk, it needs to have an impactful effect as a trade-off. This worked for 5 seconds. It didn't work for 3 seconds, and it's still not working for 4. That one second nerf might not look like much, but with the drop animation taking 2 seconds, it only bought you three seconds of distance before, and after the nerf, it's down to two seconds of distance.
That's a 33% cut. It's simply not enough to justify bringing if it's going to be 'fair' on most killers, and useless against some killers, while also being very conditional.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794136#Comment_3794136
The perk was too strong. Doing anything in the face of the killer and getting away with it for free was not healthy for the game. I think it should have stayed at 5 seconds.
Favorably it could be added to the survivors basekit, to reduce the pay to win aspect that still annoys me greatly. This would have to come with compensation to the killer role of course.
Oh, I'm not talking about the conspic action nerf. That was absolutely required. But the fact the stun duration then got tampered with, initially getting gutted for no reason, then reverted two years later only to get kneecapped -again- shortly after… That was the bit that was completely unnecessary.
It should've stayed at 5 seconds, or even increased.
-
DS just got nerfed down to the point of being useless. It's highly conditional in its application, and then people got mad that in the very specific situation for which it is designed, it was a bit of a pain to deal with.
So rather than telling people to not tunnel, they just nerfed DS.
Why pick a perk that only works under one uncommon situation (Keep in mind, the killer needs to not just be tunnelling, they need ot be tunnelling you, specifically), and then isn't even allowed to be good in that one situation?
-
Unstoppable? Sounds more like stop-motion to me!
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792462#Comment_3792462
We're talking about averages. If you have a million matches, and you get 5 4Ks in a row, you can't run around and claim you have a 100% win rate. That's not how averaging works. The greater the sample, the greater the accuracy. Having two matches which is what your example is based off doesn't remotely have enough of a sample. That being said, your example would put you at a 1.5 average kill rate (0k and a 3k). I'm not going to go into depth on what averaging means - I'd suggest you google it.
Perhaps you have issues with percentages, so let's make it easier. a 62.5% kill rate translates to a 2.5 kill rate. That means on average, you're getting 2.5 kills. Over the period of several matches, that essentially translates to you winning roughly have your matches (where winning means a 3k+). While you can have a 0K match and even some 4K matches, on AVERAGE across multiple matches, you'd essentially be alternating evenly between a 2K and a 3K.
I also see you're confused on the topic, but we're talking about standard gameplay, not new gamemodes with 8 survivors - that whole thing throws gameplay balance out the window for the sake of chaotic fun. The balance was so broken, MMR didn't get adjusted - which makes sense.
I'm not "choosing" the 2nd highest kill rate, I'm just saying that generally the community sees a 3-4k as a win, a 2K as a tie (though there's actually no tie in the game due to reasons I won't bother going into), and a 0-1 being a loss. It's a pretty good system. 0-1 is loss, 2 is "tie" (though actually still a loss since you can't tie 4 individual 1 v 1 scenarios), and 3-4 is a win.
As you counting 1k as a win, that's the only logical outcome that it's what you believe if you genuinely believe that someone with an average of 1.5 kills (37.5% kill rate) per match can get a 50% win rate. Let's make this easy on you. Let's actually increase that to a 50% kill rate. That means on average across all matches played, that player is only getting 2Ks. With a 3-4K being a win, on average, he's never winning. CAN he win? Certainly! Just over multiple matches, on average, he is not. With your number, it's even worse. With your 1.5, that means on average, he's teetering between 1-2 kills on average. Again, there's literally no way someone who only gets on average 1-2 kills is having a 50% win rate UNLESS you subscribe to the belief that each kill is considered a win and that a killer can win up to 4 times in a single match.
I hope that clarifies it for you. If you're still not getting it, I don't know what to tell you.
If you have a million matches, and you get 5 4Ks in a row, you can't run around and claim you have a 100% win rate. That's not how averaging works.
It's quite ironic that you say that, but we'll get into that.
Having two matches which is what your example is based off doesn't remotely have enough of a sample.
That's because it's not a sample, but an example. It's to show you that your ruling isn't necessarily correct, and that datasets can exist that do not abide by what you claim.
Perhaps you have issues with percentages, so let's make it easier. a 62.5% kill rate translates to a 2.5 kill rate. That means on average, you're getting 2.5 kills. Over the period of several matches, that essentially translates to you winning roughly have your matches (where winning means a 3k+). While you can have a 0K match and even some 4K matches, on AVERAGE across multiple matches, you'd essentially be alternating evenly between a 2K and a 3K.
No, that's not true. You don't 'essentially alternate between a 2K and a 3K'. There's five possible outcomes in DBD and their distribution isn't linearly even, so the data doesn't neatly compress to this point.
Consider the overall average of all matches recorded over the past month on Nightlight. This is a dataset containing 19.361 games. The average killrate here is 57.68%, or roughly 2.3 kills on average. According to you, that'd mean that you'd on average, across multiple matches, essentially be alternating between a 2K and a 3K, with considerably more 2Ks than 3Ks.
That is your logic, correct?
However, within this dataset, Nightlight also tracks the outcomes of the matches.
And only 13% were 2Ks. Only 18.7% were 3Ks.
Neither of the outcomes that, according to you, would be the average outcome were the most common outcome. The actual most common outcome was a 4K, at roughly 32.9%.
Your logic is dependent on the averaging resulting in a very neat and even distribution of all outcomes, and DBD does not do that. There are five outcomes with very complex and shifting relations among each other.
Consider the following:
Wraith vs. Bubba. Bubba is, of course, really good at guarding hooks. This makes him very qualified to secure at least a single kill, as a down at the end of the match will more likely turn into a kill with Bubba than it does with Wraith. This means 0Ks are less likely to occur for Bubba than they are for Wraith. Assuming the same rate of getting 3K or higher on both killers, it would thus stand to reason that Bubba's kill rate would be higher, due to the lower occurrence rate of 0Ks.
Do you understand this?
Another example.
Blight vs. Clown. Blight is, of course, a high mobility killer. So in the even of three survivors dying before the generators are done, Blight can zip around the map, looking for the hatch at a much higher pace than Clown can. This means Blight is much more likely to turn a 3K into a 4K. Assuming the same rate of getting 3K or higher on both killers, it would thus stand to reason that Blight's kill rate would be higher, due to the higher occurrence rate of 4Ks.
Do you understand this?
So keeping in mind that outcomes aren't evenly distributed, consider the way DBD works in general. How often, in your games, do matches close out with 2 kills and 2 escapes?
Because judging by Nightlight's statistics, across the board, 2Ks are the -least- likely outcome. So this 'essentially alternating between 2Ks and 3Ks' of yours is a massive corruption of the dataset. The reality is closer to alternating between 4Ks and 1Ks. 2Ks are, by a substantial margin, the least likely outcome. So your assertion that you can glean the winrate by averaging out the killrates and then pulling those killrates to the absolute average-point is antithetical to how DBD -actually- works.
You don't 'essentially alternate between 2Ks and 3Ks', because 2Ks are rare. So your assertion that a 2.5 killrate is, on average, comprised for one half of 2Ks and for the other half of 3Ks is just flatly incorrect.
I'm not "choosing" the 2nd highest kill rate
And in that regard, you are 'choosing' the 2nd highest killrate, because your assertion omits all outcomes that don't suit it. The only way that you could get a higher killrate out of a 50% winrate is if you use only 2Ks and 4Ks instead of 3Ks, at which point you'd be looking at a 75% killrate.
Let's actually increase that to a 50% kill rate. That means on average across all matches played, that player is only getting 2Ks. With a 3-4K being a win, on average, he's never winning. CAN he win? Certainly! Just over multiple matches, on average, he is not.
Here, though, you show a critical misunderstanding of averages.
'On average, he is never winning' and 'Can he win? Certainly' are fully mutually exclusive.
In any dataset that does not contain negative values, the only way to average to 0 is to have no value above 0. This means that if the average winrate is 0%, there cannot be a single win anywhere in the dataset.
You cannot claim that he is on average never winning, while also claiming that he can get wins. Those are mutually exclusive on a mathematical level. If you want to hold to that, then you are NOT talking about averages.
With your number, it's even worse. With your 1.5, that means on average, he's teetering between 1-2 kills on average. Again, there's literally no way someone who only gets on average 1-2 kills is having a 50% win rate UNLESS you subscribe to the belief that each kill is considered a win and that a killer can win up to 4 times in a single match.
No, you misunderstand the purpose of the 37.5% figure. It is entirely unrealistic to expect a killer to hit a 50% winrate off of that, I fully agree with that. But the extreme outlier dataset that produces a 37.5% killrate to a 50% winrate is the exact same type of statistical anomaly that your 62.5% killrate to 50% winrate is.
THAT is the point of the 37.5% killrate figure. No dataset with any relevant sample is going to produce only 0Ks and 3Ks, but neither is one going to average out to half the matches being 2Ks because that's not how DBD works.
Your error, same as the guy I'm assuming you learned this erroneous way of thinking from, is that you are confusing the outcome of the average match for the average winrate.
But the average match is never played.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3791898#Comment_3791898
I didn't say anything about a win rate. I said it would take a 62.5% kill rate for killers to get a 3k in half their matches. You're not understanding the basics here, so I'll explain the basics. a 1k is a 25% kill rate in a match. A 2k is a 50% kill rate. A 3k is a 75% kill rate. a 4k is a 100% kill rate. The exact halfway point (on average across several matches) between a 2K (50%) and a 3K (75%) is 12.5% (50% + 25% is 75%, so splitting the 25% down the middle is 12.5%). That means the halfway point in kills between a 2K and a 3K is 62.5%. With a 62.5%, you're kill rate is in the middle of the road between a 2K and a 3K on average. Now, "winning" is completely subjective in DBD (which is why BHVR refuses to define it), but the majority of the community accepts that a 3K+ is considered a killer win. In reality, each match is 4 different 1 v 1 situations and there is no survivor team (weird, I know, but that's the design). If on average you're only getting a 1K (your 37.5% number) every match + the additional 12.5% average carry overs, then you're clearly not winning half the matches like your saying unless you're defining a single kill as a killer "win" (which TECHINCALLY is true, since the killer wins 1 out of 4 for the match and the game is made into 4 different "games" per match). However, while I see that's what you're claiming here (and technically you're correct), most of the community doesn't see killers getting 1 or 2 kills as being a win.
Long story short, your "side of the argument" comes down to the grounds that a single kill is considered a killer "win" (and a killer can win 4 times in a single match with a 4k) - but that reasoning is very convoluted and easily confuses the greater balance of things. A killer that can only get 1K every match shouldn't be considered as having a 100% win rate when you consider the whole picture of there actually being 4 survivors he's facing. It's better we all accept the more common view that a 3K+ is a win.
No honey, you're making a critical error where you only consider average outcomes.
Just because half your matches are 3Ks doesn't mean the other half have to be 2Ks, which is what your 62.5% figure is dependent on. Think about it for a second: You're only considering the killrate for a pair of matches where one match is a 2K, and the other is a 3K.
But if one match is a 0K, and the other is a 3K, that's still half the matches being a 3K, is it not?
And 3/8 survivors killed is nowhere near 62.5%. So no, that's not required for a 50% winrate. Your math is only considering the outcomes closest to the average, but DBD doesn't work like that. In fact, it works quite the opposite: 2Ks are, by far, the least likely outcome.
You are choosing literally the second highest killrate configuration for the 3K+ rate, which is incredibly unfair, just like the aforementioned 37.5% would be, as that is the lowest possible killrate configuration.
Long story short, your "side of the argument" comes down to the grounds that a single kill is considered a killer "win" (and a killer can win 4 times in a single match with a 4k)
I have never once mentioned 1Ks as a win. That is a complete fabrication. Go back over the math I showed and try to find where I counted 1Ks as wins.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3791954#Comment_3791954
No, the devs stated that this 60% was to keep the horror vibe, not because of balancing reasons.
please point me out to an announcement and when it was posted because i'm very well aware they didn't say it any time after game has actually stopped to be hide and seek.
10 matches
40 survivors
50% winrate = 5 matches with 3K+ = minimum of 15 survivors killed.
15/40 = 0.375 = 37.5%
You can get a 50% winrate as killer off a killrate as low as 37.5%. Yes, that's unrealistic because the statistics are way more volatile, but my point wasn't that we should aim for that anyway, it's that claiming that a 62.5% killrate is needed for a 50% winrate is effectively based on nothing.
DBD's stats don't work that way. Nothing I said was incorrect.
killrates are based on average MMR and "top MMR", where average MMR would be supposed to have higher killrates because killer is easier role to win with on lower skill levels, while survivor is easier role to win with on higher skill levels. Basically average of 70% killrate on average MMR + 50% killrate on top MMR / 2 = 60% killrate, and that's why devs are aiming for it. Problem comes at the part where this is heavily corrupted because guess why, player induced factors.
Of course, this only ever works in a one-way street where it is used to discredit any issues survivors may have, because any purely anecdotal woe-is-me story from a killer main is 100% fact.
But hey, it doesn't matter whether you trust the stats or not, because Hotrod was talking about those stats anyway, making claims that they pointed out the exact opposite of what they actually say.
'High MMR has lower kill rates!'
'Stats say they don't'
'Official stats do!'
'No they don't'
'Well, the stats aren't accurate!'
It's just moving goalposts faster than Dredge can teleport between lockers.
alright, let's go here.
High MMR has similar killrates to average MMR because high MMR literally doesn't exist for quite a while, after quicker queues became priority over accurate ones (because players wanted it that way), and literally all players from 1600 (soft MMR cap) to 2200 (hard MMR cap) are literally considered as the same skill level even if they are not and it's extremely easy to reach soft MMR cap.
Now let's see all the player related factors that are severely affecting killrates, making killrates highly unreliable as something to balance the game around:
- hook suicides (completely player related and
- challenges (people not going for actual objectives, but griefing in order to finish a challenge (fault of the game on both sides)
- SWFs playing just in a way to be annoying and frustrate killer rather than win (do 0 objectives, focus on saves/saboing)
- other kinds of griefing survivors
etc.
And why has BHVR been focused all this time on completely wrong stuff as rebalancing perks around killrates, rather than addressing player related factors that impacted killrates?
please point me out to an announcement and when it was posted because i'm very well aware they didn't say it any time after game has actually stopped to be hide and seek.
I don't know how to search the forums for that specific post, but I believe it got quoted recently in another topic where killrates were also being discussed. I believe it was a post made by Peanits in which they stated that 60% was the goal, they never mentioned balance, they did mention the horror vibe.
killrates are based on average MMR and "top MMR", where average MMR would be supposed to have higher killrates because killer is easier role to win with on lower skill levels, while survivor is easier role to win with on higher skill levels. Basically average of 70% killrate on average MMR + 50% killrate on top MMR / 2 = 60% killrate, and that's why devs are aiming for it. Problem comes at the part where this is heavily corrupted because guess why, player induced factors.
Again, though: High MMR killrates are higher than average MMR killrates. Also, average MMR makes up a far bigger proportion of the playerbase, so that calculation is off by a mile. Top MMR would be such a tiny fraction that you couldn't move the needle with it if you weighted it appropriately.
None of what you are saying has any foundation.
High MMR has similar killrates to average MMR
Except the stats disprove this.
Now let's see all the player related factors that are severely affecting killrates, making killrates highly unreliable as something to balance the game around
Alright, so we're not going by killrates.
So then 60% is NOT a good benchmark, your earlier spiel about why they picked 60% is based on nothing.
But also, you're moving the goalpost again, because now you're arguing that the 60% killrate is entirely insignificant when this little tangent came as a response to me arguing back against Hotrod claiming that it WAS significant.
Now also omitting my rebuttal to your accusation of bias on my part, you gotta admit: This is not a good look for you in that regard.