Firellius
Firellius
About
- Username
- Firellius
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,210
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Snowbawlzzz said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3696400#Comment_3696400
What is the name of the role the survivors are facing?
We can just rename it to 'hooker', but I feel that has rather different connotations.
Might work for 'hooked on you' though.
-
@ChaosWam said:
I was worried about it starting issues with other perks combined, but putting that aside this baffles me more.
Aside the animation looking bad, I chalk that up to PTB jank, the stun being 5 seconds on the killer and the reward still being a 2-3ish second window escape feels weird. If it were 4 seconds I would at least accept that, but being stuck for 5 seconds as killer while the survivor doesn't get a whole lot of distance at the same time? I dunno, that feels strange.
If I had a nickel for every time BHVR made a change that's worse for both sides of the fence, I'd have…
I was gonna do the Doofenschmirtz meme, but I think we're past 2 instances of this now, actually.
-
I should start by saying that there is one situation where the game is survivor sided, and that's when there's an extremely well-coordinated SWF who are actively tryharding to win the game.
According to the stats, not even that is survivor-sided.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3692733#Comment_3692733
But you brough up that what i said in this was that it would take the killer 60 seconds to catch up, which means DS is disabled, we literally agree on this.
Yes, we do.
But the topic of the thread at large is about DS disabling when another survivor goes down. And we disagree on that.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3692414#Comment_3692414
Are you intentionally doing this?
There are 2 situations and you just described the one we are literally NOT talking about.
- The survivor is unhooked and the killer immediately tunnels them
- This is precisely why DS exists and it should still be in play here
- The survivor is unhooked, and the killer does a hook trade with the person who unhooked them
- This was the reason you gave why: "We can't have DS disable when another survivor is downed because of this"
- I'm stating that this situation the killer is LITERALLY by DEFINITION not tunneling. Because they hooked a different person. What you are complaining about here is what people are starting to describe as "Soft tunneling" which Tru3 mentioned in his recent discussion with otz, where you target 2 different survivors and go for them rather than the other 2.
- My point is, EVEN IN THIS SITUATION YOU BROUGHT UP, the survivor has MORE than enough time to literally run to the OPPOSITE END OF THE MAP if they need to, in order to get somewhere safe. At that point, if you are getting downed again, you are just bad at being chased, and that is a skill issue.
- So at this point if you are complaining about "Soft tunneling" you really need to get a grip with reality, because you cannot expect killers to evenly spread hooks out among every single player for the "fun" of the survivors with the game in its current state.
There are 2 situations and you just described the one we are literally NOT talking about.
It IS what we are talking about.
I'm stating that this situation the killer is LITERALLY by DEFINITION not tunneling.
You are legit splitting hairs here. If you're going this route, you might as well argue that if the killer kicks a gen or a breakable wall, it disables all anti-tunnel.
The reality is that this allows killers to circumvent anti-tunnel, thus once again buffing tunnelling.
My point is, EVEN IN THIS SITUATION YOU BROUGHT UP, the survivor has MORE than enough time to literally run to the OPPOSITE END OF THE MAP if they need to, in order to get somewhere safe. At that point, if you are getting downed again, you are just bad at being chased, and that is a skill issue.
And it doesn't matter.
If you are immediately targeting a survivor who has just been unhooked, you will get hit with DS. That is DS's exact purpose, and the very reason why DS should not disable under this condition.
And if, as you say, they go down that fast that it's a 'skill issue', just pick 'em up, eat the DS, and get the down again: You're already winning anyway. You're essentially complaining about win-win situations not being killer-sided enough.
Y'all are losing the plot with DS. It's a survivor perk, not a basekit QoL feature. Peanits said it too: This buff to DS is NOT the be-all-end-all 'solution' to tunnelling. You have a point about flashlight saves. You don't have a point about this hook condition.
'But it's an anti-tunnel perk and if you hook someone else you're not tunnelling'
Point out to me where, in DS's description, it states that this perk is intended purely and exclusively as an anti-tunnel feature.
So at this point if you are complaining about "Soft tunneling" you really need to get a grip with reality, because you cannot expect killers to evenly spread hooks out among every single player for the "fun" of the survivors with the game in its current state.
The year is 2027. Killrates are up to 79% and the average winrates for killers is at 86.5%. 'Honestly, I think the basekit BT should go. You can't expect killers to not instadown off-hook with the game in its current state'.
- The survivor is unhooked and the killer immediately tunnels them
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3692409#Comment_3692409
No, at that point they are being tunneled, and they have far less time to get to a safe place, so DS should still be in play. We are discussing the situation where the killer downs and then hooks the person who did the unhooking and then proceeds to go after the person who was hooked. Because that was the scenario that was brough up when i said that downing a different survivor should disable DS.
No, at that point they are being tunneled, and they have far less time to get to a safe place
That depends on the distance the killer is at, doesn't it?
You're still describing a scenario where the survivor is pulled off hook and is immediately being targeted again.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3692165#Comment_3692165
I feel like you are intentionally missing the point now.
Yes, i understand that it only matters if the survivor is running the whole time. But given that a map is 100 x 100 square meters, the math checks out, that the survivor has enough time to get to say, the killer shack (one of the strongest structures in the game) even if it is on the complete opposite end of the map. So they have plenty of time to get to a safe area, and then some.
That doesn't change things, though, does it?
If the survivor gets pulled off the hook, and the killer, wherever they are, immediately turns to head towards the hook and chase that survivor down, do you also state that the survivor isn't getting tunnelled because they had time to make it to a strong loop?
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3692134#Comment_3692134
You seem to be missing the point. So i'll spell it out more clearly. You mentioned that the killer would just hook trade and go after the unhooked person and that was still "tunneling". I'm making the point that by definition it is not tunneling for the following reasons.
If you factor in the hook trade after the survivor gets unhooked, the following happens, and i'll be more generous for the survivor side in the math this time around to show how obvious it is.
- The killer hits the unhooker a second time, downing them and sits through a 2.7 wipe animation.
- The killer positions themself over the person they just downed, lets say that takes 1 second.
- The killer picks up the downed survivor, this takes 3 seconds
- The killer hooks the downed survivor, this takes 1.5 seconds
In total, the killer spend 2.7 + 1 + 3 +1.5 seconds downing the unhooker and completing the hook trade. That is a total of 8.2 seconds.
During that 8.2 seconds, the person who was just unhooked, is able to move a distance of 36.08 (we'll round to 36) meters.
A killer moves at a default speed of 4.6 meters per second and needs to be within 3.5 meters to do a successful lunge attack. That means the survivor still running, and the killer pursuing, the killer needs to close a gap of 36 - 3.5 = 32.5 meters.
The survivor for 10 seconds moves at 4.4 meters per second. So for 10 - 8.2 (the killer was effectively standing still for 8.2 seconds) the survivor moves at 4.4 m/s for 1.8 more seconds, and then at 4 m/s for the rest of the chase. So after 1.8 seconds, the killer has gained 0.36 meters of distance. This puts the killer at needing to close a gap of 32.14 meters (we'll round down in favor of the survivor to 32 meters) to land a hit..
To close the gap of 32 meters, the killer will gain 0.6 meters of distance per second. That takes the killer 53.3 (again, we'll round down) 53 seconds.
That means in an infinite straight line, the killer spent 8.2 seconds hooking the original person, and downing the unhooked survivor takes another 53 seconds for a total of 61.2 seconds.
Now again, obviously, the map is not an infinite straight line. Maps are typically around 100 x 100 meters square. Generally they aren't perfect squares, but they have roughly the same area.
My point is simple. If you deactivated DS when you did a hook trade, you would not be tunneling, because the original survivor who was hooked would have MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME to get from literally one side of the map to the exact opposite end of the map and probably heal themselves before the killer ever got them. And, as you pointed out, it doesn't matter because the DS timer would be up anyway, so if you deactivate it when another survivor is downed, it isn't going to hurt the unhooked survivor in this case.
Where it DOES come into play, is when say, someone gets unhooked, you down someone else and then the original unhooked guy, uses his temporary powers of invincibility, to go for a pallet save, or a flashlight save, or body blocking to prevent you from hooking. Etc. Because BY DEFINITION the unhooked guy is LITERALLY not being tunneled, because you LITERALLY downed someone else and are attempting to unhook them.
You're making a mistake though.
To close the gap of 32 meters, the killer will gain 0.6 meters of distance per second. That takes the killer 53.3 (again, we'll round down) 53 seconds.
That means in an infinite straight line, the killer spent 8.2 seconds hooking the original person, and downing the unhooked survivor takes another 53 seconds for a total of 61.2 seconds.
My point is simple. If you deactivated DS when you did a hook trade, you would not be tunneling, because the original survivor who was hooked would have MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME to get from literally one side of the map to the exact opposite end of the map and probably heal themselves before the killer ever got them.
That .6 meters per second ONLY applies if the survivor is continuously running away from the killer. The second that survivor stops running, the killer closes the gap significantly faster. You do not have 60 seconds of free time. What you are describing, with the .6 m/s catch-up, is a chase. In other words, you just got pulled off hook, and the killer is chasing you down.
This is also known as tunnelling.
You could never get that heal off in ten seconds, because the killer doesn't need ten seconds to close the gap if the survivor stops moving to heal.
If, and only IF, the survivor is able to run continuously to try and make distance from the killer, does he have the ability to stretch that distance out to 60 seconds, but at any given time, a ten second head start will not put the killer any further away from the survivor than ten seconds. As in: If the survivor stops, it'll take less than ten seconds for the killer to catch up.
Again: Your whole model is dependent on the survivor being stuck in chase from the moment they're unhooked. Which is what DS is designed to punish.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3691987#Comment_3691987
Did you not read what i wrote?
Here it is, but if you don't want to read it because of math, it is simple
Even if you hook trade, the person who just got unhooked gets a 10 second head start. In this math i didn't even factor in the fact that they run faster due to the basekit BT. A 10 second headstart, in an infinite straight line, is a 60 second head start, in that it takes a killer 60 seconds to catch up. Yes, it is true that maps are not an infinite straight line, but the point is that you have PLENTY of time, to run to the literal OPPOSITE END of the map if you need to in order to get somewhere safe like shack pallet.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3691916#Comment_3691916
You're changing things up. It's not a 60 second head start, it's a 10 second head start. But it doesn't even matter, because if, according to you, you can't catch up to this survivor within 60 seconds, they already cannot have DS anymore.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3691961#Comment_3691961
A 60 second head start isn't enough? What world do you live in? Are the rest of the survivors just standing around looking at a wall instead of working gens?
It takes you 60 seconds to hook someone?
Besides, if it takes you 60 seconds to catch up, DS is already disabled anyway. -
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3691798#Comment_3691798
But BY DEFINITION you are not tunneling if someone else is being hooked. PERIOD. Even if someone saved the survivor, got hit, and did a trade, do you realize HOW MUCH time it takes the killer to hook that new person?
You have to:
- Wait for 2.7 wipe animation
- "Fiddle" about for 2-3 seconds because the game decides to "lag" them in some random position on the ground
- 3 second pickup animation
- 1.5 second hook animation
That's around 10 full seconds. Do you know how FAR a survivor can get in 10 seconds? That is a full 40 meters. Do you know how LONG it takes a killer to catch up to a survivor with a full 10 second head start? 60 seconds. Basically, you could be on one end of the map and want to run to the exact opposite corner, and you would not only beat the killer to that corner, but even after you stopped moving it would take the killer another 10 seconds to even get to you.
That is MORE than enough time for you to run to a safe area of the map and still have plenty of time to hide as your scratch marks disappear and make it difficult to track where you went. At that point if you get caught again you are just bad at hiding from the killer.
That's around 10 full seconds. Do you know how FAR a survivor can get in 10 seconds?
Not far enough. Scratch marks will still point you out, so there's zero chance to break the chase. Even if you do start walking, due to your slow movement, you can't make meaningful distance, and a quick sweep will have the killer find you again.
Not to mention that if you get that hook trade, you shouldn't then be rewarded by also disabling the most easy-to-circumvent perk that survivors have. You're already winning, you don't need to win harder, and certainly not at the expense of another survivor's playability.
-
@Marioneo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3691499#Comment_3691499
It should be when another survivor is hooked
Even that one I don't agree with. Hook trading would immediately kill DS and thus produce more tunnelling.
Overall, the only condition I can think of that DS should be affected by is using a flashlight. In any other case, DS is entirely avoidable or useless. You don't need to commit to the same target repeatedly and you can pick someone else, especially if you can hook someone and then down the first target again within 60 seconds of them being unhooked. At that point, you are already winning really hard and can absolutely afford to go for someone else.
-
There's a lot of ways to fix hexes. Ruin just needs to get its regression rate returned to 200%, and needs the 'yeets itself upon a survivor dying' back, for instance.
But there's also more creative ways to go about it. I really like Two Can Play's reignition mechanism for example, so…
Hex: Blood Favour, when destroyed, now reignites after you destroy two pallets.
Hex: Face the Darkness re-enables after hooking a survivor twice.
And then there's the option of having hex perks not fully disable, but persist in a weakened state:
Hex: Crowd Control only blocks windows for 5 seconds once the totem is gone.
Hex: Huntress' Lullaby can no longer gain tokens when cleansed, but the effect persists at whatever level of tokens you had.
Hex: Retribution permanently renders whoever cleansed it Oblivious.
Hex: Thrill of the Hunt now simply grants 50% more BP scoring in the Hunter category, regardless of tokens and regardless of whether the totem is still active.
There's ways to shift the risk/reward balance around beyond just 'effect goes up' and I really wish BHVR would get creative with it. Same goes for their design for boons.
-
BRING BACK WGLF!
BRING BACK BBQ!
Seriously though, WGLF and BBQ were on to something with creating 'win' conditions that didn't require the other team to lose. That needs to be expanded upon.
-
@Xyphus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3690028#Comment_3690028
Aren't those different score events?
The score event would only count it upon a completed blind, but I think it'd be fairer if trying to use a flashlight at all would count as a conspic action.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689742#Comment_3689742
DS topic wise, I said it was complained about in the past for other reasons. DS for what you harp on me about is the current way survivors use it. Just to clear that up.
And I just wish we had something to help with tunneling without sacrificing a perk slot and being forced to buy a DLC or wait out the shrine. Heck, OTR isn't that bad of an anti-tunnel perk by itself imo aside it being able to be negated immediately off hook. Paired with other perks, it becomes problematic and aggravating to face.
The move from DS to OTR was just worse for everyone. OTR is better at bodyblocking against non-tunnelling killers since it doesn't incapacitate you, but it gets disabled if the killer tunnels harder. It's remarkable how wrong BHVR managed to get that one.
It takes skill, in a game like this, to make a decision that is worse for both sides of the fence.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689735#Comment_3689735
Did I say DS/OTR/UB was being used or is and will be this entire time?
Before it used to be DS/Dead Hard/UB/Adrenaline, if my memory serves me right.
And going forward, we're probably going to end up with a similar meta as to before the shakeup: Anti tunnel/bodyblock perks and strong regression. And that's me hoping I'm wrong about the bodyblocking. Not looking forward to that.
Did I say DS/OTR/UB was being used or is and will be this entire time?
Was. As per the topic.
And going forward, we're probably going to end up with a similar meta as to before the shakeup: Anti tunnel/bodyblock perks and strong regression. And that's me hoping I'm wrong about the bodyblocking. Not looking forward to that.
OTR might need a fix, but it needed one from day 1. DS wasn't the problem.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689727#Comment_3689727
I didn't say anything about OTR and pre-nerf DS…?
Anyway, look, you can at LEAST agree that locking a perk that's supposed to help survivors avoid being tunneled behind a licensed chapter is a bad idea right? Regardless of any builds DS can be paired with?
But you said "It's DS/OTR/UB being used offensively that's an issue"?
And I get what you mean, and there should be a baseline solution to the problem, -something- is better than a few more years of -nothing-.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689573#Comment_3689573
It was literally covering the forums, youtube and twitch streamers. One of the top most discussed issues in the game.
It… Really wasn't, my guy. There were complaints about the existence of second-chance perks altogether, about survivors always using the same set of perks, but not about non-tunnelling killers getting hit with DS.
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689573#Comment_3689573
Again, as I have explained it a ton now, it's not JUST DS.
It's DS/OTR/UB being used offensively that's an issue. Buffing DS doesn't fix tunneling against most M2 killers and punishes M1 killers stuck with overly-altruistic survivors running this build.
I've even seen killers claim 3 gens and facecamps were 'once in a blue moon' and we know that ain't true.
OTR wasn't a thing back before DS got nerfed to 3 seconds, what are you talking about?
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689503#Comment_3689503
And I explained why it's a problem to non-tunneling killers, yet somehow it doesn't get through despite carefully explaining it.
I don't even know why it's a bad thing to say we shouldn't promote using anti-tunnel perks to go on the offense while finding a solution that benefits both sides and all MMR ranges.
And I explained why it's a problem to non-tunneling killers, yet somehow it doesn't get through despite carefully explaining it.
Likewise, I've explained why it's not a problem to non-tunnelling killers, but that doesn't get through either, despite carefully explaining it.
I don't even know why it's a bad thing to say we shouldn't promote using anti-tunnel perks to go on the offense while finding a solution that benefits both sides and all MMR ranges.
Because it takes BHVR two years to change a 3 back to a 5 and the forum killers are at it again, throwing out the anchor and clamouring to have it undone, inventing once-in-a-blue-moon scenarios to try and paint the perk as a problem.
Tunnelling is the issue that killers have been digging their heels in on the most. It's been a problem since the game's inception, but we're going to massively overanalyse a perk that historically stopped being a problem after the conspic action nerf, minus the EGC activations.
'Anything but DS', and once DS is off the table, it's straight back to 'no solution warranted'. And then we can go another two years without anything being done.
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689360#Comment_3689360
Okay so I've been here for a millennia on the forums and what he's saying is true.
I've been here for as long as DS has had its deactivation conditions. No one complained about DS being a problem to non-tunnelling killers.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689495#Comment_3689495
I don't know if you weren't looking in the right places then, because I DEFINITELY remember people wanting DS nerfed and rejoicing when the changes came through.
Meanwhile, the tunneling problem wasn't and still isn't actually fixed. DS isn't going to stop it against decent M2 killers and low MMR survivors without buying DS are still going to suffer.
I don't know if you weren't looking in the right places then, because I DEFINITELY remember people wanting DS nerfed and rejoicing when the changes came through.
Oh, every change will have someone cheering on the sidelines. Tunnel-junkies would rejoice for any DS nerf.
But that is different from DS being a problem to non-tunnelling killers.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689476#Comment_3689476
Steam discussions and Reddit, as well as playing survivor and being teamed with 2-3 man bully squads at the time.
Also, general research into the game that has little to no information in game will expose you to the issues of the game. Videos, mostly. I refrained from joining the forums for this long because of situations like this.
Yeah, and when I joined in, I did the same, and encountered none of that. I came in shortly before DS got its actual conspic action nerf, and there were -no- complaints about offensive use after the conspic action nerf.
There were complaints about its use in general, definitely, with tunnelling addicts being upset that they shot themselves in the foot, but nothing about DS bodyblocking.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689311#Comment_3689311
I started the game when Sadako came out. You really think I joined the forums at the same time?
If you weren't on the forums, though, how do you know what the community opinion was on DS?
-
@ExcelSword said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689311#Comment_3689311
Some people join the forums recent but have been playing for years.
I have a 5 year badge but less than 400 posts. It's just because I don't post too often on forums, and I wager a good chunk of players are the same.But we're specifically talking about the community, IE: These forums.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689141#Comment_3689141
I seem to recall people complain about the length of the stun, especially killers who mained M1 killers with no chase power. Meanwhile, killers like Nurse, Blight, Huntress etc didn't really get effected as hard because they could catch up with their power.
If anything, I'm starting to feel gaslighted by this community over DS.
You joined March 2023, well after the DS nerf. How do you know?
-
@concubined said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3687830#Comment_3687830
the same statement was made by the best most well-known players in the competitive/content creating community. The statement simply implies that there’s a skill difference between players and the players at a higher mmr or overall understanding of the game have a better understanding of how to get value from the perk compared to the lower mmr survivors. Which isn’t a bad thing it’s just real life but it shows that buffing it in the sake of the lower mmr survivors will only make it more abusable by the higher ones. Hopes this explanation suited you well enough that you didn’t choose to stop reading not even half way in, I understand reading things you don’t agree with isn’t the easiest but it’s the way to find communicate and hopefully find common ground
"I understand reading things you don’t agree with isn’t the easiest"
You pre-empted this entire thread with a 'if you disagree with me, you are low skill', so I don't think you can accuse anyone else of having difficulties with reading things you don't agree with.
-
@concubined said:
With the current state of Decisive Strike where it's only a 3 second stun, good survivors knows that it is still a great perk, we understand it only means we need to path somewhere with resources we can work with after the stun. Raising the stun duration to 5 seconds only limits survivor skill expression by making the escape guaranteed, specially against weaker killers but really it's just a huge time waste for your team to rush gens.
A common misconception is that as a survivor you have a right to not be tunneled, with my own experience I can't count how many times I've watched ttv survivors literally report me for tunneling as if it's a bannable offense and have hate mails/threats sent to me for tunneling all the while I have never BM'ed (it's a waste of time not spent on pressuring gens). You are not entitled to the killer not continuing to pursue you after you've been unhooked, and anti tunneling perks and basekits are not a birth right as much as they're starting to appear to be.
Remember the very first meta shake up that had very positive impact as far as survivor builds finally having some diversity? Well prepare to see DS on every survivor in every game. Because this patch is the great flood on everything that’s good and holy and DS is the only passenger on Noah’s ark.
You know how killer’s “meta” builds are basically 4 gen slow downs? Well this is the survivor equivalent of that
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/FZBGNQGF9ZMM/img-7743.jpeg
but you don’t see survivors running this or is even considered meta, why?
Now imagine killers have the opposite equivalent of “DS, OTR, DH, Adrenaline” basically 4 perks to ensure you can tunnel out a survivor. Oh ya and now imagine the killer have that times 4, that’s survivor meta for you.
"A common misconception is that as a survivor you have a right to not be tunneled"
And killers don't have an inalienable right to tunnel.
DS is the most easily circumvented perk in the entire game. If you don't want to get hit by that five second stun, you can simply choose not to.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3687681#Comment_3687681
If you're going to use it that way, then you could have just bodyblocked instead. I don't even understand how your plan is even supposed to work? You give someone an instant health state, run away, and hope the killer chases after you? That wouldn't even make sense.
At least with bodyblocking, you continuously delay the killer until they hit you, then the other survivor gets free distance while the killer is recovering from the attack. That is what encourages the killer to go after you. Just giving the survivor an extra health state doesn't encourage anything, especially if the killer is still super close to whoever they are tunneling, because you made zero attempt to give the survivor any free distance.
Except if I give them an extra health state, it also gives them the on-hit speed boost, instead of me taking it and making more distance. Not to mention that if the killer drops the unhooked and goes for me, I go down in one hit and I don't get any distance to start with.
In short: if I bodyblock, I get a speed burst to make distance while the tunnel target doesn't. If I FTP, I can't make distance AND go down in one hit, while the tunnel target can take a hit and then sprint out.
Of course, if FTP disables anti-tunnel, then the tunnel target becomes the obvious best target again.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3687647#Comment_3687647
Having DS ripped off by someone's FTP should be fine, because almost 100% of the time it is being used to bring a survivor from the dying state to the injured state, which doesn't count as being fully headed. And this is especially true, because most people combo this with buckle up, and that combo only works on survivors in the dying state.
I've used FTP to try and draw killer's attention off a tunnel target by healing them to full with it. This should not then greenlight the killer to tunnel harder because DS got deactivated.
-
@OmegaXII said:
I’m always wondering why getting healed doesn’t disable DS, since if you’re healing, you’re not being tunnelled LMAO. But I guess it might be because you have no control over your teammate’s action, okay cool.
But why does it stay active if you’re fully healed? I would hate to get DS’ed because of this if you play any instadown killer too well LOL.Nope. Not having DS ripped off by someone's FTP.
Y'all need to remember that this is a survivor perk, and is not supposed to be a net neutral.
-
@GlamourousLeviathan said:
DS was never weak to begin with, it was just massively outclassed by Off the Record which did everything DS did but better. I don't expect to see more of DS because Off the Record is still the better anti tunnel perk.
Nah.
Off the Record has less counterplay for sure, but DS is the stronger anti-tunnel now. Pick-up animation and stun added together will just net you and your team a good chunk of extra time, not to mention that DS can be paired with flashlight saves.
OTR will be easier to use and perhaps a bit more consistent, but DS will be much stronger. Plus, DS works with basekit BT.
-
It's too conditional to not carry a very heavy stun. Pretty sure all the folks saying 'it's good' are forgetting that the perk can only be activated by the killer, making it extremely conditional.
It was one of the healthiest perks in the game, and it got nuked for no reason.
-
DBD is not a horror game. The horror aspect doesn't survive the repeated playing and community aspects. And even if they did want to make it a horror game, it would be much better to have it revolve around stealth, as that is by far the most tense gameplay.
But that went out the window with a barrage of aura perks.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3684940#Comment_3684940
How are we "stuck with 120 seconds" like is it impossible to change for some reason? Has the perk become self aware and the devs aren't allowed to change it now?
If they never bothered messing around with the parameters of Boons to make them work better, why would they start now with Invocations?
-
@Nazzzak said:
The devs will probably keep an eye on its stats. If it's use coincides with a noticeable high loss rate then it'll probably get a buff.
I think there's a bit of a problem with that, though. It'll probably mostly get picked for Adept challenges, and if people want to win, they won't actually use the perk. They'd need to isolate the loss rate of games where the perk actually fires, as opposed to where it's picked.
-
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3684499#Comment_3684499
This attitude of "it is a killer perk" is completely misguided.
Let me ask you, do you TRULY believe, that the perk designers at behavior, sat around and said: "######### survivor players, let's make a survivor perk that is so bad that it actually is a killer perk, that'll show those losers"
Or is it more reasonable that because this is a brand new mechanic to the game, that they are being super conservative with it because they aren't fully sure how it is all going to work out?
The perk is likely going to get buffed at some point, and pretending its not, or pretending that BHVR is in some way intentionally doing this is disingenuous.
They are not fixing it.
It is clear this perk was designed with the first concern in mind being 'this must not obstruct the killer too much'. It was in a worse state on the PTB, and it didn't get a straight buff, it got one coupled with a nerf, keeping the perk in its absolutely abysmal state. They specifically took steps to ensure it wouldn't get out of that position.
We know that BHVR is very stubborn about mistakes they make, as they haven't fixed Ruin or DS, nor did they ever fix Boons. They're not willing to deviate from convention, as none of the boons got any parameter adjustments to make them function better. Hell, they don't even seem willing to consider letting Weaving Spiders phase through gen-blocks.
So we're stuck with 120 seconds of charge time, which means BHVR has painted itself into a corner. Nothing you can come up with as an effect can justify 120 seconds of charge time, without also unleashing a tidal wave of killer complaints. This perk type is going to either be trash for survivors or perceived as OP by killers.
And they don't want the latter to happen.
So it -must- stay throw tier.
It's not what the killswitch is intended for, but I do think that All Things Wicked would be better if Sable just had 2 perks.
-
I remember seeing an Otz video where he would forcibly DS the killer every time he was picked up, so it's definitely possible to mess with the server in that way.
-
Uh... Guys?
Now do I hate the perk? No I find it annoying because you can have gen at 99% but boom lost a lot of progress but I don't hate it. The reason I feel like it's going to be nerf is either.
Survivors say it's way to difficult to avoid even though just let go of the gen the killer doesn't get a notification one it's location just that a stack was used.
I think dude's talking about Pain Res.
-
"OhTofu says nothing but facts about SM for 40 seconds"
*Links clip of OhTofu saying literally nothing of substance*
-
@MrPenguin said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3683099#Comment_3683099
Well, I can't speak for the majority but in my experience I have a lot more middle of the road 1-3Ks than sweeps in either direction. If that's truly more common than I'm not sure why I would be different. It might have something to do with my playstyle not being to tunnel and camp maybe? Not really sure there as to what would cause the discrepancy if there is one.
I'm also not sure why 60% would guarantee unbalance. Well, win rate wise at least. I think part of the issue is a 2K would technically be "balanced" but it also isn't a win for the killer while 2 survivors still won. But the killer needs to win too, so you can't really settle on a 2K being the average. The only real options left are things above a 2K which already pushes us above 50%.
It's either "win" or "didn't win" for win rate, and a draw is under "didn't win".
At least as far as I can tell.
Maybe you're more lenient with the hatch, but generally speaking, if the killer gets 3 kills, the fourth is likely to die too, which is likely why it trends towards 4Ks. Not tunnelling or camping may also indeed trend you towards more moderate outcomes too, but that's just a guess.
I'm also not sure why 60% would guarantee unbalance.
Going by the Nightlight statistics, the current winrate (That's 3K+) is roughly 49.5%, versus a kill rate of 56%. If you were to inflate the kill rate, unless its a buff that trends 0Ks towards 1Ks and 3Ks towards 4Ks, you're going to see an increase in winrates. If you want perfect balance, the rate at which 3K+ occurs should be equal to 1 - KR. Stats above indicate a survivor winrate of 44%, which is 5.5 percentage points below that of killers. That is a pretty considerable swing.
With the complicated nature of DBD and the various killers each having their own individual outcome trends (Instadown killers like Hillbilly and Bubba for example have a uniquely low likelihood of scoring 0K due to their ability to camp a down in EGC, something not shared by, for example, Nemesis) it is virtually impossible to really get a lock on good balance. But what we're seeing at the moment is that the game can already be quite killer-sided at killrates between 50 and 60%. Trying to kick the KR up towards 60% is likely to make things less balanced.
Unless it's some utterly meaningless change like ditching the hatch, which wouldn't do killers much good in upping their winrates but would inflate the killrates, thus pissing off everyone. Normally I'd say that's not an option, but BHVR has proven in the past that they are willing to implement a change that's worse for both sides of the fence.
-
@MrPenguin said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682295#Comment_3682295
what about for: 1,2,2,3? That's a 50% kill rate. But only a 25% win rate. Also more likely than the bouncing between getting 0 or 3 every match completely skipping the middle of 1 and 2. Those are not realistic results in your example.
In a theoretical on paper yeah 50% kill rate could work if we could guarantee extremes one way or the other. But extremes being the most common occurrence aren't how things work, that's why they're extremes. The killer is not bouncing between 0K and 4K all the time, most of it is in-between.
It's not going to be 0,4,0,4,0,4,0,4,0,4. It's going to be more like 0,2,4,3,1,3,2,3,4,2. Which is still a 50% win rate with a 60% kill rate. Add 1 kill and you have the 62.5 you were given.
To be 50% kill rate it'd be more like 0,2,3,3,2,1,2,3,2,2 which is only a 30% win rate.
As far as I have put together at least. Having a 50% kill and win rate hasn't worked out in any reasonable model of how the game and matches would actually go which include 1 and 2K's not just 0 or 4 and 0 or 3.
Matches with DCs and players just giving up early obviously shouldn't be factored in. That's a separate issue and not normal intended gameplay.
3 of 5 outcomes are not wins for the killer (0,1,2). So it should be favored towards them a bit imo.
@RpTheHotrod idk if this is similar to what you were trying to express.
In a theoretical on paper yeah 50% kill rate could work if we could guarantee extremes one way or the other. But extremes being the most common occurrence aren't how things work, that's why they're extremes. The killer is not bouncing between 0K and 4K all the time, most of it is in-between.
That is actually not true. DBD actually tends to lean -more- towards the extremes than the middle-of-the-road. 2Ks are by far the least common outcome across the board, for example. And while 1Ks and 0Ks are on roughly equal footing due to the nature of EGC and the green light on camping/tunnelling, 3Ks are far less prevalent than 4Ks.
While it's true that a flat 50% KR does not guarantee total balance, we can be pretty much guaranteed that 60% KR and upwards is incredibly unbalanced, resulting in killers winning the vast majority of their matches.
What @RpTheHotrod is doing, however, is taking the statistics, extrapolating an average match, and then misinterpreting this as the 'average winrate'. The model he's using is just flatly incorrect, as evidenced by those three match outcomes. Unfortunately, one other forum user flung this idea into the ether and now there's a lot of people that misunderstand the significance of the 60% target figure as a result, and use it to claim killers are still underpowered when they are in fact overpowered.
60% was not chosen for balance. BHVR chose it because they think it makes the game function better.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682295#Comment_3682295
I admire your dedication to trying to explain this.
Sadly, it falls on deaf ears, because one person misunderstood how the statistics work and unfortunately it lines up with a pro-killer bias, so now people just run with it.
-
@Akumakaji said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3671224#Comment_3671224
That's, the ago-old adage of "we are not genrushing/tunneling, but just doing our job".
At its lowest level, that might be true, but the game is much more nuanced than that.
Actions have consequences and ultra-efficency is often contra to a fun game, where both sides have time to do some fun stuff.
@CrypticGirl Yes, the world for the killer doesn't end when 3 gens pop first chase, BUT all leeway with the survivors instantly end, and this could potentially be right at the start.
Last game I was completely in control, I chose the right gens to patrol, won many mindgames, ended chases quickly and managed to chase survivors to gens that were worked at. Thus I had 3 hooks and only one gen done, when that girl that already got hooked twice stumbled into me and threw down a pallet from the wrong side. I downed her and left her slugged, but didn't seal the deal. Had I been down to 2 gens at this time, I would have killed her.
Many survivors favor gens over friends and this greatly flavors the matches and alters how quickly sympathetic killers might be backed against the wall.
Actions have consequences and ultra-efficency is often contra to a fun game, where both sides have time to do some fun stuff.
That's why I'm asking. Because contrary to what seems to be an upcoming popular opinion: Doing gens is not 'genrushing'. If they aren't bringing genrush perks and toolkits, it's not 'genrushing'.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682279#Comment_3682279
Facts are a real bummer. Must really hate math, eh? A 75+% kill rate in a match is a win with a 3k+. A 50% kill rate in a match is not a win with only a 2k. 75% is the minimum for a win. At 62.5%, it's the halfway point between on average always winning and on average not winning. Essentially, it's a 50% win rate. Going down just a few percent to 60% generally still means they are expected to win roughly half their matches, but with an occasional extra loss when averaging several matches. I know you spout that kills have nothing to do with winning, but come on, it literally does. 3k+ is how a killer wins a match. We don't want to killers to have an average of a 75% kill rate because on average they'd always win. We don't want them to have a 50% kill rate because on average they'd never win. That's why they go with 60%, on average over a period of matches, that grey area between those two numbers gives them room to both win and not win on average. 62.5% is the true middle point, but they opted to drop it down to 60%. With that bring said, we have several killers in low to mid 50% which means they are a lot closer to only getting a 2k every match than if they were at the intended 60%.
Pretty sure I explained this to you already, but riddle me this: What are the kill and winrates across the following three matches?
Match 1: 0K
Match 2: 3K
Match 3: 3K
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682126#Comment_3682126
Not according to their recent stats. A lot of killers are actually way underperforming the intended 60% kill rate (60% kill rate means winning slightly under half their matches, as it's almost in the middle of a 2k and a 3k. 62.5% is the true middle ground).
Stop dredging this up, it is flatly wrong. The outcome of the average match =/= winrate. 60% is massively killer-sided.
Also, the recent stats do not disprove the statement that killrates are higher at high MMR.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
Because they balance the game around mid to mid high mmr. It's only "super easy" for killers at low mmr. As mmr goes up, it becomes much harder for killers unless they are playing nurse/blight which stomps at high mmr.
Killrates have historically been higher at high MMR than overall.
@WolfyWood said:
Why would they want the less popular role to be difficult to play?
I think it'd be a better idea to look at killer gameplay and think of gameplay improvements for it, rather than making the other role also unappealing.
-
I do think that this part is one of the only killer gameplay pieces that could use some ironing out. The killer is overwhelmingly the power role, except when it's time to pick up a survivor. That moment makes the killer vulnerable, and I think it makes up the majority of the difference between solo and 4-man escape rates at high MMR.
Can't claim to know how to tackle it without just removing hook denial altogether, but it deserves attention.
-
@TheSubstitute said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3679669#Comment_3679669
I'm not arguing with you; I'm explaining to you how the MMR system works and how the people who count it as 4 individual wins have a basis to make that claim.
For Killer win streaks, 3 and 4E is a loss, 2E is a draw and 1E is a loss. That's how the system measures it and why your edited argument is wrong in the context of my post. As it's an asymmetrical game the win conditions are different for each side. From the survivor perspective for MMR there are 4 individual 1v1s and, from the Killer's perspective, there is a singular 1v4.
If you don't understand that you can't talk about the context of the MMR system until you do.
So, the Blight streak was treated as 1,947 contests but the Survivor streak was treated as 684 individual contests. That's how the MMR system works and why the people claiming it was 4 individual wins per escape have a basis to say that.
If you don't like that then you should argue for changes to how MMR works and not argue with a factual explanation of how MMR works.
That's still not a survivor win streak of 684, though. It's just up to four win streaks of 171. If the 171 is just the number of 3Es, then one or more of them likely didn't reach 171, potentially even none of them.
There's no way to count Blight's streak as 1947 while counting the survivors as 684 that isn't a misinterpretation of statistics.
Either you count the survivors as a group, in which case it's 1947 vs 171, or you count them as 4 1v1s, in which case it's 7788 vs 684.
-
Sounds like it's time for some Nurse and Blight buffs. I mean, this proves survivors are OP, clearly?