HerInfernalMajesty
HerInfernalMajesty
About
- Username
- HerInfernalMajesty
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Astel said:
I heard BP bonus incentives depend on players' MMR.
I think so too. Different MMR values should have different demands right?
-
@Hunkulese said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619593#Comment_3619593
The funny thing about everyone complaining about how bad playing survivor is that playing survivor has been so much better recently. I've had way way more teammates who understand the basic fundamentals of the game. It is mostly on the players for the miserable experience. Behaviour has done quite a bit to improve the solo queue experience.
The only thing they really need to do is let us see everyone's loadout.
It’s crazy. I have the same experience too. I am escaping so much more often than usual. It’s weird how easy my Survivor games have been.
-
Head nods are the most hilarious thing that happens. Whether the headnods are slow and exaggerated or subtle, they always make me laugh 🤣
-
I love the idea of a global TR or power.
-
@CorvusCorax86 said:
1) Plunderer's Instinct: Because we need to get presents for all our children.
2) We'll Make It: Because we are one big family.
3) Lithe: My children need me there fast!
4) Emphatic Connection: But they can also seek me out when I'm needed.
All this with Jeff's Xmas clothing.
Don't forget to bring the Party Starter for the fireworks and the Tarnished Coin for more presents.
I love this idea haha. Wow how cool. I love seeing people post unique thematic builds. Thanks for sharing 😊
-
Hi! Yeah I actually use the rating buttons after every game. 99% of the time I rate the match a 5/5.
-
For a new Survivor I recommend practicing at hiding from the Killer and learning to find a generator asap and repairing it as soon as the Killer is chasing another Survivor.
-
Happy New Years to you and to everyone as well! ☺️🎉
-
@Ayodam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619202#Comment_3619202
I too have seen a lot of horror and I disagree with you. More often than not a final person remains because 1.) most audience members root for the protagonist at the end of the day; 2.) cinema / story-based media is immersive; 3.) cinema / story-based media with a doomed outcome often performs poorly when compared against the opposite (which is why the final girl trope even exists while there is no everybody dies trope); and 4.) it sets up the potential for a sequel.
Not saying you’re doing this, but I am saying it is disingenuous to pretend that somehow everybody dying is at all anything but anomalous. That person you’re replying to is correct. If DBD should mirror horror in cinema and other content one survivor should almost always—9/10 times—live. That is the formula.
Maybe I just watch different horror. Most of the horror I watch ends with the bad guy winning. Not always, but often.
-
@mecca said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619192#Comment_3619192
If we really want to be real to the movies, the protagonist usually wins at the end. Speaking of Halloween, Laurie Strode didn't die no matter how much Michael Myers tried.
But this is a game and both sides should have a fair chance at winning.
I’ve seen plenty of Horror and the protagonists don’t win as much as it would seem. Sometimes they do, but a lot of times they don’t. That’s kind of part of the horror genre, a sad ending where the bad guy wins.
-
Happy New Years and Happy Holidays to everyone here and to the whole DBD team. Thank you so much for all of your hard work. I can feel the passion in the game and it feels wonderful. Just in case anyone from Behavior reads this and wants some awesome horror suggestions:
- Ghost Story by Peter Straub
- The Thief of Always by Clive Barker
- Neomonicon by Alan Moore
- Providence by Alan Moore
- Horrorstör by Grady Hendrix
- The Burning Moon movie
I know many of you have heard of these but maybe some horror lovers here haven’t. From one horror lover to others, THANK YOU!!!! 👏👏👏🎉🎉🎉☺️☺️☺️
-
@alpha5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618397#Comment_3618397
Power role is a design concept. The actual kill rate is a balance/implementation issue. This is why the distinction is important. If a killer has a 10% kill rate, he is badly balanced, but he would still be the power role because he decides who gets to sit on gens, who gets to loop and what 10% get to leave the trial early.
Sure. I completely agree. Thank you for keeping me sharp.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618412#Comment_3618412
Speaking objectivly: 0-1K is a loss, 2k is a draw, 3-4k is a win.
Personally i would say a great game is a win and a bad game is a loss - no matter the outcome.
BUT if i had to decide what a win/draw/loss for me and everybody else should be, then i would be leaning towards hook stages. Because then, we most of the time always have many if not everybody winning.
For killer 0-5 hook stages is a loss (have not happend to me a single time since i am back), 6 is a draw and above is a win. For survivor, if they personally escape, its always a win, but if they die, they can still rely on their teammates. If more then 2 gets out, its still a win for them. 😁
Often, we have many winners!😉
I see where you are coming from. Everyone wins, Survivors escape, and Killers get at least 7 hooks.
I just have a really hard time believing that the Killer player base will accept a 7 hook 4E as a win. And I honestly can’t blame them for feeling that way.
-
@Firellius said:
It's important to distinguish what it actually means to be the 'power role', as quite a few people seem to think it means 'the role that always wins', or 'the overpowered role'.
IMO, the killer is the power role, since in general gameplay, survivors have to respond to what the killer does, as opposed to the other way around. In that way, the killer unilaterally dictates the game. The killer can bodyblock survivors, but not the other way around. The killer can incapacitate the survivors, not the other way around. The killer determines where survivors can go, not the other way around.
There's a couple of exceptions that need to be ironed out: Loops that are too strong, and the killer becoming vulnerable when they pick up a survivor. I do think those need pruning.
As to whether or not the killer SHOULD feel like the power role: Yes, but to a limit. There's a general gameplay expectation that I think the killer should be pressed to adhere to, in order to keep the game playable.
Thank you for coming into this thread.
Let me get this out of the way: First, I do not believe in a hyper OP Killer where Survivors have no control whatsoever. I truly want this to be a fun game for both roles (I play Survivor a ton!). My main desire is for this game to be as thrilling as possible. Because of skill disparities it will be impossible to always have this.
When it comes to the technicalities of the power role, then yes overwhelmingly the Killer is the power role. But there are times where the Survivors are the power role when they are exceedingly better than a Killer lacking in skill or experience. Of course in this situation we would be getting into holding the game hostage territory which is already bannable. So on the front we are good.
What is difficult for me to come around to is a 50% kill rate. I see discussion that 50/50 is fair. And in most cases I would agree! But in this game it is vague, but frankly isn’t a 2K a draw for the Killer? I think this is where the fairness comes down to. Should Killers temper their understanding of winning to include a 2K instead of only 3K and 4K?
Also, I fully understand that personal winning looks different for everyone. To some Killers a 4E is a win just as long as there were some jump scares and tense moments (this is where I reside).
But again, do we consider a 2K a win or a draw? If that can’t be answered then I’m afraid the argument is a stale mate.
I personally think that a kill rate of 60% is the sweet spot. The killer is a threat but not too much. A 3K per match (a definitive Killer win) would be 75%. 60% is below that number so 50% of the time the Killer still isn’t “winning”.
Again I appreciate your civility on this subject, it is a topic we are all passionate about. We all enjoy this game in different ways and in different degrees. I’m sure we all want it to be the best game it could be. In my opinion I just don’t think the player base will correlate a 2K average as a Killer win 50% of the time. But I am more than open to hearing any ideas about this subject. I am more than open to changing my mind about this topic.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618388#Comment_3618388
They did a series of showmatches with no restriction and killer came out on top (comp players vs comp players). So i do think some killers are stronger then best survivor comp teams, mainly Nurse Spirt and Blight. But it is okay to think otherwise since we dont have much footage of that.
Switch 4 and 5 for obvious reason and i would fully agree with your updated list.
Sure thing, Bully squads were at a time where survivors had strong tools, more powerful perks and especially when better maps were a thing. But those Bully squads often ran in less experienced killers at that time due to more or less random matchmaking. I never saw a bully squad in 2018 "bullying" for example a good mega blink nurse. In that case, the Bully was the killer.
That is also why i believe ballance is important. When killer are to strong, they become the bully. We see this very often now in currenct matchmaking. So i stick with that statement - ballance and solid matchmaking is actually a great way to elliminate bully squads/bullying killers.
I am not saying, turn the tides and make survivor huge favourite, i am saying make it even. And improve the matchmaking system.
In your opinion, is a 2K a win for the Killer or a draw? Is there a way of judging what winning is for a Killer apart from a 4K?
-
@crogers271 said:
On the other hand this game is a Killer power fantasy so a Killer bias is absolutely to be expected.The game is a killer power fantasy? Maybe its a wording choice, but this seems strange. Do people really want to play the killers from horror movies?
To me, and fundamentally because the game requires more of them, the game is about the tension and thrill of trying to escape a killer. That means the killer has to be dangerous enough that it feels meaningful to escape, but not so dangerous that it feels pointless to play the game.
Should the Killer be a threat, but not enough of a threat to lock one or more Survivors out of a game?It's impossible to create a game where skill mismatches never happen or players always feel they have agency. However, it is a flawed game design that the killer can pick a survivor and that player has no agency, especially if they/the other survivors didn't guess right on the perks. I do not know if there is a realistic way to fix it at this point.
Should the game go to a scoreboard type of game without eliminations? Wouldn’t that destroy what the game is about?No, and yes it would destroy the game immediately.
What about when Survivors are the power role? It does happen; is this an allowable prejudice?At this point I don't know what you mean by power role. Times when the survivor are in control and clear favorite? As I said earlier, skill mismatches are inevitable.
The Survivors if playing correctly can beat the Killer. There exists a pathway to victory. This tells me that ultimately teamwork itself is the power role.I'm not seeing the logic here. Switch killer and survivor there and the sentence still makes sense.
The problem is that it is difficult to manifest the discipline required to achieve this teamwork. Impatience, selfishness, lack of awareness etc. get in the way of Survivor victory.That's the design of the game where it pits altruism against induvial gains, which is also a big element of horror movies.
If escaping became easier I believe this whole game would unravel and deteriorate.It depends on how a much issue. If killer were 90% or 10% would the game be fun? No, pretty much everyone would agree on that. If there were 55%? 50%? 45%? 65%? It's more a line drawing question. If they were a little lower I think it would be healthy, but don't consider it a huge problem.
I appreciate your comment. I really do. My line of thinking is that if kill rates were to be 50% that means on average 2 Survivors escape per match. Technically this is a draw (by community standards). Because of this then half the time, the Killer draws at best? I think that’s why the 60% kill rate is the sweet spot for this since a 3K is considered a Killer win.
But this gets into the territory of “why is a 2K considered a draw?”
-
@alpha5 said:
As Firellius pointed out it is important what we mean by "power role". Some people use to describe the currently dominant faction when it is the faction that dictates most aspects of the game. OP even tried to attribute this term to a concept which is pure nonsense.
Killer absolutely is the power role. They have the power to remove players from the game. This is a pointless discussion.
Thanks for pointing this out. I didn’t clarify it in my original post but later in a comment.
Even if the kill rate was 10%, the Killer is still technically the power role right? But then realistically, is a 10% kill rate enough for the power role?
-
@jonifire said:
Killer already is the power role. I convinced some of my friends to play dbd with me the last days and we rarely got out. I admit that they aren’t the best, but the killers weren‘t either.
I Play both roles and killer a bit more, because playing survivor feels miserable and killers are far too strong besides some. I‘m not the person as good as those survivors in videos, but I would say I‘m good.
When I play killer besides of some Autohaven maps most times it is no real challenge and it is too easy to get kills.
Shrinking the maps is also very bad in my opinion and makes the far too long gen times even more of a bad experience. I hate the knight map rework. I really liked the map before and now it’s my most hated map.
Nobody talks about why everybody gen rushs! It‘s because you got no chance if you don‘t play this game 24/7 and there is nothing else for survivor worth doing with everything being nerfed.
I would want to play this game more with friends, but it is just not enjoyable (on survivor side). So I mostly only play killer, which ends with a 4K or rarely with 0 kills, close games are rare. It‘s only stomp or get stomped.
I respect the points you made.
-
@Nazzzak said:
"If the Killer bias of 60% kill rate were to go away, say down to 50% or lower, would DBD still be DBD?"
The killrate only increased to 60% with update 6.1 (2022). I think it's fine at 60% but yeah, the game would still be DBD as the average killrate was like 51% before that (iirc).
At the end of the day, it's a game and a power "fantasy" will only go as far as your skill takes you. If being the power role means that a person who picks up the game today should be able to have the upper hand as killer against survivors who have played the game for alot longer, then it wouldn't bode well for the health and longevity of the game.
Also the argument seems to come down to kills vs escapes. Alot of people play this game without either in mind. Fun is subjective. Some people find kills that are too easy to be boring, and others find escapes that are too easy to be boring. Your question is very black and white and I don't think there is a proper answer besides the kill rate being at a level that keeps killers satisfied and enables survivors a *chance*, despite the differing goals of whatever team mates they've been matched with.
Let me ask a different question. Does the 60% kill rate hurt the game? If it went to 50% is this negligible?
Even if the kill rate was 10% the ability to eliminate still rests with the Killer making them the power role. Or does it?
Is there a fear of being eliminated? Should there be a fear of being eliminated? Does kill rate factor into this fear? If so, how? And how much is enough?
Btw I agree that people play for different reasons and get different satisfactions out of different aspects of the game unrelated to kills/escapes. I just think that the number of players who care about kills/escapes may be the majority.
-
@GeneralV said:
Yes, the killer should be the power role.
And that doesn't mean it should be impossible to escape. Remember the quote from No One Left Behind?
"Yeah, no #########.
But I believe we can outsmart and overthrow him if we work together.
Don't be predictable and selfish!"
Thats it, actually. The survivors should feel like they are in a dangerous situation, from which they can escape only if they work together.
And the killer, well:
"This is my world. And you can't ever leave." — Freddy Krueger
"He stops at nothing."
"Shining in the darkest dark, his eyes pierce the night and sting your soul."
"If you do not stop and catch your breath... she will."
"The night assists me and it's endless here." — The Ghost Face
The killer is the danger, the monster lurking in the fog. It is a role which has to feel threatening. And some people will say this feeling will disappear at some point, some will never feel it, but the game should make an effort to provide it to you.
And that goes beyond the killers themselves, obviously. The scenario and overall atmosphere of the game is also extremely important, something current DBD severely lacks. @Atsuka_Anarchy had a good discussion about this topic recently.
Give me Legion on reworked Coldwind and it is nothing special.
Give me Myers on Old Shelter Woods with a lot of fog and now we're talking!
I will always always always support a scarier atmosphere for the game.
-
@Rulebreaker said:
...We feel like we're seeing this kinda topic and question pop up more frequently...
We feel the killer should be the hunter in the fog if that makes sense. The killer should have an inherent advantage over lone survivors and be a threat, but survivors should be able...not fight back but not be completely helpless either at least as a team (a single survivor should never have the power to overcome the killer). We want a tug of war for the power where each side has to work for it instead of relying on perks or RNG maps. We might be rambling atm, but we want the killer to be a threat survivors need to worry about without having them hopeless (that would kill any sense of playing the game in our opinion) but with survivors not having to much power that theres nil threat from the killer (thered be no point playing killer then).
Your take is very reasonable. I agree with it. I especially agree that the Killer should have an inherent advantage over lone Survivors.
Do you believe that the Killer can be threat without the 40/60 bias? If there was no Killer bias and the survival/kill rate was 50/50, is the Killer a big enough threat?
-
@Eleghost said:
I think Killer should have more power than survivors and i believe there should be some sort buff killers get if they are struggling based on gens completed to survivors hooked. This could be speed buff until a certain hook criteria is met or information to assist the killer in maintaining pressure. Currently it seems the way to play is to tunnel the first survivor out immediately to maintain control/pressure.
It's hard to really address the issue without raising more issues though or making one side mad about it but for a fun game i would say they need something to make it so the killer is not down and out after some quick generator completions early on.
Personally I agree. It would be great if Killers had more ways of enacting and enforcing pressure in contrast to the more unpopular methods that exist.
-
@kin said:
in my opinion, this killer should be something that sets the rule for the game from which survivors should play, not the other way around, because killers are the main source of content in this game, the more varied and interesting it is, the better, and whether the survivors die in the match or not , the most important thing is the match itself, and not its result, will the survivor be unhappy if he dies in the fight against an interesting killer, in an interesting match? I don't think.
but at the same time, the survivors, of course, must have a way to defeat the killer, but not too strong. All these divine windows should not exist, generators like what determines the phase of the match (such as 5 generators early, 3 mid 0 late game) should be taken under stricter control, as well as the time spent surviving in the match (there should not be an opportunity to ######### in the first hook and the tunnel is also a problem) so yes.
If you perceive dbd as a party game in which people come primarily for emotions - killers should be done as the side of power, with all not even the most balanced decisions.
this is a terribly controversial answer to a controversial question
All of your ideas sound very reasonable. I agree with you.
-
@bloodyknife said:
You seriously asking this or just joking? If survivors were the power role then good luck finding a match when noone is willingly turning themselves into a punching bag for survivors.
There is definitely friction behind the idea of Killer being the power role. Some people say it is unjustifiably unfair, some say it is a justifiable bias.
If I may ask, how do you feel about the Killer being the power role?
-
Then they listend to the crying killer mains (no offens, but that is what happend)
I appreciate the respect. Sincerely.
For me I have been on the side of completely destroying the Killer as a Survivor. And honestly, it just wasn’t fun. It felt wrong. It felt boring to me. Completely having my way with the Killer as a Survivor felt like the game was broken. Ironically it feels more fun to die trying to escape as a Survivor than to completely bully the Killer (Which again I have done before).
However I understand that these are my own personal feelings and I may be in the minority. I’m sure there’s plenty of players who would love to bully the Killer all day everyday. Just for me personally it doesn’t feel like a fun game doing that.
-
@BOOTtoFACE said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618015#Comment_3618015
Yes, because killers are dealing with 4 survivors. 4 humans vs 1 human. They shouldn't make it impossible for survivors to escape or else it's just too easy for killers. A medium has to be reached then add 10% power to the killer and voila it's perfect. Make it 40/60.
That is where it currently is I believe, 40/60.
However this is a point of contention within the community. I agree with you, I believe it should be 40/60 as well.
-
@BOOTtoFACE said:
Can anyone really answer and say "Killers are the power role" when Nemesis can be body blocked by survivors and his own freakin' zombies?
I wait for a serious, no nonsense answer. (This will never happen)
Do you believe that Killers should be the power role?
-
The breakable walls in Badham work pretty well. There’s the two on each side of the preschool and two on each side of the house without the basement. Breaking those four walls makes chasing Survivors through those areas easier. It’s torture chasing a Survivor through that house who knows how to use the windows to their max potential.
-
@BlightedDolphin said:
Blight, Oni, and Wesker are all fairly well liked using those stats while Freddy, Clown, Legion, Trickster, Knight are all very disliked despite none of them being B tier or above.
To me it just looks like people like killers with chase powers that have more counter play than just hold W and pre drop.
I suspect this is the reason behind the numbers too.
-
@Smoe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617612#Comment_3617612
So you say, but without comparing it to a larger number, we won't know that for certain.
We do have a smaller number to compare it to actually. In the Polls section if I recall the final two most fun Killers to go against were Hillbilly and Demogorgan. So despite a smaller sample size the proportions stayed relatively similar.
-
@glitchboi said:
Scratched Mirror Myers is really scary on indoor maps and have spooked me plenty. Huntress's lullaby is genuinely unnerving, especially with the Baba Yaga skin. Dredge can be quite unnerving with his uncanny appearance as well as jumpscare-like power.
Oh yeah for sure. Those are all creepy absolutely.
-
@Smoe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617606#Comment_3617606
Now of course there will be slight variations but overall the deviations that stick out should be proportional to the whole.
If you compare 100,000 to 1000, it's going to be more than just a slight variation and the outliers could very much change entirely.
100 might be the minimal acceptable number, but it still only covers an incredibly small portion of an otherwise much larger playerbase and the more people you cover, the more accurate the stats will become, after all you said it yourself ''Greater data gives greater precision.''
To me, 1000 people only is simply too little an amount to be taken as anything concrete for any talks regarding changes to any killers.
Also any stats done by the community should be taken with a grain of salt no matter what.
The thing is that outlier percentage should be mostly the same despite the group size.
-
@Smoe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617593#Comment_3617593
In comparison to the entire survivor playerbase or even just half of the entire survivor playerbase? 1000 survivors is barely anything.
The idea is that diversity of data is mostly evenly interspersed. So whether you get 100, 1,000, or even 10,000+ the proportion of statistical data outliers should mostly be the same. Greater data gives greater precision.
Let’s say out of 10,000 people, 1,000 enjoy Apples over Bananas. In 1,000 people the number should be 100. In 100 people that number should be 10. Now of course there will be slight variations but overall the deviations that stick out should be proportional to the whole.
Again 100 is usually the minimum accepted number. There are exceptions but I think the in this case 1,000 while not the most ideal, is still definitely good enough to show the outliers.
It’s a question of why are there outliers.
-
@Smoe said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617593#Comment_3617593
In comparison to the entire survivor playerbase or even just half of the entire survivor playerbase? 1000 survivors is barely anything.
For sure. But many stats derived from the population hardly ever sample even close to the whole population. Usually it’s just a fraction. Random sampling, (while not perfect) still accounts for deviations in data. It’s not the perfect picture but it often times tells us that something is going on which may or may not relate to the hypothesis.
-
@Smoe said:
I wouldn't put too much stock into these stats as they don't really mean anything significant since they are only covering the opinions of 1000 Survivors and nothing more.
I can’t say that they don’t mean anything significant. It’s not perfect data (which is near impossible to obtain) but 1,000 more than accounts for statistical deviations. 100 is actually the minimum number.
-
@Leatherbilly said:
Introduction
Hello everyone. I'm here to address the fundamental problems of DBD's current design. The primary issue is not and has never been camping, and this misdiagnosis of the problem has been a significant red herring for a long time. I plan to address why the balance is so bad, what the Killer meta's response has been, and how to improve things.
In this post, I have created titles that explain the argument each paragraph makes. I invite you to read them all, but if you ever find a paragraph whose title seems so obvious as to be axiomatic, feel free to skip it.
Dead By Imbalance
All Killers Aren't Created Equally
The first fundamental problem is the disparity between killers. I won't spend much time on this, as it is axiomatic that Nurse, Blight and the like are leagues superior to Freddy, Trapper and the like. Far more important is the why underlying this imbalance. For a Killer to be viable, they must combine short chases with either mobility for map pressure/defense or stall. Many killers simply lack the toolkits to do this and thus lack any agency in chase.
Lack of Agency in Chases
If a Survivor is running towards Crotus Prenn main, that represents over a thirty second chase for a killer whose power doesn't shut off safe pallets or the main building window loops. Instead, such killers are required to run Bamboozle full time as a band-aid fix, as many windows just lack mindgames without it altogether. Specifically, many killers completely lack agency in chase and cannot control anything about the flow. If survivors run to Crotus main, you just have to eat the time penalty and likely lose two to three generators in the process.
Another example is the flashlight: if a survivor is going for a save and you're Nurse, Blight, Deathslinger or the like, it will take no investment nor commitment to chase to punish the flashlighter. Now imagine you're a Myers: what can you really do? The answer is unfortunately not much, because to injure them you have to fully commit to a chase and let your slug escape. It's just another problem that only low tiers really need to deal with.
Fundamentally, these killers are predictable, and they have to slowly walk up to you to pose any real threat, which means they have to invest significant time, sometimes dozens of seconds, to actually injure someone.
Disparate Objective Times
All of this wastes precious time that killers do not have, because all five generators can be done in under six minutes. If your Killer cannot secure a hit, catch up and secure another hit in under thirty seconds, you're relying on survivor misplays to succeed.
Additionally, poorly designed mechanics such as toolboxes are still in the game. Generators are essentially a Killer's health state, and simply by equipping an item, Killer now has less time to play the game. Their "health states" just start immediately reduced and there's nothing they can do about it. It's akin to the original Moris in DBD which used to ignore hook states and kill you on your first down.
Fundamentally, the Killer needs to get 9 hook states to win. If a game only lasts six minutes, you need 1.5 hooks per minute. Assuming you are using a 115% M1 killer, this means every sixty seconds you need to get three hits, plus the time to transport a survivor to hook and the time to patrol and find another survivor. That means you have spent less than 20 seconds per hit or you're losing chase.
Perks Make the Gap Wider
On top of all of this and likely having to run Bamboozle full time as a concession to map design, survivors get a free, massive gap opener with Exhaustion perks. Think of how long it takes to catch up to a Survivor who just used Sprint Burst: maybe 10, 15 seconds? Remember that this means once you catch up, you need to get a hit in 5 seconds to keep pace, and once you do, they will hold W key again with their speed boost as your attack cools down.
The kicker? Since every single Survivor is running these exhaustion perks, every single chase will start with you wasting 10 seconds to catch up, and remember, you need to secure at minimum 9 hooks to win as Killer. That means you are spending a minute and a half every game just catching up to a perk being activated, and again, you only have six minutes to start with. There is, again, no agency for the killer in this situation.
Add onto this perks that annihilate your momentum (Deliverance, Dead Hard, MFT, Unbreakabill, etc.) and all that progress you had is gone. When you're on such razor thin margins as needing a hit in under 20 seconds, you cannot afford to also deal with these perks.
Map Design
Map design exasperates the issue by having unavoidable god loops that are guaranteed to just waste your time. Multiple windows next to each other are a safe zone if you didn't bring Bamboozle, and loops such as the main building of most maps tend to have safe, unavoidable pallets. In the most egregious of cases, these safe loops also involve a window, such as Garden of Joy.
The issue is, again, if you only have 6 minutes to get 9 hooks, even if a god loop only wastes thirty seconds, you've lost almost 10% of your total game time to something that was completely unavoidable and outside of your control.
So on top of losing 25% of your perk slots to map design by needing Bamboozle, even with Bamboozle you're losing a big chunk of time automatically.
The Killer Meta
What is the Killer's response to all this? The answer is not and has never been camping. The optimal meta for Killer is and has always been TUNNELING. Kill a Survivor as quickly as possible, and they lose 25% of their repair efficiency. This is one half of the problem of why Killers tunnel: we simply don't have time to get 12 hooks.
BHVR Incentivizes Tunneling
The second half of the problem is that there is zero reason to ever switch targets once someone has been hooked once. Here's the math on Killer decision making:
If I hook a Survivor, they're now a third of the way dead. Once they're unhooked, it takes two hits to down them again due to the Endurance state. Then, they're 2/3rds dead. If I chase the savior, it will take two hits to down them because they're healthy. Then, they're 1/3rd dead.
It's plain to see what the optimal play is: once someone is hooked, target them relentlessly until they die, because being hooked has absolutely no penalty until it's the third time. Until a Survivor dies, you get nothing for hooking them, and their repair efficiency is still 100% once the Survivor is unhooked.
Put more succinctly, I can choose to get a kill after 9 hooks or after 3 hooks depending on who I target: which one do you think I'm going to pick?
The Solution
Firstly, know that this change would have to come with nerfs to Nurse and Blight at the very least, and potentially other top tier killers. However, the solution is evident: introduce a reward for hooking new survivors as an incentive to switch targets. We don't currently have time to switch targets, so give us time for hooking someone new.
It can be as simple and inelegant as a baseline painres effect for each survivor the first time they're hooked in a Trial. But until there is an incentive, the gameplay loop of DBD will forever be the same: find someone, tunnel them out, rinse repeat.
it's a boring, tedious and frustrating meta, and it has destroyed the enjoyment of both sides. These changes would diversity the Killer meta as well as remove some of the most toxic and frustrating moments of DBD.
TL;DR
Nerf Nurse/Blight, then add a baseline stall mechanic to reward the killer for switching targets
You’ve summed up very well how I feel about what’s going on with the game. I do feel that the Killer doesn’t have enough ways of slowing the game down enough.
-
@Vanishlord said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617127#Comment_3617127
Well, I have an xbox and a playstation and mainly play the xbox. I only play the playstation to play spiderman 2. There is a sale on xbox which is why I want to get a few games. I like a variety of different games. I want to try zombie games like dying light, RE. My friends recomend dying light but have not played RE.
Then I think the Resident Evil games will be your best bet!
-
If you’re looking for a highly sentimental story and you are sensitive to existential fear then I highly recommend Final Fantasy 16.
-
@Vanishlord said:
Just wondering as I am thinking about getting RE2+3 remastered. Any other recommendations?
Also anyone who has played the RE mastered 2+3, how hard are they?
What kind of story are you looking for?
-
Thanks for the answers everyone.
I have another question. When should I be revving the chainsaw?
-
@jajay119 said:
Seriously in recent weeks it's gotten beyod he pale. Survivor looping you too long? DC. Too many gens done too quickly? DC. The gates are powered? DC. Between this and the tunnelling and slugging going on right now the game is an absolute state. The DC issue is definitely more of a daytime issue, but it's getting rediculous. At least run a solid end game build or something to bring it back; like a NOED-Blood Warden-Devour Hope stack rather than waste everyone's time.
Yes, before anyone says it I know there are a lot of survivors DCs too, but at least that doesn't end the entire match.
Not really sure what I want from this thread; certainly no easy resolve I can see. More of just a rant I guess lol.
I think another factor at play is that the servers are a little unstable. There are Killers chasing mid chase that suddenly dc. Even me playing as Killer I have been disconnected mid game. The tally screen shows it as me who disconnected even though it was the game that kicked me out.
-
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to everyone! This has been a fun year in DBD and I really look forward to next year.
Be good! Or Krampus will take you away while you’re sleeping.
On a more serious note please be safe everybody.
🎄❄️🎁☃️🍪
-
Glenn would be so cool to have as a Survivor.
-
@LordGlint said:
Could just be abit of nonsensical humor. Plenty of devs have had fun with their game's loading screens.
That’s what I was figuring too, some dark humor.
-
Happy Holidays and Happy New Years everyone! Please everyone be safe!
🎁❄️☃️🎄
-
@DrDucky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615092#Comment_3615092
You just need to gage the strength of a loop and try to waste as much time as you can before dropping a pallet. With some exceptions where you need to pre drop or just burn a god pallet etc. But it is a huge chunk of the survivor's skill knowing and reacting to this. A good rule of thumb is, if you are not on death hook and healthy, then get as much value out of pallets as you can before dropping them. But if you are on death hook or injured and death hook especially then burn all the pallets you want, especially because by then the match is coming to an end so pallets literally do not matter then and you dying will be a much worse off thing for the team then a few pallets being gone.
This is some of the best advice I have ever seen for novices going into the intermediate skill level.
This answer would be perfect copied and pasted to the beginner advice and tips thread.
-
☺️☺️☺️
-
@TheArbiter said:
Perfectly in general or perfectly in solo q vs in a swf
I would say in general but optimal would have to be a 4-person swf. So maybe a swf with 4 survivors.
-
@Mooks said:
If you play on controller keep in mind you might get slower when you change directions on your joystick or if you don’t push it to the maximum. It’s unlikely this is really noticeable when running since you probably circle the joystick around but in my experience there are edge cases where this makes a difference in ‚speed‘ or rather acceleration..
This exactly might be it thank you so much for answering.