Huff
Huff
About
- Username
- Huff
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,181
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Jakasd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1524546#Comment_1524546
I do not see them as an obstacle or block me "Mentally" I always try to play the best I can simply if they have been 2 - 3 years and I 3 months, obviously they are going to beat me again and again and again without stopping because I do not know the I play like them
The problem is that simply as much as I do my best I will not be able to win and it is not fair that I lose all my games of the day against people who should not play
You see, that's simply not true. Somebody with a few months of experience can still beat somebody with 2-3 years. DbD allows a player to heavily turn the game in their favor through the use of items, offerings, and perks. On top of that, time played does not equal skill in a 1:1 ratio. Just because somebody has more time doesn't mean every situation like that the person with more time wins. Some people are slow learners, or just aren't that good in general. I for one am not afraid to admit that I've had the game for more than a year and while I wouldn't call myself terrible, I'd still say I'm pretty bad generally. There's bound to be plenty of people newer to the game that are much better than I am, and would therefore win in a theoretical match/battle/whatever you want to call it.
So no, just because it's 3 months vs. 2-3 years doesn't mean every match is going to just be you getting stomped out. Perhaps on average people that play longer are going to be better, but like I said that doesn't automatically mean that more time = more skill.
Also, I find it very weird that you say "it is not fair that I lose all my games of the day against people who should not play."
-
I think @IceCreamPrincess is pretty much right on the money with it. It works really well on M1 killers mostly, since they make the most use out of just walking up and attacking, and on specific killers it has some niche tricks with it. Like how with Demo/Pig you can use their alternate attack on the obsession to save stacks, or even with Trapper you can save stacks by picking up the obsession from a trap. Similarly with Trapper, if you have SBTFL and a non-obession is trapper, you can smack them for a free token, or you can even get 2 free tokens if you run the padded jaws (because 2 hits to take them down.) It also makes it a lot more dangerous for people to go for altruistic plays right in your face. Another thing with Hag, is that having less cooldown after an attack means that you can get ready to teleport even sooner, and won't miss an opportunity to hit somebody running away as much.
Like, I can't tell you how many times I've been playing a killer like Trapper, have had somebody run down into the basement right in front of me thinking they're going to make some awesome play in front of my face, only for me to just one-two them before they can even get to the hook.
-
@TruffleTurtle said:
To be fair for the most part the guys r quieter than the girls
I know you say most but there's also Jeff and Bill, who I would say are in the top 3 for the most noisy in the game along with Jane.
Also, you can reduce noise with perks, but not the size of your character.
-
@Jakasd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1523896#Comment_1523896
They are probably very good and the things I do make them laugh because I'm not at their "Level" so they play technically to annoy me
There is no rank to be toxic but it is always rank 1 - 4 in my case obv :/
You have to realize how flawed the ranking system is. People can derank for doing really well and rank up for not doing practically anything. I'm telling you, the moment you stop trying to view these ranks as a basis for skill, the better off you'll be.
-
I also hear people call others "boosted" because they play a certain way or use certain things. Like a killer might be called boosted for having to tunnel and mori everyone off first hook or running NOED since they can't win without it, or the opposite end with survivors running the "smol PP" DS/Unbreakable combo together.
-
Because people can't be bothered to run Detective's Hunch.
Seriously, imagine if Detective's Hunch was as meta, or even a little less, than DS. Nobody would ever run NOED because of the one perk being run, because the totems would always just be broken. On top of that hex perks as a whole would become relatively obsolete if everybody just always was figuring out where they were.
But no, it's easier to make a post about it instead.
-
@Jakasd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1523551#Comment_1523551
I read about it, I hope they fix it soon, it's not fun to play with toxic players rank 1 T_T
What difference does their rank make? Any kind of player can be toxic.
-
With such a radical point of view on the chat I don't know if I can change your mind.
But what about the people who actually enjoy the chat feature? Just take it away from them? That alone should be reason enough to keep it. Just allow people to opt out of the chat if they dislike it that much; I see no reason to take it away from the other people that do.
-
Dull key is the purple tier one. It is a "hatch key."
-
Yes, some people do that. Not me personally. If the default look of a character is boring to me then just adding blood on it won't make it that much better. Either way though, I'll still pick out a piece or two of the bloody stuff to put on if it ends up making my character look good.
-
I don't think it's actually that many people, but that being said, people like all sorts of strange things.
-
@DrunkenWrench said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1523734#Comment_1523734
Sadly, I did state that DBD is not the only source of genuine high amounts of racism, and no, I do not hold any bias against DbD
"DBD is the only one that has a tremendously racist counterside to its community."
This is a direct quote from you. "Only one," you said.
-
@PigMainClaudette said:
This is just a reminder that yes, there are indeed survivors who do bones in order to try and counter NoED. These players also generally don't gen-rush.
When these players come here and say that NoED is indeed a terrible perk and needs changing, they're right. They do not need to "git gud", they do not need to hear "Just do bones." and they do NOT need to hear a garbage spiel about how easy the perk is to counter, the killer is "oNlY pLaYiNg WiTh 3 PeRkS!" or the points of DS/BT/DH/UB being perks and can be stacked.
To now make the "Do bones" argument null and void, I will now highlight every way that this argument is totally invalid:
- Survivor perks, such as Decisive Strike and Unbreakable are used with the hope that they are NEVER ACTIVATED. Well, for a lot of their users anyway. People can claim this as being perks down, much like the arguments for NoED.
- The so-called Survivor equivelant, Adrenaline, is only a small and temporary boost while NoED is permanent if activated. Yes, the health state is temporary, but there are several killers that have base-kit instant downs so this really shouldn't be THAT big of an issue.
- NoED does not discriminate between those who have done totems and those who do not. This leads to several cases like mine where I am commonly doing 3-4 dull totems MYSELF and getting killed after only one hit and hook. I am being punished for others failing, not my own failure. I know that Survivor is technically a team game, but there is a point where the individual should not be punished for the failures of the team.
- It creates bad habits. Rather than actually adapting to applying pressure through various means, or learning how to improve in chases, NoED is used as a safety net in order to get kills that one would not normally be able to achieve, making them think that they are more skilled than they actually are. Rather than getting better at their role, they are telling others to do way more work because they refuse to adapt.
- Counters to a majority of Survivor perks are merely a change in mindset or playstyle, such as trading hooks to apply pressure and avoid Decisive Strike AND Borrowed Time. NoED requires survivors to go out of their way in order to stop one of your perks.
- The "counters" are also indirect and limited, also chewing up valuable perk slots for other perks to counter some of the more unsavoury tactics that killers use and are not perk dependent.
Main point here is that yes, I do the dull totems. They are more bloodpoints and cancel the perk. I AM NORMALLY THE ONE TO GET HIT BY IT. Most of these games, it is also the first hook that I will be placed on and will also ultimately kill me.
There are also many issues that I have with NoED on a fundamental level as a perk, especially with it's activation for both general activation and notification of it's activity. Every other Hex perk requires ONE totem to be destroyed, where as NoED can have up to 5 required, before endgame.
All exposure effects outside of NoED and Devour Hope also give instant notification. Devour Hope also has a lengthy list of requirements to activate outside of "be loosing" in order to achieve the same effect. Devour Hope is also a TEACHABLE perk, one that should be more powerful than base-perks as you have to do a lot more work for them to become available.
So, fellow killers, while you lot think up of an actual excuse for NoED being the way it is, I'll be off actually doing the damn bones whenever I decide to indulge in a little bit of Survivor while I try to progress my Archives. In the meantime, whenever any of you argue about Decisive Strike, Borrowed Time, Unbreakable just remember this advice, since it's ok for YOU to give it: Just don't tunnel, camp or slug. Never mind that the survivor ran at you or started working on that generator or unhooking that other survivor in your face. Kinda hypocritical, isn't it? That's how I feel every time I hear the phrase "just do bones".
I did them, so now what?
-Unbreakable/DS being not used still means the survivors are getting to live/are not in danger. You think this is a bad trade off because they are using less perks?
-I don't care about Adrenaline.
-NOED working on any survivor doesn't mean anything. If its conditions are met, then it works. Just like any other thing. Like DS, doesn't differentiate between "actual" tunneling or a survivor throwing themselves in the way of it. NOED can also be stopped before it activates, unlike some of the other survivor perks (which also can appear in a game up to 4x.)
-Lots of perks create bad habits. I could say the exact same "Rather than getting better at their role they are telling others to do way more work because they refuse to adapt" thing about tons of other things.
-At some point, there isn't enough room to trade hooks every single time. You can't play every game like "Hook survivor #1, then survivor #2, then survivor #3, etc." because there isn't enough time. The unhooked survivor will just run off to get healed and do gens, or if you chase/tunnel them instead then the unhooker just gets to sit on the floor and doesn't lose a life on hook. That's why NOED is so effective, because the games end up finishing extremely fast and nobody ever takes the time to find all the bones. Switch up your playstyle to trade hooks like that, see how much better your games go.
-Yea, counters in the game chew up your available slots. That's kind of how counters tend to go: people bring Iron Will to counter killers that rely on hearing. On the other hand, Stridor can be brought to counter that. People bring Calm Spirit to counter killers that make you scream like Doc or killers with Infectious Fright. Or, the classic "DS to counter tunneling" example. This isn't an exception: just bring a perk to counter NOED if you hate running into it that much. People don't usually seem to have many problems running things to counter other things, except for when it just happens to be NOED.
I'm not even a NOED user myself, and I dislike going against it because I agree it's a way to cheese some kills when you didn't do much, but you did some bones. Then you still got hit with NOED. That doesn't mean you "did them." It means you did some.
I'll give you a piece of pro advice: use Detective's Hunch. If you still keep getting hit with NOED after equipping that, it just means you're not using the perk properly. No way you should be getting smacked with NOED all the time if you're clearing all 5 totems (which I easily do when I end up bringing the perk.) Or, if you're one of those people who's going to screech at the thought of obtaining a DLC perk, use the free option: Small Game. Hell, just knowing totem spawns allows me to clear like 3 or 4 totems if I decide to totem hunt while playing survivor, at least depending on the map (Lery's and another one or two maps are a little harder). Again, not a fan of NOED myself but to say "I did bones. You need a new excuse," is just laughable.
-
@slunder said:
Killer mains tend to complain about survivor meta when they are the ones that cause it to happen in the first place. This also applies to some survivors, but mostly it is just killers that do this. This does not apply to every killer player.
Here is what they do: they camp and tunnel a survivor to death and then, in such a way that it is impossible for that survivor to escape without decisive strike. Then, the fun build survivor that just wanted to have fun realizes that he does not stand a chance because the killers he goes against will camp and tunnel if they are losing. He used decisive strike and borrowed time, and then the killer mains ask why they get decisive strike to be used unfairly.
But think of it: most survivors run decisive strike and borrowed time to counter tunnelers and campers, not to be a dickhead. Maybe a side effect from decisive is that the survivor that was tunneled last game ends up using DS for countering this, but he ends up using it after 59 seconds. So, this is my message: killer mains, if you ever camp or tunnel, fine, it is in the game, but stop bitching when you realize survivors are using counter perks. Survivors do not want to lose instantly without being able to do anything, which is why they run the perk. I, myself, used to avoid meta perks, but really, after getting those free wins strats killers, I decided to switch to use borrowed or decisive.
If you do not tunnel or camp, then you complaints are legit and you deserve to argue. However, if you are a killer main that tunnels and then cry about survivors using counter-play, then you are just entitled to your victory.
****This post can also be applied to survivors that are t-bagging and stuff like that and then complain about camping, but they are more rare, so yea.****
I don't tunnel or camp unless somebody crosses me (like obviously having DS and trying to get me to chase them and then hopping into a locker.) Yet still survivors will constantly pull dickhead maneuvers in my games. Not all of them, but it's very very often since so many survivors run those perks. It's almost every single game. I don't even like to be that dramatic person that says "EVERY SINGLE TIME BLAH BLAH" or anything, but it is quite literally almost every single game I play killer that I get a survivor trying to pull some scumbag play with a second chance perk (DS in a locker/Unbreakable into a pallet stun/etc.) So tell me, why do they use those perks in that way even when I don't intentionally play like a jerk? I'm not too sure it has anything to do with "countering" a playstyle they can visibly see they aren't going up against. Pretty sure it has more to do with the fact that people just love to run OP things, like Unbreakable+DS, the classic "smol PP" build. Or, the killer equivalent, mori anybody they can off first hook + NOED.
It's just kinda illogical to title this post "killer mains, do not complain about things that you cause." I could just as easily point the finger at survivors and say "survivors you cause killers to play like this because of your gen rushing and abusing god loops" or something. That doesn't make it any more or less the survivors' fault. It's just individually up to each player how they're going to play. Personally, I don't run "OP" things usually. I try to avoid NOED and DS primarily because everybody hates those, but they just don't really interest me anyway because I like other perks a little better.
That being said though, if we're going to be pointing fingers and placing blame here, then I gotta say that even though by default I play killer decently to the survivors (not being a jerk) I won't hesitate to pull a complete 180 if somebody does try to pull that crap on me. If somebody wants to act like they're invulnerable in front of me because of their perk, I'll show them exactly how they aren't. At that point, it will be their fault for bringing the camping and tunneling upon themselves. Then I can say "survivor mains, do not complain about things that you cause." :)
-
I think it's pretty clear you're writing this with a bias against DbD. That whole "I've seen [BAD WORD], more sickening than your cerebrum could ever perceive" crap sounds goofy to me, because otherwise you wouldn't be making such a big deal about people being mean to you in a video game.
I'm not condoning racism in any way, and in fact I wouldn't mind if a basic filter were added in or whatever but... I just can't take you seriously when you try to act like DbD is this outlier when it comes to this stuff. Toooons of games are like that. Even off of video games, people are like that.
I would probably take you more seriously if you didn't say DbD is the ONLY game where there's a tremendously racist counterside or whatever, if you didn't say "I've seen [BAD WORD], more sickening than your cerebrum could ever perceive," and if you didn't act like literally every single game you play has people just blowing you up with racism afterwards. I'll, every once in a while have somebody say "the N word" or tell me to kill myself or something, but even if that was a thing that happened literally every single game, you know what I would do? Stop reading the chat, and just play the game.
Once again, I don't condone that stuff whatsoever so don't try to twist it around into that. Just seriously, look at the things you say and ask yourself if people saying mean things on the internet warrants this amount of dramatics.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1518787#Comment_1518787
Yeah, that "argument" isn't new either. Happens every time there's societal progress.
Like today. Hence my use of the phrase "today's people."
I don't know what point you're trying to make here.
-
@ProfoundEnding said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1518836#Comment_1518836
If you wore her bottoms with a different top they would clip tremendously, since the bottoms extend past her waist.
And you're telling me you couldn't separate it like they have with Claudette's dresses?
-
Dude I get what you're saying. You're worried that with how (some) people are crying out for FNaF and trying to push things that "wouldn't work" in DbD, that something wild like Human Centipede (or the doctor from it or whatever) could make it in.
I think if you're being realistic though, it more than likely isn't going to happen. I'll tell you though, if they ever ended up making a deal to bring in the FNaF franchise for good, I wouldn't be surprised if Human Centipede would be an upcoming license after that. If you ask me, any franchise would be possible after that.
-
- Jane
-
@ProfoundEnding said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1518813#Comment_1518813
Its because all dresses up until this point split at the waist. Janes doesn't. Hers splits like above the belly button.
And you're telling me you couldn't have the top portion of the dress worn with the bottom covered up by her pants if you wanted? Or the opposite, with the bottom/skirt part of the dress flowing and having a different top? I just don't get why where the dress splits would prevent a cosmetic set from being able to be mixed with others.
-
@kamisen said:
@EmpireWinner I think it's fine when it's a dress or something along the lines of... I didn't get the logic when it came to the Nea skin, but who am I to judge?
@Demonl3y And Jane as well!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Claudette has a skin (2 if you count the recolor from the rift) where she has a dress, and they're still perfectly mixable. I don't understand why other cosmetics wouldn't work the same way.
Hell, I'm pretty sure there's a glitch where people can split up the Nea outfit and I've seen it with individual pieces (the headpiece without the hoodie for sure) and I didn't even notice any problems.
I can kinda understand the "clipping" argument for having sets, but I don't completely understand it when they're barely any different model-wise from the original character. What do I know though? I'm just a player, I don't design the stuff..
-
@Komodo16 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1517706#Comment_1517706
Hey man dont blame me I just hate people making assumptions about me and not listening to what im saying
I understand your point of view, even if some people here think it might have been distasteful the way you put it. I'm just referring to the whole thread turning from "Nea's weird armpit color" to "this is the grooming norm in this country, and this is the grooming norm in that country."
Completely derailed from what this thread was originally about.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1517706#Comment_1517706
I was right with you until you went with "today's people", like discussion drift is a new phenomenon instead of a human thing that has existed since we started communicating.
I say "today's people" because everything nowadays has to be about being accepting and inclusive and all that. Like one person can't say an arguably distasteful thing about body hair or the whole thread goes off topic, just like what happened here. That's why I say "today's people" and even more so why I say "in this sort of fashion."
But yes. You're totally right, discussion drift existed before anybody alive today existed. That's irrelevant though. Just like the grooming norm discussion. Thanks.
-
Amazing how off track people are getting here.
OP is talking about Nea's armpit color. This thread isn't about grooming norms.
Leave it to today's people to derail the conversation in this sort of fashion though.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
How many of you that play killer, have ever had a survivor scare the bejesus out of you??? 😱
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/S86D61LT4O8T/37bed712-9ba0-4029-a1df-50f8cfaf050a.gif
Yesterday I was playing as Pig and while crouched I noticed a scratch mark and so I thought I would be smart and scare the survivor near a gen that was barely touched, so I go through a pallet and BAM! This Blendette stuns me and I nearly dropped my coffee. 😂 I was like “killer?? Where?!?” Was the funniest match I’ve had in a while.
I've had that happen to me a single time, except I wasn't even going to check anything specifically. I believe I was just playing Trapper and walking around to collect traps, and I walked through a pallet not really thinking anything of it and my ears just get blasted with the slam sound effect and I jumped a little bit as I realized what this Meg just did.
-
@Wylesong said:
I am seeing not just mods but other players defending the whole Rank means nothing and it is a soft way of determining a players skill. They also say it just means that player plays a ton.
This is simply not true. You do not just get to red rank killer or survivor by playing 1000 hours and sucking. You need to do things to meet criteria to pip and rank up.
As survivor you need to do gens and save people and win chases. You cant just see the killer and fall on the ground and go oops i am dead but I played 1000 hours so I am ranked now. It does not work like that.
As killer you cannot see the survivors and lose chases and not pressure gens and expect to rank.
I do agree yes Ranking is a bit easy but I have almost 1000 hours of play and never been Rank 1 on either side. I mean by what people are saying I should be rank 1 because I play a lot but it simply is not true. I have some good games and some bad games. Some games I Pip and some I DePip.
Rank DOES equal skill because it shows the killer can and does know how to win chases. They have an idea of what perks work together and how to apply pressure. On survivor side it shows the survivor knows how to loop and win chases and can save fellow players and do gens without worry.
Overall I do not mean to seem rude but if rank never mattered then why have any rank or matchmaking system? It is because even the developers know you cannot put a Rank 1 with a Rank 10-20 and think they are at the same level of skill because it is not simply just play time but it is SKILL.
Sorry just wanted to put that out there and I know it is just another persons dumb opinion so please ignore me. I hope you all have a good weekend and your matches be great.
-If you say you have never seen a rank 1 that's bad at the game you're either lying or just have incredible luck. There's plenty of bad rank 1s. So what you are saying here is "simply not true."
-You admit yourself ranking is easy. Just because you yourself never hit rank 1 yet on either side doesn't mean that it's not easy to do.
-As previously mentioned, there are plenty of baddies at rank 1. With this in mind, saying "Rank DOES equal skill" is just straight false. On top of that, a killer can utterly demolish a team in almost no time at all and depip from that. According to your "Rank equals skill" logic, that means that the killer is actually not as good because he's depipping, even though he utterly demolished the team. On the other hand as survivor, a survivor can play in a detrimental way to their team and still pip out of it. That doesn't mean they're good because they rank up more often by playing like that.
I'm not saying it's a great system or even that the matchmaking is good, but there's a good reason that people don't take the rank system seriously. It's a very flawed system and thus trying to base somebody's "skill" off of it will similarly lead to a flawed outcome. Of course if somebody is completely god awful at the game and die within the first 5 seconds every match, then yeah they're going to depip. On the other hand, if somebody plays like a legend every single game they're going to more easily rise to rank 1. The important thing to keep in mind though is that just because those things are true, doesn't mean that rank automatically equals skill. Lower rank players can still be good and high rank players can still be bad. It's just as I said before, basing your opinion off a flawed system like that will give you a similarly flawed opinion. No disrespect or anything, I just disagree very much that "rank equals skill."
-
Probably because they disabled the DC penalties I guess, and people don't wanna play when every game is going to be an abnormal game.
-
@SpaceCoconut said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1506397#Comment_1506397
They're referring to the hackers that forces some streamers to have unwarranted matchmaking bans of several hours.
Rather than making anyone unbannable, it would probably just be better to have a system that works and that can't be hacked so easily...
Well in response to your own post my thought was "Yeah, and hackers will probably find a way to send streamers to the salt mines too." Then that thought lead me to think what you wrote, about having a better system. I personally think either system would be fine, but it's not like it's even going to matter what system they have if it can be abused that easily. It makes me wonder why they even removed the DC penalties and then added them back in if they didn't even actually fix the issue.
At this point it's discouraging me to play in general now. I don't want to play with people if they don't want to play the game. I don't even mind some light farming here and there, or if the DCs were just once in a while, but it's so widespread. I don't want to wait in queue and play a game like 3 or 4 times just to get a normal game.
Somebody shared a clip of Pug doing it in such a disgusting way, and it just shows how unafraid people are to DC. It's the exact reason I don't think streamers should just get a free pass on that.
-
@Steel_Eyed said:
Make the big streamers unbannable is probably the next step.
Why should somebody get special privileges/free disconnects? Just because they stream? I don't exactly get what you mean by "unbannable" but either way, why?
-
@Squirrel_Thicc said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1499762#Comment_1499762
It's shoving your nose in my business when you care SO much about what I spend my money on. (Not you in particular just in general).
I understand what you mean but at that point you're fighting fire with fire.
-
@MusicNerd_TC said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1499646#Comment_1499646
There's a difference between shaming and having an opinion.
Yeah, what this guy said. ^
I'm not so sure that wanting to make a statement against what a company is doing is necessarily "shoving your nose in other peoples' business" when the choices the company makes will affect them too...
I'm not even somebody who tunnels people with whatever certain cosmetics (unless they make themselves really obvious and bright with them.) I just think if people want to play a certain way, even if that's tunneling somebody with a certain cosmetic, then it seems more like shoving your nose into somebody's business telling them to stop. Or at least it's just as much of that as them tunneling somebody with a certain cosmetic.
-
You have to give them credit, they ignored some of the newer characters for a long time like Adam. They're finally giving some of the newer characters some cosmetics.
I can't say I disagree with you though... Been seeing a lot of cosmetics for Megatron lately.
-
@CheyeneKL said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1499099#Comment_1499099
I've had a LOT of matches where the hatch escape was extremely close. It usually happens when I'm slugged for the 4k and I already know where the hatch is when I go down. I have multiple clips of Bubbas hoofing it to me, only to BARELY miss grabbing me off the ground in time LOL
Other matches I've been in a chase while injured and I'm lucky enough to make it to the hatch as the killer smacks me.
MANY of my hatch escapes have been close enough that the killer would have had an easy time grabbing me.
I think the newer end game mechanic is enough, there isn't really any reason to add the hatch grab back in. If the killer, who has complete freedom to run around, does not find the hatch in time to shut it, that's that. I didn't play DBD before they changed how the hatch worked, but it sounds like the last one alive had a lot better chances of escaping than they currently do now, considering you used to not be able to close the hatch as the killer.
Keys are a different subject but even then, I don't think players bringing an iridescent item deserve to be able to be grabbed out of their escape, but dat just my onion.
I can't exactly say my experiences will be the same as everybody, so fair enough if your games are more like that than mine are. I just mostly don't like the fact that I can kick a hatch even if I find it first and the survivor just has to follow me around and then just run up and unlock it. If I kick the hatch, they can go for the doors. If I leave to go guard the doors and they have a key, they literally have me checkmated. They can go for the door if I stand on hatch and if I leave hatch they get the hatch.
I would agree a little more though if keys couldn't be looted from chests, and didn't come in 2 different rarities that allow hatch to open (iridescent/very rare.) But I mean, I don't find myself in many of those situations anyway so I don't exactly care that much either way.
-
@CheyeneKL said:
If he brought a key then he gets to use it on the hatch if he finds it. You have other counters, such as:
1. Killing him before the hatch spawns
2. Shutting the hatch before anyone else can jump in.
Hatch grabs would make keys a bit of a waste... as iridescent items.
I can understand why you don't like multiple people escaping through the hatch but just make sure you shut it before other people jump in. Whenever I've used a key with another person, the killer has decided to whack us instead of just keeping his cool and closing the hatch.
Just saying, even if a key carrier dies a team mate often knows they have a key and will pick it up after them. At least until the new Franklin's existed, there was no way to remove a key from a game. Even now, it takes what, 90 seconds to make the item get eaten up? Even if you try to guard it you're kind of shooting yourself in the foot anyway by giving them 90 seconds of free time, basically like longer global version of DS.
Also, most people with a key won't open the hatch unless they have team mates with them. I have almost never seen a situation where there's multiple people sitting on hatch, while the killer is close enough to go for a grab/kick the hatch closed. The only time was when I myself had a key and hook bombed somebody where I just happened to find a key in the basement last minute and the killer just happened to hook one of my team mates near the hatch (I had no idea it was even there.)
I just personally wouldn't mind hatch grabs being back. It would only really make a difference 1v1 and if it's that close for the killer to grab, it was either mere seconds off from being a kill anyway or it's somebody that's taking the hatch right in front of the killer because of a dumb reason (teabagging on the hatch or whatever.) Not saying your position is invalid, but I just want to bring up that it's pretty rare for a situation like that to happen unless it's very very close.
-
After reading this post I too feel like I've gotten Insta-Downs. Especially the guy saying "pay 2 win premium killer."
-
Glad to hear it's back. I checked the patch notes and didn't see it, but either way I'm glad to know. :)
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1496866#Comment_1496866
I thought the DC penalties had been re-implemented? I haven't tried disconnecting to see for myself or anything, but other posts on the forums have made it sound like the penalties are back.
I mean maybe I'm incorrect. I hope I'm incorrect. Last I heard, they were disabled because of some hacker stuff going on.
Anyway, if you know where you saw that said or whatever, please link me it because I don't want to spread misinformation. :P Also, I want to know if I've also just been getting mass amounts of people disconnecting even though the penalties are back. I've had multiple games in a row with disconnects recently. More of them than not, in fact.
-
It wouldn't necessarily make sense, but...
I like to call Repressed Alliance "Tickle Fight" because of its icon.
-
Yes. It's because they took out the DC penalties and people are babies.
-
I love this post.
I'm all for inclusion and all but seriously... It's so obvious when companies say things to pander rather than to actually address an issue.
-
I'm so glad I wasn't having a stroke when I tried doing the flashlight challenge earlier. It was so weird not being able to use the flashlight properly.
-
@1800GENMEND said:
Survivors should not be forced to participate in a match where the killer refuses to play the game.
Since survivors cannot disconnect from the game without consequences when a killer decides not to play the game but rather farms points without the intent of killing or slug survivors repeatedly without the intent of killing them, or AFK with the purpose of de-ranking, they should be able to discourage this type of behavior by making it bannable.
You cannot be serious when you say that the killer not killing the survivors should be bannable.
Sandbagging somebody in a corner? Sure, that's holding them in the game and forcing them to DC. Killer just not killing the survivors? Hell no, no thank you. That's a normal thing for me to do when I'm not feeling like I want to play dirty. I'll frequently hook people up to death hook and then just chase them regularly but not death hook them after, because sometimes I like to let people go. Why in the world should that be bannable?
If you don't want to be held in the game as hostage that's fine. But if you don't even feel like playing the game normally then why log on? Just disconnect and stop playing for a while.
-
@claudetterealness said:
@Huff you have too much time on your hands to be writing an essay like this and I won't be reading it
That "essay" is about 2, maybe 3 paragraphs worth of typing that was only done in a few minutes. If that's too much for you then maybe you need to brush up on your reading skills. Don't know if you're illiterate or just refuse to see any point of view except yours.
But hey... People that are selfish enough to DC, it wouldn't surprised me that they're also selfish enough to just plug their ears and go "LAH LAH LAH LAH I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"
Enjoy being willfully ignorant. :)
-
I suspect it sometimes and I've asked survivors, but I never accuse them outright. I never understood when killers do that. Just yesterday I was playing survivor and I went overly altruistic even though I almost exclusively solo just because I didn't really care if I died, and my homie Jane was in trouble. I just ate the hook in a trade (it was endgame collapse) and this facecamping Legion said something accusing us of being in SWF. Probably just because everybody got out.
I mean, if you're 100% sure they're lying then I understand what you mean. But how do you know?
-
I actually am with you on part of this. I mean, I don't think she's "easy" or "OP" necessarily, I just really dislike the way she plays. I feel like most Pigs I go against just trap one person and constantly harass them. Literally just within the past 24 hours I went against exactly that: a Pig that downed this Meg, put a helmet on her, and just "proxy camped" her and went after her any time somebody picked her up. 2 gens were also done just after the Meg got her helmet, so her timer was ticking and Meg just couldn't even do much about it.
Again, I don't think she's OP per se, but I really hate playing against her. She's one of my least favorites in the game because I know it's just going to be a game of waiting around til the person on their helmet dies because she just won't leave them alone.
Also, since I've had this sort of response to my criticisms of Pig, it's not about if it's a "good" strategy or not (in terms of winning the game.) My complains stem from a similar place of people that hate playing against something like basement Bubba. I don't think anybody thinks Bubba is OP, but (at least before his change when he could just infinite rev) I don't think anybody really liked being against one, because it's just boring as all hell and isn't engaging to play against. At least if you're asking me.
-
@Flyguy115 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1492796#Comment_1492796
very well said .
Ty ;)
-
I don't think many people do care, but hey, you gotta have some sort of filler for the rift.
-
I'm not surprised to see that in the slightest. I want to know how old that clip is though, because it can't be that old being on Dead Dawg.
I remember back when the whole DC penalty debate was going on, back before they even were implemented, he did a podcast where it was one side vs. the other on why DCs should or shouldn't be punished, and obviously Pug was on the "shouldn't be punished" side.
I don't even watch the dude but I already have a complete lack of respect for him. His tone just screams "manbaby." Clips like this where people do this ######### literally live on stream need to be dealt with and peoples' accounts suspended or something. I don't care if DC penalties are in right now or not, there's no excuse not to punish people just doing it blatantly on stream like that.
-
@claudetterealness said:
@Carpemortum you're delusional if you think there is no validity in that 'excuse' ... this game is currently complete horse ######### & if you read through the forums on the countless bug reporting and in-game problems people are experiencing, you'd see that MANY people are angry, fixing actual problems (which there is an abundance of and have been for a LONG time) should be a priority.
I've never in my life known of a game that has so many problems 4 years after it was made LOOL
If you read through the forums before the penalties existed, and even now that they got removed again, you'd see that people would complain about DCing instead. Yet you conveniently forget that when bringing up that people on the forums complain about buggy experiences. I'm not saying the game doesn't have bugs, but people complained just as much if not more about people constantly DCing before. Another reason it's absolutely stupid that you say "if you read through the forums" is because you don't seem to realize how many people will just DC if they're allowed to, just because it's a killer they don't like or whatnot. That has nothing to do with buggy games. Again I'm not defending DbD but mocking people who want the DC penalties back, especially with your "if you read the forums" drivel, is nothing more than a big sign for you to wave around that says "I have nothing useful to contribute around here and I'd rather mock people who have legitimate concerns." You say that fixing "actual" problems should be a priority, as if you imply that having people DC practically every single game isn't an "actual" problem. Get real dude. Even if there was 0 bugs, people would still quit because "omg Freddy OP" or whatever.
If you don't like the bugs, then don't deal with them. Go play singleplayer games instead. They seem more up your alley. You can quit them at any time.
-
@zoozoom6 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1492623#Comment_1492623
yeah thats part of the problem also i said "the measure of victory" because its not one amoung many it is the only one
Yeah that's part of the problem and also I said " 'measure of victory' that pretty much everybody agrees is busted and doesn't make any sense " because it's a bad system and nobody that knows how it works actually takes it as the determining factor for a "win" or not.