ImNotBobDylan
ImNotBobDylan
About
- Username
- ImNotBobDylan
- Joined
- Visits
- 768
- Last Active
Comments
-
@kizuati said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205405#Comment_3205405
Well actually - it's only wallhacks and aimbots we can't prevent effectively.
Speed hacks though? Literally just don't blindly trust the client. The client tells the server their inputs,server responds whether or not that movement is valid. Client compensates with a bit of prediction to account for latency..
You know...like any normal game.
Not sure about this one tbh but collisions seem to be handled server-side, so there must be a reason why they don't do validation for regular trajectories, and I guess that's to avoid rubberbanding.
-
@kizuati said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205405#Comment_3205405
It's not that they can run code server side. It's just that their back-end is that ######### bad. You ask the servers to spawn a bot and they just go "seems good"
They wouldn't name themselves c_spawnbot() though.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205527#Comment_3205527
They're... both within line of sight of at least one gen, the left one in LoS of multiple. Thats fine if you want to camp that position and force it into a three gen (either from the bad grouping visible, or a possible offscreen closer third gen,) but it pretty much requires you to do so if you want to get any value from those hexes.
And since one of them is Devour Hope, you're going to be required to move away from the hook to be able to get any value out of it, meaning you either need to hook people away from the 3 gen, or just never get devour stacks anyway.
From my experience you're almost always required to play around your Devour totem if you want to get any value from it, that includes finding an early 3-gen camp location around the totem, ignoring entire parts of the map, dropping chases to come back and defend it, etc. Playing normally and hoping that the survivors won't find the totems, not only rarely works, but is asking for RNG to dictate whether you win or lose, which is paradoxically what OP complains about.
So, I would much rather have the totem be visible to everyone including me, then I can at least predict logically what the survivors will do. There is one particular spot on one of the Coldwind maps where the totem is completely in the middle of a field without any cover nearby, the first time I saw it I thought it was horrible RNG, and yet I haven't ever seen survivors manage to cleanse it successfully.
Also from a balance perspective, it is much fairer for survivors if they can easily locate the Devour totem, rather than lose the game because the totem was well hidden and they didn't find it in time. (I think the totem aura is revealed to survivors anyway after a while - although I don't know precisely how it works)
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
Absolute gem I got doing my nurse daily
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/G3ENBNTENOFN/inked20220923230508-1.jpg
I would actually be pretty happy with this. Both totems in the same place so you have a clear region to patrol between hooks. You are playing Nurse so you can very quickly go back there. Also this hill looks quite good with LOS to the totem so survivors will almost definitely take hits trying to cleanse it.
In my experience the worst RNG is when totems are scattered across the map. It's not very relevant that the totems are well hidden, survivors will end up finding them anyway, and then they will have an easier time cleansing them if you don't have LOS.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205312#Comment_3205312
- The server uptime change was just an example of one of the changes they're working on. It's apparently being implemented as part of a larger package of changes in Q4.
- They do care about cheaters, if they didn't they wouldn't be devoting resources to constantly banning them and to the anti-cheat server side changes they're working on.
- Yes, Behaviour is right to devote resources to detecting client side cheats both blatant and subtle. And it sounds like Pug is blaming the victims of cheating for the cheaters' bad behaviour.
A change like server uptime reduction has no reason to wait until Q4. Streamers are being held hostage right now. Hacking is a game of cat and mouse. After they push a batch of changes, the hackers will find a new exploit in 1 week. If they need to wait a quarter every time they want to update the anti-cheat, that means streamers can play 1 week every 3 months.
In an ideal world, your bullets would make sense. In the real world, things like WH, movement boost and auto-DH are straight up impossible to prevent (they are just flaws in UE). Experimentally, we've only seen the DBD cheating situation get worse month after month despite the measures that were implemented, streamers are being targeted by exploits that have been existing for years, and in the mean time, hackers seem to like the confrontation with the developers more and more (I can't see any reason to hold streamers publicly on stream except to taunt the developers). I saw a few weeks ago someone on the forums share a very concerning video of cheater playing with name "c_spawnBot()" and actually managing to spawn bots in the game, which to me seems to indicate that hackers can now run code server-side, so by the time the new server-side counter-measures will be implemented, hackers will have compromised the server and there will be a whole variety of new obvious cheats.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205143#Comment_3205143
I don't remember ever having rubber banding to that extent, no.
And actually the streamers do complain about people flying everywhere in addition to the complaints about stream sniping and the game being taken hostage. The latter two complaints are more serious but they do specifically explicitly complain about the other cheats as well, both blatant and subtle.
Finally you're confusing something taking a while to program with not being a high development priority.
Reducing the server uptime from 2 hours to 1, doesn't sound like something that really takes a lots of time and resources to implement... and for that measure to be taken, multiple top killer streamers had to threaten to stop playing. In the mean time, we get a complete Mori rework that most people seem to already hate and literally nobody asked for. Idk, looks like a priority problem to me.
I am pretty sure that BHVR does not care about cheaters. It creates such an amount of technical problems to address it, for such an extremely minor part of the playerbase, that it's simply not worth. They just realized that cheating the new trending complaint on socials and so they published a bit of PR text to calm the situation.
Coincidentally, yesterday Angrypug was stream sniped by 2 obvious "flying" cheaters, and he didn't seem to mind it too much. Please watch the game it was quite entertaining:
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1599051075?t=02h02m07s
Now, do you think BHVR should invest time and effort to fix that type of games, so that these 2 Megs will now use less detectable cheats like WH + 2% movement boost?
In fact, Pug explicitly said towards the end of the game that cheating should not be a priority and that top streamers are bitching about issues that do not affect the rest of the playerbase, and that he can't sympathize as these streamers themselves create as many problems as cheaters by promoting unhealthy tryhard playstyles with their constant 50-win streaks attempts.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203597#Comment_3203597
I don’t know how much of the game can or can’t be handled server side, but I think we all agree that the current version doesn’t have enough server side validations. Clients shouldn’t be able to tell survivors “I’m flying and all the gens are done and this other player is dead and the game is going to continue past endgame collapse”. Yeah, some things presumably need to be handled on the client side, but there are a lot of things that shouldn’t.
And yes, it’s a major development task to switch these things over to server side validation, but the devs apparently recognize that it’s actually a necessary investment they’re going to have to make in the game. This is high priority item for them.
I doubt this is of any high priority for BHVR, since it seems they are taking months just for something as basic as reducing the server time to 2h to 1h lol... and in the end, adding server-side validation would only address the obvious hackers, which are the least annoying ones. This is neither going to annoy subtle hackers (WH, 2% speed boost, auto DH etc.), nor stream snipers, nor hackers finding exploits that prevent the game to progress. The streamers are not complaining about people flying everywhere they are complaining about people inserting in their lobbies and subtly ruining their streaks.
Making more calculations client-side is fixing the least annoying part of hacking at a very expensive cost (create more bugs and lag possibilities for 90% of the playerbase who are not exposed to cheating). Remember when the server would lag and move you backwards every 10 minutes? That's the type of issues you'd create with server-side logic.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
I should not laugh to this... But i am sorry, i can't stop myself...
Yeah, they are tunnelling bots... Developed by BHVR.
This is actually hilarious
Now I'm just wondering if there are many people like OP who legitimately didn't hear about this new feature and think they are facing weird killer bots
Imagine the confusion if someone encountered an angry Bubba Main who facecamps and keeps hitting them on hook, wondering "why did they make bots play like this? it's so weird"
-
@Pulsar said:
I'm upset because they absolutely murdered Rancor and actually made No Mither worse.
To me it looks the guy who fixed Blast Mine in previous patch has now been promoted to Lead balance designer
-
F
-
Tbf I'm a survivor main and many changes are objectively horrible like removal of Moris from Devour Hope and Rancor, literally nobody asked for that
I can tell, this change is from the same dev who decided to nerf Blast mine
-
Slugging was an issue imo so I'm happy to see them try to address it. At least that.
But yeah it seems like 90% of the resources were spent on useless things that nobody asked for.
Even worse, half of the patch notes is just REMOVING content from the game for no good reason. Like, why remove Mori from Devour and Rancor, just why? Who asked for it? What does it solve? I don't think I've ever seen people complain about these perks, the appeal came from the Moris not because the perks were any good, these perks made the game feel different and special.
-
@shalo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3199472#Comment_3199472
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3189788#Comment_3189788
"The average SWF group, which makes up the vast majority of SWF groups, has little to no discernable difference compared to solo players (within a few %)."
Thanks, I hadn't see this paragraph, but I still have doubts over what is exactly said here. They are saying that the escape rate of players in the middle of the Bell curve, is very close regardless of whether they play in SWF or solo, right? Then, isn't that just due to MMR?
-
@shalo said:
BHVR has made it very clear that swf survival rates have "little to no discernable difference compared to solo players" so of course they're balancing around swf and solo.
Can you find the quote? I'm pretty sure it's not what they said. IIRC what they said is that the chances of winning of a SWF and a solo at the same MMR are roughly the same. The wording is very important here (and imo it makes the stat pointless). If MMR is constant then of course the chances of winning are going to be the same, I mean, that's exactly what MMR is supposed to do...
-
Not only do they clearly balance the game for SWF, but they balance it for Discord SWFs, and probably for ridiculously high level of play that I doubt even your casual SWF will achieve.
"Save the best for last" is a good example. Just today Mandy commented that STBFL is balanced because the obsession should see that the killer has it and bodyblock for her teammates so that the killer lose stacks. I'm sorry but if that is not a ridiculously idealistic view of how people play the game then I don't know what is. How are you even supposed to communicate to the obsession that the killer has STBFL if you're not on Discord? Literally the goal of the perk is to avoid the obsession as killer, so is the obsession supposed to stop working on gens from time to time to proactively check if the killer has STBFL? Then bodyblock for them, in solo queue, the environment where half the time you will get camped / tunneled for doing so, and your teammates will let you die?
-
You think it is frustrating as killer? Try experiencing it as survivor where you press it in time, you see the animation start, and you still go down.
-
@th3 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3196270#Comment_3196270
I hate to play devils advocate but there are several things which make what you posted incorrect.
Vanguard is signed not only by Riot's certification team (which ensures it works properly without bugs), its also further certified with Microsoft's kernel certification process. All of these processes with Microsoft specifically scan for malware, bugs, hardware compatibility tests, and multiple extended validation tests.
Any quick google search will tell you what vanguard does, as well as the processes behind that.
I don't know how Microsoft certifications work but I can tell you that they certainly don't guarantee that your software has no bug, because there is no process in the world to guarantee that. There have been exploits found in drivers that millions of people used, and at the time these drivers were definitely certified too, until someone publicly revealed the exploit...
Anyway, I don't see how that contradicts my post. Even if Riot were able to prove that Vanguard had no exploit still shipping an anti-cheat that is permanently loaded comes with so many constraints that likely no game will be willing to use it besides extremely competitive titles. The game studio will have to multiply their technical support team size by 2x because now users are wondering why since they installed the game X or Y does not work anymore on the machine only to find out that the anticheat blocked it even though the game was not launched. For example I just did a google search and there is a person whose touch screen stopped working after they installed Valorant. Bugs like that.
-
At some point when writing software you have to trust that other parts of the code work fine. Nobody in their right mind writes code thinking "what if this function gets spoofed" especially when the kind of checks you suggest adding can sometimes be expensive and it's better to have them client-side to not lag the server (remember that >99% of users are not cheating).
Even if they would fix the DS thing you mentioned, this would only make blatant cheaters slightly less annoying, but subtle cheaters (which are the worst) could still use things like wallhack or speed boost which are likely impossible to patch.
-
@koery said:
EAC is famous for can't do **** in every game that use it for anti-cheat purpose.btw the vanguard for varlorant is actually something I'm looking for (the anti-cheat perspective)
Valorant's anticheat is not a good example, because it is very intrusive, basically as intrusive as a software can get. It only accepts to run if it is the very first thing that was loaded on your CPU, not just before Windows is even loaded, but even before your drivers, monitor. etc. There is barely any failsafe during this phase so if there is any bug in Vanguard software it will make your whole system instable, it is an extremely hardcore method of fighting cheats that comes with a lot of downsides (and likely this is the reason why Valorant isn't working on consoles).
With an anticheat like this, Vanguard dev team is probably spending more time debugging why countless innocent people have X or Y not working on their machine, rather than actually trying to detect cheaters. Of course Valorant can afford it because a large part of their marketing campaign is based on this anticheat, but I don't think other game studios are willing to make such sacrifices.
And I doubt even Vanguard anticheat is enough to fight motivated hackers like the PCIe device thing I mentioned.
-
I know it's not the story you want to hear, but developing an anti-cheat costs millions of $, and is always guaranteed to be a losing battle as long as the hackers are motivated enough. The way CPUs and software work is just not well suited to prevent hacking. On Amazon there are even PCIe devices that hackers can attach to their RAM so that the cheat software runs on a physically different machine than the one where the anticheat runs. I've read how Easy Anti Cheat works and I think it's a very smart anti cheat, if some hackers can bypass it in its current state, I don't think it's possible to "improve it".
-
@Lycidas said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3196047#Comment_3196047
I never said that other games don't have issues with cheaters, of course they do, it's a constant arms race between anticheats and (proper) hackers.
EAC is not one of the best anticheats out there, simply going by how often it gives some kind of issue ("EAC could not be instantiated" anyone?) or how it affects in certain cases the performances of the games in which is used (see all the stuttering and freezing issues that Elden Ring had, those magically disappear if you launch the game without EAC)
Sure, the techinques will be similar between one anticheat and the other, but you can't deny that some games have a way more rampant cheater issue than others, even if they have roughly the same amount of players.
And say what you want, apparently the "years" that you claim it would take a software engineer to bypass the EAC rules are bypassed in a matter of months, so those don't matter that much at this point.
I don't think DBD has a cheating situation that is particularly worse than other games, you only notice it because of Otz who has 10K viewers and having a streamer this big compared to the playerbase size is quite unique. But how often do you see cheaters in your game? Personally it's like one per month and I assume it's the same for others so in the end the game is still perfectly playable for 95% of the playerbase. The fact Otz is affected that much I would say that it is then more a stream sniper problem than a cheating problem.
The anti-cheats are bypassed in months because the hackers nowadays are companies with multiple hackers hired full-time and with years of experience. It still doesn't mean the anti cheat is not good. It is imo extremely good, but it can't do miracles, as I said, the anticheat cannot take ownership of the hacker's CPU, while the hacker can.
I don't get the EAC issues you mention personally, but I don't doubt you have them, there's no miracle. Most anticheat methods have performance downsides, because they rely on scanning some part of the memory to make sure they haven't changed, or intercepting important system functions and adding checks, etc. When that happens it makes your game slower of course. But it's not because the AntiCheat is poorly coded, it's because the method itself needs resources. So if EAC makes your game slower, it means it's likely better than other anticheats at detecting cheats.
-
@Lycidas said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3195958#Comment_3195958
TBF, Easy AntiCheat is not at all one of the best anticheat system out there
Still, that doesn't mean it's an easy task to "stop cheaters", but saying that EAC is a good enough product is delusional as well
Because remember, we're not talking about proper hackers. We're talking about kids that buy cheats off of youtube/twitch.
Name one game that does not have a cheat problem? I've read on hacking forums the list of the techniques EAC uses and it is very long. It would take even a skilled software engineer literal years to write a code that bypasses them all. I don't think there is an anti-cheat that is "better", they all probably share the same techniques, but the only difference is how intrusive they want to be
-
Answer is painful: there's no communication because there's no good news to communicate (and there won't ever be).
People who say things like "just stop cheaters" or "improve the anti-cheat" are completely delusional and unaware of how IT works. The game already uses EAC which likely has a whole company behind it and thousands of detection methods, the fact that is not enough should make you realize it's never easy to "just stop cheaters".
The reality is, hackers are just too difficult/expensive to fight. Its a never-ending game of cat and mouse where the hackers are always favored, because as long as the game will be in the form of a program that runs on their CPU, someone who knows what they're doing can always inject/read from that program, it's their CPU, not BHVR's. No Anti Cheat can fight that unless they become ridiculously intrusive like Valorant.
-
Yeah it would be great if you Pulsar could upload the full video to prove your claims. It's extremely hard to believe someone who plays Bubba would camp and tunnel a survivor.
-
@BradQuackson said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3188191#Comment_3188191
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/DKXAVXO2PWMY/mmr-works.png
Yeah well my games are constantly like this no matter what, your at a MMR softcap where you are probably in a very large pool still.
Well still you're kind of agree'ing that the MMR does not do its job then if you get 10+ winstreaks. While for you it can be explained because you're a Nurse tryhard and likely at the top of MMR bracket, but me I'm a baby Nurse with 30 hours and yet still my killrate right now is 99.8 % (lul maybe even higher than you noob)
-
@BradQuackson said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3188072#Comment_3188072
It does work, I have 10 minute queues and face majority 4 MAN SWF
Edit: My fresh, nurse account that has 12 losses (like 8 ddosed disconnected) and a streak of 1126 games, followed by a current standing 761 winstreak I am currently playing.
I have 10 min queue too, and I face sweaty SWFs occasionally but then inexplicably I get a game like this:
-
@RatbasterdJr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3188072#Comment_3188072
What killer were you using?
Nurse (link to the thread I made back then)
But shortly after I also got 10+ streaks with Trickster (easy) and Bubba (more difficult)
-
I think MMR does not work AT ALL and there must be something seriously wrong in the way you collect metrics if you truly believe the average chances of survival are 50%. In particular I wonder if you can explain:
- How is it possible that random players like me can get a 36-win streak on killer (recorded, all 4Ks, and I can reproduce it).
- Why killrate is used as a metric for game balance since the MMR's exact job is to bring it to 50%.
-
Yes DH is bugged, even after the animation starts there is roughly ~100 ms activation time during which it does nothing, the time is inconsistent and seem to depends on server latency. You won't be able to use it reactively at all against certain players. Even good loopers fail it quite regularly on stream.
-
Solo Q survivors are punching bags in this game. There is nothing you can do about it. It was already clear way before patch 6.1.0, but now that they buffed killers even more it is also clear that the devs do not see any issue and want the game to be balanced like this.
Just have some self-respect and stop playing solo queue. Seriously. After a few weeks your mental health will get MUCH better. Your brain doesn't want you to stop because you remember fun times playing this game, but these were from an epoch where the game still had a fair amount of casual players who weren't playing a 50-winstreak stomp simulator.
-
It is absolutely throwing, you are not only wasting 15 sec of time but also preventing your teammate with a boon perk to use it. The extremely minor chance of cleansing NOED pre-emptively (good luck to cleanse 5 totems in solo queue, literally never seen that happen in hundreds games) is by far offset by the much more serious risks you are putting yourself at if the killer has Undying or Pentimento.
That said, it is not any less throwing than 90% of the Rift challenges
-
Yeah I have the same bug when playing Bubba. I think it's some sort of weird network problem because I've noticed the affected survivor loses connection just after.
-
@OniWantsUrLocation said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3178865#Comment_3178865
Interesting clip. Never happened to me once. Unlucky I guess.
Edit: Maybe it's a connection problem, since my guy Probzz plays with his viewers most of the time. And if they are on the other side of the world, the killer could be there too. Such situations can happen then.
It happens all the time, to me, streamers, and people on this forum. I have other clips like this. The perk is bugged. Dead hard validation should be client-sided like old dead hard was.
-
@OniWantsUrLocation said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3178726#Comment_3178726
How many hours have I played with the new DH? More than I would like to admit. I got used to the little delay pretty quickly. At first I even hated DH because of it, but now I love it. I've understood how DH works and what makes this perk so balanced.
But what do you mean by "even top players inexplicably miss it sometimes"? I'm pretty sure the devs never intended DH to provide a guaranteed escape. Of course, they will fail sometimes if the killer is somewhat experienced.
See this clip for example:
https://clips.twitch.tv/PlausibleQuaintToothPoooound-iWBWh8GpGI3RAT4qIt's Probzz a 5000+ hour player.
The lunge was very predictable, just before a pallet, after she ignored the fake, a player like Probzz should have no trouble hitting that consistently.
If you watch frame-by-frame you can see he actually pressed the button and the animation started. And yet he still got hit.
Do you think the killer is "somewhat experienced" here? No, he just happens to be lucky that it was one of these weird circumstances DH didn't work.
-
@OniWantsUrLocation said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3177752#Comment_3177752
I think some people want a guaranteed DH. Like, no matter how close the killer is, as soon as you see his weapon move for 0.1 sec you press E and escape. That's not how it works and hell it shouldn't. I agree with you that DH is perfectly balanced right now.
Maybe not have it work regardless of killer distance, but at least having it not depend on server lag would certainly be a fair ask.
It's not even that the perk can't be used reactively anymore, it still can, but it's completely inconsistent right now, even top players inexplicably miss it sometimes.
Let's be honest, how many hours have you played the new DH? It took me 1 day to realize something was not right with this perk, and I've seen many other people complain about a weird undocumented activation delay, it's definitely not a coincidence. I still think it's a solid perk, but I've stopped using it because it's just way too frustrating to use.
-
They need to buff 3v1 situations as survivor and apply compensatory buffs to killer in 4v1 situations. The reason why tunneling is so effective is because you have to kill one survivor as fast as possible and then it's easy to win 1v3, and if you don't do that as killer then the gens go way too fast.
On top of it, 3v1 scenarios are already not a very enjoyable part of the game, usually you can already tell who will win depending on the number of gens remaining (buffing 3v1 will also help if your teammate DC'd).
-
@buffcoyote said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3177532#Comment_3177532
So you admit it then...that you didn't react nicely, but rather with attitude. That'll be all, your honor.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3177629#Comment_3177629
I'll interject and say, no, I believe you're the one coming off across as a jerk, it's not just the person you replied to thinking it. Just saying. 🤷♂️
You and OP seem to care a lot about what some people you'll never meet think of you. I don't. I care about people reading not being mislead, and be corrected if my opinions are wrong. And reading my initial reply again, it's not aggressive, OP only views it this way because what I wrote is true and he didn't expect people to criticize his build. I note you're the first person here coming to insults and posting a clearly non-constructive, provoking and off-topic comment in the thread.
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3177532#Comment_3177532
Every response you've made since your first one has been perfectly reasonable and not aggressive but you fail to see how your first post is needlessly aggressive (the sarcastic "admire" in particular). You could have said something like "This build doesn't have an exhaustion perk, do you find it works well for you? What is your escape rate?" No, you had to be a jackass out of the gate. "Post a video so we can admire how bad it is" is, again, not a request for evidence, it's taunting and aggressive in a situation that doesn't warrant that. You keep trying to explain it away as me making a bold claim and then you are asking me for evidence. That would have been fine, if that's what happened.
You are either unable or unwilling to see how your initial response is problematic, so I don't think any further interaction between us is going to be fruitful. Let me know when you've had some time to reflect and maybe we could have a productive discussion later.
Your initial message was way more problematic than my response. At least it is to me because someone may look at your build and try it while being my soloQ teammate...
If you advise uninformed people to do something stupid, it deserves a harsh reply even if you phrase it in a way that is very polite and nice.
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3177532#Comment_3177532
Point is, the wording of your reply was very aggressive as though I'd personally attacked you. Take that attitude elsewhere if you want to have a civil discussion, otherwise I have no reason to oblige your demand.
If you make an absurd claim, don't expect everybody to react nicely.
What the absolute heck? In what universe is sharing a build that I enjoy and works well for me "making an absurd claim," and is this the same universe where sharing a subjective opinion about a video game is reason for others not to "react nicely?"
You really need to rethink your approach to engaging with people if this is what you actually believe. Holy hell.
I did not "demand" anything nor "aggress" you. Sorry but I think you are trying to get offended.
About "Sharing a subjective opinion" - imagine you go to a science forum and claim that God is responsible for gravity. That claim, despite absurd, is a valid subjective opinion, in fact it can't even be scientifically disproven. But because it heavily contradicts common knowledge, making such claim will grant you the "absurd" insult and "sarcastic" replies like mine.
Now why I think your opinion here is "absurd": while you're right that most gaming discussions are very subjective, here the topic specifically mentions "optimal", so people who click can expect that, or at least they would not expect a build that is clearly unoptimal. But the build you shared is objectively not good, it does not even include an exhaustion perk, and yet you ambiguously make it sound like this build gives you good escape chances in solo Q, so a "provoking" comment like mine is perfectly justified. While ultimately the definition of "good build" is subjective, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of pro players would pick 1 exhaustion and OtR if they were asked to make a "good" build, and probably nobody would pick Bond or Deja Vu. I'm also confident you would get much higher escape rate yourself by picking at least an exhaustion perk - feel free to prove me wrong by sharing your gameplay.
-
Just so that you know, the killer likely doesn't know they're a SWF, from his POV there are 2 random survivors accusing a 3rd one, so statistically they think it's probably you who are the problem, maybe they think the survivors are pointing at you because you are cheating or sabotaged the game etc. Would one of these situations be true it is also a nice move from the killer to let one person escape. So the situation is unfortunate but nothing to blame on the killer.
-
That was not sarcastic, I don't think you reach more than 20% with this build.
If you make an absurd claim, don't expect everybody to react nicely. Solo queue is bad enough right now, I don't need my teammates to run Deja Vu instead of OtR because they have read it on the forum
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3177360#Comment_3177360
This might be one of the most unprovoked, needlessly aggressive comments I've ever read on this forum.
Who hurt you?
Asking evidence after a dubious claim is not aggressive
The topic is called "optimal perk" and you recommend a build that I doubt you can have any success with, half of the perks you mentioned are poor/super situational AND and you have no OtR (strongest perk in the game) AND you have no exhaustion perk. Get chased by a tunneling killer you lose the game in 3 minutes
As you may have noticed, many people on this forum pretend that solo Q is fine and that they easily escape 50% of the time themselves, but curiously they never share any of their gameplay, so I suspect that these people are killer OTPs who don't care about balance, so here since you specifically recommend a solo Q build I think it is the perfect occasion to prove me wrong, would you mind sharing gameplay with your build please?
-
Didn't realize Ojomo got banned, RIP.
Luckily we still have @BradQuackson who will more than likely accept to take over the challenge
-
@JackFrostMan said:
Mostly at night. I'd hazard things will calm down and killer BP bonuses will be more common in a few weeks.
Please explain your secret.
My queue times take 10+ minutes at night and then I get very unbalanced matches:
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
Windows is good. For soloQ, I also like:
- Deja Vu (helps avoid 3-gens)
- Kindred
- Open Handed
- Bond
Open Handed synergizes with Kindred, Bond, and Windows, though it can actually be problematic for Windows, especially on indoor maps, because your vision is littered with stuff that's too far away to be useful. If I want to run Windows, I will swap out Bond or Deja Vu in the above build.
Lol. No exhaustion perk. No OtR. Good luck in solo queue with that.
Please share a bit of gameplay with these perks so we can admire your 20% escape rate...
-
I think at this point every person who genuinely tried new Dead Hard has realized that the perk is bugged and inconsistent. Sometimes the perk works fine for a full match and then in the next match you keep getting downed even after the animation starts.
I've tried very hard to make the new DH work, I've even bound the key to Mouse Left, still can't get it working half of the matches. I've given up because I don't like gambling.
I don't know what the exact cause of this inconsistency is but looking frame-by-frame seems there is indeed an activation delay in the order of 100 ms which if you add ping and human reaction time it becomes very difficult to use this perk reactively.
People who tell OP that it's a skill issue or that they have no issue themselves are just being dishonest, you can use that as a good indicator of how high the level of BS is on this forum. Even streamers constantly get hit even on predictable lunges, so I doubt random forumers can have "no issue" (most likely the people who claim that have not played with it for long).
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3174507#Comment_3174507
Which is why I’ve literally said if neither side finds it fun, or what one side finds fun and the other finds unfun doesn’t line up, changing it makes sense.
Not only, there are cases where one side finds something a little fun and the other side finds it very unfun. These should be addressed too.
The goal is that every player has fun within a reasonable compromise. Not that the player who has found how to exploit the game better has all the fun and the others are doomed.
-
You are very wrong, for 99% players what matters is whether the game is fun, not whether it is balanced.
A game can be balanced but unfun for BOTH payers at the same time.
A good example in DBD is slugging, the killer has managed to down the last survivor as killer, and all his teammates are dead, but the survivor is too far away from any hook. Then the optimal decision is for both players to LITERALLY STOP PLAYING.
In this situation, none of the 2 players are having fun for 4 minutes. Whether slugging is balanced is irrelevant, both players are wasting their time, so this is something that SHOULD be addressed, regardless of whether this is balanced or not.
This would be fixed by eg. allowing a downed survivor to give up after 1 minute of slugging.
I take slugging because it's the most obvious example but there are MANY things in this game that are balanced and yet VERY unfun.
-
Totally agree this game has some of the least intuitive hitboxes I've ever seen and when practicing huntress I also wondered why we couldn't get a debug command that shows hitboxes (in private matches).
BHVR should probably do a new pass on the hitboxes of the environment and make them closer to their visual aspect, especially bush and car hitboxes look clearly improvable.