Incarnate
Incarnate
About
- Username
- Incarnate
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@CornChip said:
I feel like the forums have started to run out of things to complain about..We have lots to complain about, especially when they keep taking what we say with "a grain of salt", or twist what we say to be something different, or simply just dismisses it.
-
It wouldn't for any game that has been a paid version from the start be fair for those who purchased it, if it went free to play, even if that's what would make the game in question "survive". But generally people would probably rather want that the game in question "survives" rather than it "dies".
Personally, I'd rather that the game remained pay to play, especially because when a game goes free to play after having been pay to play, the free to play model is for the most part also going to continuously affect those who've paid for it, but obviously this definitely depends on the free to play model. I'm personally not a fan of the free to play model, as I'd personally rather pay than to have some free to play model forced down upon me. Don't expect that if it wen't free to play that they'd be able to actually keep it going by charging for cosmetics and various dlc's only.
-
I don't agree with that. I think it would be better if it was locked in place when you as a victim/survivor clicked ready before entering the lobby. Where as soon as a victim enters the lobby the killer's selections will become locked. I definitely think the killer should be able to see what he/she is up against.powerbats said:@Boss said:
I myself wouldn't really mind if they were to strip the Killer of the ability to see Items, Survivors or both at the lobby.
But it's there for a reason. And the reason is obviously to be able to see what you're gonna fight and respond to it by changing your equipment if you so desire.
While quitting when you see something you dislike is definitely not something i support, last-second-switching to remove a feature the Killer has feels more scummy to me.Agreed, the only thing that should be seen is names and perhaps outfit colors although that'd mean you could get 4 P3 Claudettes and not realize it. But the names shouldn't be shown because so much lobby dodging goes on with profile checking.
-
@Boss - I agree, switching at the last second certainly does subverts the killers feature (power if you will) know what he/she is up against, and that is scummy and in my opion that is exploiting it to get an advantage the killer can't do anything about.
-
In my opinion - what you've selected should be locked the moment you click ready.
-
@Jesya said:
if whoever removed the LOL would focus their time on the Asian forum posts late at night selling degrees and figuring out how to prevent them from spamming the forums with it.
Fixing that is actually relatively simple.
All that is needed is to restrict the number of accounts per game key, and obviously to make the forum so it technically supports it and has an automated process for approving accounts. -
I'd much rather like the devs didn't dismiss our feedback or do the exact opposite of what the community expresses.
-
@alivebydeadight said:
@Incarnate said:
Who cares about the Legion, it's not worth buying nor playing anyways.HEY, WE SAID NOTHING ABOOT LEGION, ONLY JESUS
You actually did - in the subject.
You didn't say anything about Jeff nor Jesus in the OP but in the comments you did, but that wasn't what I responding to. -
Who cares about the Legion, it's not worth buying nor playing anyways.
-
@Peanits said:
The Entity does not accept resignations.Does the entity listen to feedback and take it seriously? ..or should we all just go play some civilization, for a refreshing change?
-
@Janick said:
@ModernFable said:
“Mend, Snap out of it, and Wake up, are no longer considered healing actions, and as such, will not be affected by perks that refer to healing.”I very much appreciate the newly added consistency this change brings.
That being said I didn’t feel Legion, Doctor, or Freddy needed a nerf. However hopefully now they’ll be better able to adjust their kits as needed, and not be held back by weird interactions.
(excluding Freddy due to his “Soon TM Rework”)
This will allow us to tweak the base power of a killer much better, without fear of breaking his build when a players use a certain perk. The feeling of necessity to have specific perks on a character to make him viable is not something that we think is good for the overall balance, which is the reason why we are doing those changes.
Thank you!
So we can expect you to individually add what you removed to the killers base kit?
...like with the doc, since Snap out out of it was considered a healing action, which made it possible to combine it with Nurses Calling to be able to see them if they were snapping out of it if you were close enough? Because if not, then you're not just making changes to allow you to make changes without fear of breaking someone's build, but you're actually breaking someone's build. -
What about these quotes, which are part of a longer one: "play something else""for a refreshing change"
- sound familiar? -
@Peanits said:
The first problem came with downvotes. There were some other functions attached to downvotes that could not be removed, namely that after a certain number of downvotes, the post would be hidden. That's out of the question because it basically means that anyone with an unpopular opinion is effectively silenced (or in the case of large threads, anyone with an opinion in general on the first page or so). So unfortunately, downvotes had to go. Downvotes are really key here, LOL became a negative thing because we had to get rid of them.Then LOL sorta' took over that place. Fair enough, we didn't really mind, even if it is a little more rude than a downvote. No biggy. But then a couple other problems surfaced. We had a few instances where people would run a bot or even just manually use a bunch of alt accounts to spam reactions (almost always LOL) on people they disagree with. I'm talking thousands overnight. Those guys have been dealt with, but it still kept happening every once in a while. Beyond that, there were a bunch of times where someone would follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts (and yes, we can see who). This also lead some people to accuse other people for it, often innocent people.
So if the downvotes were associated/attached to other functions that you could not remove, couldn't you just have made one that was called down vote, but where it isn't attached to those functions? I mean you could make the LOLs that weren't attached to any negative forum function, so if you could make that, it would make sense you could make any type of vote without the negative function attachment to it.
However, this doesn't change the fact that it could still be abused to make something seem like it's disliked a lot, in much the same way as it was with the LOLs. This indicates a problem with the forum, namely the security part of it. Because if it's that easy to abuse, then you need a tighter security system in place.
How could this be fixed? It would seem the problem comes from how easy it is to make alternate accounts.
I've already suggested this before, namely that there should only be one official forum account per game key. This would solve a lot of problems, namely the abuse, because you can see who's voting for what, and thus you can easily shut it down, and it won't be as easy to just make a new alternate account, it would suddenly become quite costly to try and abuse the system because you'd a new game key every time, which also would also would take care of all those spambots. I don't think it would be that hard to implement, I know Paradox does something like this and it works very well. -
LOL is a bit ambiguous as it could mean you don't agree or that you quite literally find it funny. But at the same time also can be taken as ridiculement.
I think they should remove LOL, add agree, disagree and insightful. -
I can see why camping / tunnelling is more of a necessity with the changes to BT (implementation of DW and mending) - it seems it's the most time-efficient strategy to remove the one with BT simply because that survivor/victim can potentially have you waste a lot more time on chases and on top of that, actually undo the work that you're trying to do as killer - namely kill.
I agree with @Raccoon on this one, and I'd like to point out that no one should tell anyone how to play, UNLESS they're asking for advice on how to improve. It might be that it's not fun to be camped or tunnelled, but thats just how the game is designed, and anyone that has a problem with that, then take it up with the devs, not the player. As long as the players aren't abusing or exploiting an unintended mechanic to gain an unfair advantage, then no one really has any business in telling how another player should play. Camping and tunnelling from the survivors/victims perspective certainly isn't fun and there isn't much they can do about it, but neither is there for the killer if the situation calls for camping or tunnelling, and with the changes to BT, it very much so promotes/encourages exactly that. There are also other additions coming that encourages camping, like Breakdown and saboteur combo. Speaking of abusing/exploiting unintended mechanics, is one those things the devs really a notorious for sanctioning things that should be considered an exploit. Which says something about the devs, don't it?
-
@AshleyWB said:
Pfft...I blame you for the legion. 😄Jk nice prediction.Maybe Kira didn't actually predict anything, maybe BHVR just "borrowed" some of it for "inspiration" - it's more than possible
-
@The_Crusader said:
Judgement said:If I remember correctly the last time they asked the community to make ideas, Decisive Strike happened.
I really hope this is true
I'd hate to think it was the actual developers who came up with such a ridiculous perk that would go on to taint the game for over two years.
The only reason why it has been able to remain is because the devs have been reluctant to remove or change it, as in doing so they would upset a lot of people, but that can be quite necessary when it comes to balance. Speaking of balance, there are so many things they really should've fixed, but it comes down to what I just said. Plus some of it also stems from some members being very "vocal" about certain things, and suddenly certain things becomes allowed even when they should not have been or vice versa.
-
Surprisingly the doc and the huntress are TOP 2 most favorite, I didn't expect that.
-
@Judgement said:
If I remember correctly the last time they asked the community to make ideas, Decisive Strike happened.I don't know about that, but if so it was probably not in any real controlled manner, but a matter of them reading ideas and just implementing it. Where what I'm suggesting here is very, very different and in a much more controlled way.
-
@Delfador said:
Would you mind if I ask you who the community is?
Don't you see the forum? Do you actually believe that we can agree on creating a survivor or a killer?The community here are the members of this forum - the official forum.
Yes, I do see the forum, and yes I do believe that we can agree on things, and when we can't agree we can surely vote.@Delfador said:
According to survivors, every new patch is another way that the devs hold killers' hands, according to killers, every new patch is another way that the devs show their gratitude for their larger playerbase.The benefit of this way of doing it, is that we get to decide on what goes in and what doesn't, which is a very big difference from how it is now. So here it's the community collaborating together to make content that is in the best interest of us all, so it would really be the community "holding hands" if anything. Where those who're only want what would be best for one side could easily be spotted, and if the argument in question doesn't hold any merit it will quite easily not make the cut, because if it came to a poll chances are greater that it wouldn't make the cut.
You say, that every new patch is another way for the devs to show their gratitude for their larger playerbase, well they have a very odd way of showing their appreciation and gratitude - to me that seems more like thats about making money than showing their gratitude.
@Delfador said:
People start to complain after every single new chapter release, throw insults at the devs, everybody starts to talk about hop OP the opposite side's perks are.Again, the benefit of doing it this way, is that we get to choose what goes in and what doesn't so, if someone feels bad about the dlc, then they can only blame themselves. Another benefit of doing it this way, is that we are not forced on release deadlines, so we can easily discuss pros and cons, and if something doesn't seem to be good, then we can easily find other better alternatives.
@Delfador said:
I hope they don't listen to community at this point. They should choose a couple of veterans who play the game consistently and instead of whining, trying to improve themselves. Make them play the killers before the PTB, get their opinion and build their own ideas on top of it.Well, here is the thing, veteran or not, everyone in the community gets a say, but the veterans can easily see if something would be too powerful or too weak, too broken, etc.
In regards to how they normally do the internal gamebalancing before the PTB, I agree that it would be a whole lot better if they had people playing the game who actually knows the ins and outs of the game, but I don't think it should only be veterans, because if you only get veterans then you easily can miss important parts of it that less experienced players might have isues with. But the gist of it, is to have the community be part of the balancing aspects, both before, during and after the PTB.
When it comes to BHVR building on top of things, that usually doesn't go well, we've seen a lot of proof of that. Because that is exactly what happens when they take the feedback and suggestions given with "a grain of salt" or "puts their twist on it". There are many examples of this happening, just take the most recent one that hasn't made it to the live update yet, but thats exact proof of that, unfortunately. I definitely think it would be a good opportunity get a better insight to what their community wants.
There is another alternative, which could be contests in regards to killer/survivor concepts and ideas, like a monthly one or something. Where people can officially submit their ideas, have it be limited to one per member, where it has to meet certain criterias and so forth. This would also give them insight into what the community wants. Obviously, the can get insight from reading the members posts on the forum, the problem with that though is that apparently they take everything we write with "a grain of salt". But if we were going the route of member submitted ideas, they could easily use that. Every one month, one member submitted killer and survivor design/concept/idea will be voted for and become the winner for it's respective category. These winners will then go into another poll which will be conducted every 3 or 6 months - where each of these will be used for an upcoming dlc. They could announce the winners on the dev stream, and if they feel charitable, they could offer a prize for winning the contest. Where all of these that have been submitted, would be available on this forum, where their balance, design, concept and so forth could be discussed.
-
@Wolf74 said:
@Incarnate said:
@Claudette_Baguette - My thoughts on this... The devs are not very competent at balancing the game, and they show inability to understand what the community wants, especially when considering that they're doing the exact opposite of what the majority of the community members who've spend a great deal of time, energy and effort on the PTB, both testing it, providing feedback and suggestions on how to fix it. And what do they do? The exact opposite, and not only that they make unwarranted changes that hurt the balance for other killers.I don't think they care about balance, they care about making $$$$. They do not care about the community, they care about making $$$$. If they truly cared about the game and the community, they'd be doing more what the community wants than what they want.
Actually you are wrong… they exactly do what the "community" wants.
But just the SURVIVOR side of the community.
Survivor want "fun" killer, that do not act as threats to them and THEY get what they want.Well... I've participated in the PTBs and they clearly don't listen nor do the seem to care.
...and there is just one thing here that I think is rather important. Without a killer, there is no game, and who's going to play a killer who's NOT fun to play because of struggling down survivors, even survivors with No Mither.Futhermore, if they only listen one side, it will be very onesided, and guess what that will do? Kill the game in the long run. Why? This is competitive game, and if it strongly favors one side, guess what will happen? More people will play on the more favorable side. Why? Because a lot of people find winning to be fun.
So if what you say is true, that they're favoring the survivors/victims more, then we have a very serious issue.
Because thats like making rules in a sport thats favors one side. Even being a 4 vs 1 assymetrical competitive game, it still needs to be as balanced and fair as possible for BOTH sides - where making rules that favors one side would already make it UNFAIR and UNBALANCED for one side. See a problem? If they don't see a problem with that, then they have no business making a competitive game such as this. -
I'm not going to buy the new dlc, not going to buy the new killer with virtual currency either.
This dlc is not worth the money, and the legions power is really nothing more than a blatant rehashed ripoff of the spirits power with a few additions and alterations, and it's quite underwhelming. It's actually so bad balance wise that if they don't release the legion with what the majority of feedback and suggestions were pointing to towards changing, then the legion will be the WORST killer ever released, and most likely will be for quite some time. But BHVR might actually make a killer who's even worse. But you know when all survivors/victims can run No mither and the killer can't down them or struggles hard to so, then you know you're dealing with one of the absolute WEAKEST killers in the game.Save your money and shards - this killer is not worth it.
..and in my opinion BHVR don't deserve your money when they just do a blatant rehash, and don't even want to address the issues that the community express concerns with. -
@Claudette_Baguette - My thoughts on this... The devs are not very competent at balancing the game, and they show inability to understand what the community wants, especially when considering that they're doing the exact opposite of what the majority of the community members who've spend a great deal of time, energy and effort on the PTB, both testing it, providing feedback and suggestions on how to fix it. And what do they do? The exact opposite, and not only that they make unwarranted changes that hurt the balance for other killers.
I don't think they care about balance, they care about making $$$$. They do not care about the community, they care about making $$$$. If they truly cared about the game and the community, they'd be doing more what the community wants than what they want.
-
@HellDescent said:
My guess they are gonna announce DBD ftp with 4 original killers and survivors. Since they make most of the money from dlc and cosmetics anywayThat wouldn't surprise me one bit, especially when considering their focus is more about dishing out dlc's and new cosmetics than they're on making a great game that is balanced, with killers that are equally viable and strong from a competitive stand point.
-
@Pizzaman said:
I think the last time this was brought up in a stream, they said something along these lines:Muh, not possible because maps are "proceduraly" generated by putting tiles together, muh.
But still, the idea sounds interesting.
Not necessarily a problem though that they're procedurally generated - which in my opinion I wouldn't say they are - they're randomised definitely but procedurally generated I would'nt say so. Because as far as I know, they're using predetermined tiles with predetermined and variable object placement.
I think opening up to the workshop would be both a good thing but also bad thing as it might open up to all sorts of issues, like cheating and other sorts of hacks, without them being actual hacks to gain competitive advantages. The real question is, does the pros outweigh the cons?
-
@Vadim239 said:
@Incarnate said:
Interesting ideas..Would'nt be bad for a devotion system specifically for characters too.
The devotion is the account level, Not the character level.
I know, thats also why a devotion system would good for characters too, not just character levels, but something more than that. Like when you actually achieve level 50 with the character. I know you can prestige the character, but prestige simply means to just obtaining a few extra cosmetics and thats it. Many aren't even interested in prestige, which personally I'm not either.
So like if one achieved level 50, then thereafter you could then have devotion levels, which could yield various types of benefits - which in my opinion also should be visible to others.
-
Interesting ideas..
Would'nt be bad for a devotion system specifically for characters too.
-
@benzos said:
@Raccoon said:
Saying GG
after every game (even when it's a blow up against me) confirmed toxic. It's really hard to keep up with all these new rules.
If someone has any ideas on how to detoxify GG
, please let me know.it's like killers get looped 5 gens in 4 min and survs say gg
. its not a gg and it's a mock. it feels like ######### to get camped and it feels like ######### to get looped when you dont know how to play the loop so to say gg when it wasn't is bad sport.You can't say that for certain for everyone, granted that for some it definitely is used in a toxic way, but you can't know that for certain just from looking at the "GG" you need more info, and I'm not saying more match info, but info in regards to what they write. However if they put in "EZ" or something else that could give the indication that the GG was meant in derogatory and toxic way, then you can say it was, but not really until then, certainly not in a broad sense. Many just write GG because thats perceived "common courtesy" in online games.
-
@Peanits said:
It's literally a thread made with the intent of being toxic and posting people's reactions.I really shouldn't have to say more.
First of all, if there is a good discussion going as a result of it, then there is no need to close it.
Second, how can you be so sure of the intent? Unless the poster litterally have said so, otherwise that is an opinion based on pure assumption and speculation. Furthermore, it is quite possible to get biased due to several things, one being the majority calling it out to be so, even when it might with a sincere and honest intent, another being due to having seen a lot of toxic posts, and there are many more of those. It's sort of the same deal when people start assuming that people are bad players just because they're suggesting things they don't agree with, etc. So like I said, unless you actually can prove somehow that it's with a toxic or malicious intent, then you might actually be doing the posters an injustice when you delete their posts/thread based on assumption and speculation in regards to their intent. -
A screenshot perhaps?
Well, who says that won't happen, just because she currently has no face? It's possible that they make her one.
The real question - once you see her face, would you realize that not seeing it was better? -
@HellDescent said:
@Incarnate said:
@HellDescent said:
If you are chasing someone for that long you are doing something wrong and not applying any map pressure. By the time you get those tokens all the gens are gonna pop, at this point noed will provide far better bonusesBut thats the thing, the whole idea behind this perk is actually so you don't have to keep chasing for bloodlust to trigger - in fact it's something you can activate when it's ready. As you chase it will accumulate tokens towards unlocking a sprint that you can use, these tokens aren't lost when the chase ends.
I think it's very important to note the two primary key differences between how bloodlust it's build up and triggered. The perks makes it an activatable ability and is being build up irregardless of a chase ending or even happening, which is very unlike how bloodlust normally works.
To give you an example of how the perk would work in practice.
Say you chase two victims, one 7 seconds - earning you 7 tokens, the other for 8 seconds which earns you another 8 tokens. This gives you a total of 15 tokens - Enough to trigger Bloodlust level 1. A very important factor here is also the fact that YOU decide when to use it, it's not automatic. Lets continue the example, say you're still chasing the second victim as Bloodlust level 1 is achieved but not yet triggered, you hit the victim, thus ending the chase. After the recover animation you set after the victim you had hit, when you're close enough to the victim, but not close enough to strike you activate it to close the gap ensuring the second hit.Also to mention here, how you accumulate the tokens isn't just through chase, but also through other means which is very different from how bloodlust usually would've been build up to trigger - which only would've happened through a continous chase and an automatical trigger.
So if you also combined this with Bamboozle, it would be one mean combo.
This will break the game, Survivor will no longer be able to determine safe vault/pallet distance and jungle jyms will become useless
I don't think it would break the game, plus it also has cooldown when it has been activated, and it follows the same movement speed bonuses as bloodlust normally would. BL4 & 5 follows the same static increases as the previous one. I don't see why it would break the game. Just because they wouldn't be able to determine safe vault/pallet and jungle gym distance, wouldn't break the game - it would force them to play differently.
Why should they be able to do that for sure? That they would not be able to for sure would be comparable to that of the mindgames. And what it basically does is give the killer the option to end a chase more quickly, which most certainly will allow the killer to apply map pressure, instead of having to keep chasing and chasing at the expense of map pressure. Plus this could also be used for other things than to end a chase more quickly, this may not be obvious, but that is certainly also within the possibilities of its use. Furthermore, it's also possible to use this more incorrectly, like making a wrong decision about when to activate it.
Care to elaborate more about why you think it would break the game?
Perhaps some constructive suggestions in regards to what should be changed so it in your opinion wouldn't be breaking the game? -
It's an interesting idea, but not everything is this black and white. Because say certain things that normally would be considered a bad pallet or obstacle placement for the survivor, might not necessarily be so for every survivor depending on their skill and playstyle. Your idea has merit, because I definitely think that would be a good way to balance the game in regards to bringing the best of the best - that it comes at a sacrifice, in this case a sacrifice to have worse RNG.
-
@HellDescent said:
If you are chasing someone for that long you are doing something wrong and not applying any map pressure. By the time you get those tokens all the gens are gonna pop, at this point noed will provide far better bonusesBut thats the thing, the whole idea behind this perk is actually so you don't have to keep chasing for bloodlust to trigger - in fact it's something you can activate when it's ready. As you chase it will accumulate tokens towards unlocking a sprint that you can use, these tokens aren't lost when the chase ends.
I think it's very important to note the two primary key differences between how bloodlust it's build up and triggered. The perks makes it an activatable ability and is being build up irregardless of a chase ending or even happening, which is very unlike how bloodlust normally works.
To give you an example of how the perk would work in practice.
Say you chase two victims, one 7 seconds - earning you 7 tokens, the other for 8 seconds which earns you another 8 tokens. This gives you a total of 15 tokens - Enough to trigger Bloodlust level 1. A very important factor here is also the fact that YOU decide when to use it, it's not automatic. Lets continue the example, say you're still chasing the second victim as Bloodlust level 1 is achieved but not yet triggered, you hit the victim, thus ending the chase. After the recover animation you set after the victim you had hit, when you're close enough to the victim, but not close enough to strike you activate it to close the gap ensuring the second hit.Also to mention here, how you accumulate the tokens isn't just through chase, but also through other means which is very different from how bloodlust usually would've been build up to trigger - which only would've happened through a continous chase and an automatical trigger.
So if you also combined this with Bamboozle, it would be one mean combo.
-
@Skairipa said:
Interesting ideaI think so too, and it's an interesting way to give the give a sprint ability.
@HellDescent said:
I wouldn't waste a perk slot with that. I'd rather take bamboozle.When you say waste, do you think it's bad perk and if so, why do you find it to be so?
@Cetren - It's an interesting idea, but the unlimited range does seems a bit much, maybe something like this: 32/48/64? Also, I reckon that people probably wouldn't use this one that much simply due to the fickle nature of totems, especially the lit ones. What could be interesting is if the tag was contagious somehow, like when the survivor gets within those 8 meters, there is a chance for it to spread to the nearby survivors or it spreads if the tagged survivor interacts with another survivor.
-
@HellDescent said:
You shouldn't lose bloodlust when breaking a pallet imo. Tiers 2 and 3 should take longer to get and bonus reduced. Pallet spacing is still the same as before. Sometimes rng allows extremely long chases, especially at Lerry's. Some pallets are completely useless and should be a little safer, balance map pallet density instead. And I don't really like the shorter walls around the sacrificial tree when playing killer.I agree, bloodlust should'nt be lost just because of breaking a pallet or just for the chase ending, in fact I think it should be a lot harder to lose, like stay on until one has been downed. Another reason for this is that you'll spend a great deal of time on chasing someone until it actually activates, which is time completely wasted if the survivor manages to escape or force you to break a pallet - where logically if you were in a bloodlust and you were denied it or angered somehow, that lust for blood for would increase.
-
@AshleyWB said:
I think the struggle stage should stay well away from skill checks at the games current state. Performance is too inconsistent. There's no guarantee that skill checks will appear in the timeframe they should, consoles have laggy skill checks plus I would imagine lagswitchers could exploit this by freezing your game to stop skill checks appearing on your screen only for it to say hey you missed it now you dead.It's quite easy to fix that, just have consistent skill checks trigger just after a skill check has been done, that still puts pressure on the player with less "button mashing". Personally I find the button mashing to be a stupid and quite boring mechanic, and is also one of the reasons I don't enjoy playing survivor that much, hence why I play much more killer.
-
I fully support this idea, especially because I've always considered the global killer rank to be a quite big design flaw, specifically because killer levels, perk amount slots, actual available perks and addons and experience don't all follow uniformly when you improve in rank.
Either they should do whats suggested or they should rework the rank and reward system greatly, so for instance rank and rewards follows all killer and survivor characters.
-
@Malakir said:
@Incarnate don't tag me saying I avoid the discussion when you just ignore my posts saying the sme thing over and over again. Enjoy your echo chamber and leave me alone. We might talk again when you'll be smarterI'm not saying you're avoiding the discussion - what I am saying is that you keep dismissing the point I'm making in regards to tapping to avoid skill checks with detrimental effects, which negates associated gameplay balance and mechanics. I get that when they do it, they're wasting time, granting more time to the killer to kill them. However, it still doesn't change the fact that they're negating various gameplay mechanics, which is intended to help the killer.
...I know what an exploit is, which is why it's completely ridiculous they've whitelisted gentapping gens with ruin, they apparently have no idea what balance issues that creates. And quite clearly, a lot of people don't get this either, since they keep defending gentapping, whitelisted or not.
Please do understand that allowing gentapping and other forms of tapping to avoid skill checks with detrimental effects, negates intended gameplay mechanics, renders several perks and addons, even a certain power useless in that regard.
In regards to the echochamber - I do hear what you guys are saying, but apparently it doesn't matter what I say.
-
@DarkWo1f997 said:
Incarnate said:@DarkWo1f997 said:
The longer I play, the more I get used to them.
Being used to how mechanics work in the game, doesn't necessarily make them balanced or fair.
Well it’s hard to balance around movement speed in any game. I can deal with looping relatively easily; but it usually ends with me pretending to leave and then circle back around to catch the survivor.
I have just accepted that nothing will ever truly probably ever solve the issue.
Just because it's hard to get it right, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be made right.
The thing is, they have the numbers and the data, they have a large enough playerbase to support making test branches, where a good portion of those players are willing to provide feedback, suggestion to fix the issues, where some even do the problem solving for them, etc. It's quite obvious where the problems come from. -
@DarkWo1f997 said:
The longer I play, the more I get used to them.Being used to how mechanics work in the game, doesn't necessarily make them balanced or fair.
-
@Nos37 said:
@Incarnate said:
Furthermore, when it comes to SWF, it doesn't outright negate the game mechanical effects and their consequencesThe game mechanic for totems is that they are supposed to be hard to find. If I play Survivor solo and another Survivor finds a hex totem, I don't know where it's at. If SWF finds a hex totem, everyone in that SWF group know its location.
The game mechanic for Knock Out is supposed to make downed Survivors harder to find. If I play solo and another Survivor goes down, I don't know where they are. If a member of a SWF group is downed, everyone in that SWF group knows their location.
These examples are far more imbalanced than a Survivor cutting their Action Speed in half just to stay hidden from the Killer.
I'm not disagreeing with you in regards to SWF can impose quite severe balance issues, but the above example doesn't outright negate the effect, because the perk is still doing it's job - you're still relying on the knowledge given to you by the other player. But like I said, I'm not disagree with you about the balance issues
that SWF can impose.These are completely seperate issues, and none of them should be used as as or in arguments against each other to support the right to stay in the game, because none of these should have any right to be in the game as they currently are - simply because they impose such gameplay balance issues as they do. Personally, I think they should've kept SWF for a casual (non-ranked mode), solo play for competitive mode (both unranked and ranked). It should be obvious why SWF should not be in ranked play - simply because of all those balance issues. KYF as is can easily be used for tournament style play.
-
@Nickenzie - I've already suggested something similar here: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/28863/a-new-feature-to-deal-with-bloodweb-items-we-never-use-what-do-you-think-or-got-an-idea - although I do like the Cell Star idea - would definitely reduce the amount of addons and offerings we're most likely never going to be using. So I definitely agree, that we should have this option, although I personally would prefer to not have the bloodweb at all - at least in regards to addons and perks, because first of all it presents balance issues with tier and rarity differences in any given match, secondly we're wasting a ton of time grinding for BPs to use but also going through the bloodweb for items we need. Were it simply could be a matter of it being something one had unlocked through a levelling system or similar. Because the addons primarily support playstyles, either empowering them in places where they lack or make them even stronger in their particular field.
I think 50% is a reasonable percentage to get back of the original price, which was also the same percentage in my own suggestion. And like you say, these numbers could always be adjusted. I also agree with, that if somehow people can suddenly gain BP much faster than what would be considered the intended average amount, the as you say a limit could be imposed so the feature isn't being abused.
@Dreamnomad - There is no way around the cap, unless someone manually input a number higher than the cap, as with BP compensation. Also, players who've been around the game for a while would have excess BPs to burn anyways. But I can see how it can used to more quickly get the through the bloodweb, where I'm sure there could be implemented ways to deal with this as well.
However.. I think it's important enough to remind everyone reading these suggestions, that the BP's gained from selling / salvaging, are actually just BP's recovered that you've already earned and been forced to spend on items that did not want to progress and continue to use the bloodweb. It only gets worse when you get to the 50 level mark, where you litterally can be going through the entire web many times without being able to get what you actually want or need to support your playstyle or strategy you want to play, in effect forcing you to play by differently than you actually want to.
A crafting system would definitely be a much more interesting route to go, but I still do think the players should have the option to salvage bloodweb items for BPs with a reasonable value. But like I said above, the current bloodweb system with mechanical differences based on tiers and rarity most certainly creates an imbalance, hence why I'm personally more in favor of removing or reworking that system greatly.
-
@Nos37 said:
@Incarnate said:
Furthermore, when you can just tap to avoid the skill checks with detrimental effects, it renders certain perks useless.Survive With Friends renders way more Killer perks uselss and it creates a lot of imbalance issues, yet SWF isn't going anywhere... Which is unfortunate because I would love a deceptive Killer who can pretend to be a Survivor, but that won't happen because the devs know that SWF would use voice comms to shut that Killer down.
My point is: yeah, sure, there's spilt milk that you're trying to make everyone aware of, but there's toxic waste being dumped into the river that's more detrimental and even that's not going to be cleaned up.
Breaking something thats damaged isn't automatically justified by it being damaged.
Same deal as above with breaking something further thats already broken, isn't automatically justified just because it broken. This is especially true in video games, if something is broken it either needs to be removed or fixed, not broken further.Furthermore, when it comes to SWF, it doesn't outright negate the game mechanical effects and their consequences, sure they can better work around them through communicating, but it doesn't negate their effects. I agree with the fact that SWF creates a ton of balance issues, and in my opinion should've been disabled until they've actually fixed the balance issues that SWF imposes.
Right now it seems you're trying to defend there is something in the game currently that can be abused to directly avoid skill checks with a detrimental effect, which directly negates any associated gameplay balance aspect. Your argument above is basically like saying, we should just ignore this ("spilt milk") and if we break something in the game, it doesn't matter, we should ignore that too ("toxic waste") - heck while we're at it why not just whitelist all potential abusable exploits. ("Emphasizing the point").
-
@Weederick said:
@Weederick said:
@Incarnate said:
@Weederick said:
We kinda got used to it, but i'd really like to see equal hitboxes, so we can get the cheese out of the way. Looping is gonna stay, but i think wouldnt complain that much, if the mechanics were actually balanced.I'm pretty sure survivors dont gain 0.4m/s advantage, that would make it possible to infinite slower killers.
Its more than EW1 MYers, since you can infinite him around anything.
So 0.2m/s advantage seems more fitting (or boosting survivors speed to 105%)They told us a year ago they wouldnt touch collision hitboxes, but it doesnt look as complicated to change as i thought. Hopefully they change their mind someday, that was one of the most requested wishes back in 2016.
That was the number given on the previous Q&A session on October 26th 2018, they even did the aproximate math on the devstream, of course they didn't account for every little variable or situation, but it was outright stated that they gain aproximately that amount. On the same Q&A they also so showed the reason why the survivor is gaining this distance to the killer - the difference between the collision capsules and the "tightness" of the turn.
It's values given by the devs, not something I've calculated, it's right here if you for some reason don't believe what I'm saying:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=gTpZSllfMmw.It's around the 16:37 mark they begin to go into this.
Alright, its 6am and im in the mood for math... i'll try my best to calculate how much an average loop gains. The bigger the tile, the less impact looping has (it gets exponentially worse for smaller loops). Thus the example of a water tower is not very good and they also didnt do the math really, since they only provided absolute values but didnt explain how much a speed increase it gives.
We should care about the loops we actually play with. The average loop is 15-20m long and we're gonna assume its a circle. The circumference is 2piR. Killer radius is 0,5m, survivor radius is 0,45m.For a 15m loop: U=15m=2piR, so the loops radius is R=15m/2pi=2.39m.
The killer loops a 2,89m radius circle, while the survivor loops a 2,84m radius circle. Now we calculate the new circumference for killer and survivor, which is
U(Killer)= 2,89m2pi= 18,15m
U(Survivor)= 2,84m2pi = 17,83m
It takes 3,94s for the killer to loop once (18,15m : 4,6m/s) and 4,45s for the survivor (17,83m : 4m/s).
If the survivor had the same hitbox as the killer, it would take 4,54s to loop once (18,15m : 4m/s).
So the speed increase would be 2% (4,54s : 4,45s).For a 20m loop (R=3,18m):
U(Killer) = 23,15m
U(Survivor) = 22,83m
It takes 5,70s to loop once. And it takes 5,79s if survivors had killers hitboxes.
So the speed increase for a 20m loop would be 1,5% (5,79s : 5,70s)
If survivors had the same hitbox as killers, they would lose out the additional 1,5%-2% of their movement speed, which is ~0,075m/s. The speed difference between killer and survivor is only 0,6m/s or 0,4m/s, so that results in a 14% effective speed increase (0,6m/s : 0,525m/s) against normal killers and a 23% effective speed increase (0,4m/s : 0,325m/s) against slower killers.
Tl;dr: Looping takes around 15% longer to catch up due to hitbox differences (more for slow killers).
Honestly not as much as i expected. I guess other factors play a role like acceleration. Notable is that slower killers are more affected than normal killers from the hitbox abuse.
I'm really tired, so if my math doesnt make sense somewhere, please tell me. I'll sleep for now.It got approved
For everyone who is interested in hitbox abuse and what it does. Please tell me, if the math is wrong. Thats the first time we can calculate the hitbox consequences for dbd.Yeah, that's really annoying when ones post gets flagged for review just because of editting spelling and typos.
I certainly agree, it should absolutely be balanced, it's not that looping in it self is a problem, but it's the fact there are these differences like difference in collision capsule sizes that these issues occur. Fixing the collision capsules wouldn't be something that would take long, that's really just adjusting a value and thats basically it.
It's good that we can finally do some more accurate calculations on this matter, to better reach an understanding of whats actually going on.
So in regards to your calculations, they seem correct, although rounding the numbers could in some cases affect the end result, and also should keep the rounding consistent, like it's actually 4,46s and not 4,45s because you should be rounding up and not down in that specific case, not that it makes any in impactful diffence in this case though. However, in a lot of cases, the looping isn't circular, but more square-like, which obviously also affects the end result.
Acceleration does play a role, but as Mclean said, it's close to a 50'th of a second for killers, obviously this might be different for survivors as they move at 4m/s and the fastest killers at 4,6m/s.
Also, it's collision capsules, not hitboxes but I get what you mean.
So it roughly takes about 15% (more for slower killers) longer to catch up due to collision capsule differences.
And as you said, it gets worse when the loop is actually shorter, like for instance with interior loops which often have windows that means you can much more easily break from the chase, or at least gain great distance from the killer. -
@Malakir said:
dude I explained all things you and others mentioned in my previous posts, this guy just won't think or its a troll. Let's stop giving attention to this thread.
The answer is no and everybody agrees on thatCase closed
..and people keep dismissing, the fact that this isn't just a matter of that you can gentap, but you can tap through most that would trigger a skill check thus avoiding the skill check and any detrimental effect associated with it INCLUDING other intended gameplay balance effects - like for instance alerting the killer.
@TheBean is right about whats said in regards to the exploit, and in regards to sanctioning/whitelisting, it's actually ONLY "gentapping with ruin" that's sanctioned - none of the other examples of tapping (including gentapping) to avoid negative gameplay mechanics and effects.
The main point of the matter is that because you can tap and avoid most skill checks, which also means you can avoid intended gameplay mechanics and their effects, including their associated mechanics - like failing a skill check alerting the killer and revealing your location.
As @TheBean is also pointing out, what if it's not Hex: Ruin, but say Hex: Huntress Lullaby? You can avoid its effects.
Unnerving presence, same deal as above.
Healing, both selfcare and healing others - same as above.
Sabotaging, with and without the perk - same as above.Addons? It's the same deal - basically renders any addon that affects the skill check useless.
Lets take The Doc's madness, you can avoid the randomly placed skill check, by tapping (gentapping).
So, it's most certainly not just the tapping of gens thats affected by a player being able to just to tap to avoid the skill checks, as it negate a lot of other gameplay balance and mechanics.
Why they've have sanctioned the tapping of gens with hex: ruin don't make sense especially when considering how many other gameplay effects and mechanics it affects negatively, including the intended gameplay balance. However as mentioned above, it's only tapping of gens with hex: ruin thats actually sanctioned. This means that any other type of tapping to avoid skill checks with detrimental effects, would be an abuse, an exploit of game mechanics to achieve unfair gameplay advantage.
Furthermore, when you can just tap to avoid the skill checks with detrimental effects, it renders certain perks useless.
-
I've seen survivors repeatedly just keep going through the same window over and over - it would seem that basically the survivor player is spamming the interact button, and is certainly going through way more than the 3 times. Which also can be used to spam killer allerts.
-
In my opinion they should rework how hexes work, to make them more viable.
First thing they should change - all totems start as a dull totem, if a hex perk effect triggers and it's not placed on the map, then it should immediate select one of the still standing totems that is furthest away from the survivors and apply the hex in question to it.
--> This would seemingly fix bad placement spawn issue.Second, I think they should also allow for is replacing of cleansed totems - giving certain hex totems more usability.
Third, those hex perks that requires an effort to build up tokens to make them usable during the trial, the kille should not lose the accumulated benefits when it's cleansed.
Fourth, make the hexes effects semi-persistent until individually cleansed - what is meant by this that for those where it would apply, it's not enough to remove the hex totem, those affected by the hex would still be so until individually cleansed.
Fifth, it should be possible for the killer to choose to interact with certain hex totem and transfer it's effect to the killer or the killers weapon.
--> Example: Hex: Ruin is now applied to the main weapon where every survivor struck will be cursed with the hex and will require it to be cleansed before it's removed. -
@Beverly said:
Gen-tapping is the equivalent of watching paint dry to me. Spamming the same button over and over again to avoid ruin skill checks just doesn't seem worth it, especially considering how long it takes and how dull it is. I usually get it done much faster by bum-rushing it.That's probably the best course of action to take during ruin since you can safely assume the rest of your team is running around like headless chickens trying to find the totem. As far as running up and tapping the gen to stop regression during a chase goes, it feels useless. The killer will just stop to kick it, creating a bigger setback.
The skill checks really aren't that big of a deal. Anyone can work through ruin. Gen-tapping, however, prolongs the repairs and does not do much.I would not worry too much about it. Heck, the survivors may even miss out on co-op points if they're repairing with someone else.
Yeah? The point though is with what I've been trying to point out above, is that it isn't just tapping gens where you can avoid skill checks with detrimental effects, but most skill checks in fact. And in doing so, you're also avoiding other associated game mechanics, which directly affect the intended game balance.
To give an example..
If you tap the gen or any other skill check where if you failed it would actually alert the killer, by giving the killer both a visual and audible cue, by tapping you're effectively avoiding the skill check, and by avoiding the skill check you're also negating the associated gameplay mechanic from triggering, which will rob the killer of that benefit. Which is it directly will affect the intended gameplay aspects and balance. -
@Nos37 said:
@Incarnate said:
Seriously, how can you not see this is an actual issue? There are so many game mechanical and gameplay aspects that are directly avoided through just tapping to avoid skill checks.I see it, but I also see that the cost outweighs the benefit, and the devs can always steepen that cost.
The Killer will patrol gens if not in a chase so it's only a matter of time before every gen is checked. A Survivor can choose to repair at 50% the normal speed to bypass skill checks that could potentially reveal their location to the Killer, but it's not worth it because the Killer will check that gen eventually anyway; especially if it takes the Survivor twice as long to repair.
As Survivor, would you equip this perk:
"Exploitative: You know how to navigate your way around intended game mechanics. Chance for skill checks reduced by 100%. You heal, repair, sabotage, and open exit gates 50% slower."By removing gen-tapping from the whitelist it puts more strain on the enforcement team. It's not as simple as "okay, you did a thing, now you are punished." As stated earlier: it's arbitrary.
- This Survivor spent 160 seconds repairing a gen (instead of 80 seconds) without the possibility of me (the Killer) ever knowing his location (the equivelant of that Survivor having passed every skill check). Ban?
- This Survivor worked on a gen for a split second before being pulled off by an Evil Within 1 Shape. Ban?
The team would have to watch through hours of footage to make sure they don't accidentally or needlessly punish a player (on top of the hours of footage for worse things that are bannable).
If you see it, then it doesn't make sense why you'd even suggest that, because all of that is completely irrelevant, as it's a simple matter that it shouldn't be possible to just tap through to avoid skill checks, and as such they won't need any enforcement teams in this regard.
How they fix it is a different matter, but avoiding skill checks means you also avoid detrimental effects and their associated gameplay mechanics and aspects, which are important for the game balance - hence why they need to fix it rather than allow it because it directly negates associated gameplay mechanics.
@Nos37 said:
If I find a dollar on the street, pick it up, and keep it, I am stealing.
If it costs the city (and therefore taxpayers) hundreds of dollars for me to be arrested, booked, and brought before a judge, is stealing that dollar an actual issue? What about $5? $20? The crime is arbitrary.
If the dollar was in a sewer drain among filth and trash, and I had to get on my stomach to squeeze into the sewer and ruin my clothes just to get it, was it worth it if I have to spend money on the water bill for cleaning my clothes? The cost outweighs the benefit.
I think you're making it seem to be costing them way more that it actually might or will.
Also, this affects game balance alot more than it just being the tapping of gens, as I've been trying to point. -
@powerbats - you can most certainly avoid skills checks by tapping, it's potentially possible that a skill check might trigger, just as you tap, but not very likely, plus a tap isn't holding for a few seconds, tapping is tapping and holding is holding, not the same thing.
Currently as it is now in the game, it doesn't matter if it's just a tap, like less than 0.25s, it will still stop the regression without a skill check, but it's not if a skill check triggers that matter in this regard though. The time you spend on stopping the regression actually does matter in relation to game balance, because it takes the killer roughly 2s to apply the regression, but you can remove that with less than 0.25s of effort.
The point about that you can avoid skill checks by tapping, isn't just gen-tapping, it's tapping in general, in effect you can litterally avoid most skill checks that have a detrimental effect imposed on it, where avoiding the skill check you also avoid the negative effect thats associated with it, where this effect is intended to help the killer, which directly hurts the killer's gameplay and balance - how is it that you don't see this?