Incarnate
Incarnate
About
- Username
- Incarnate
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Dreamnomad said:
Dev video addressed this issue. They didn't "intend" for 360s to be a thing, but they don't dislike it and have no plans to change it.Well, if they didn't intend for it then they most certainly need to make sure that it's actually balanced and non-abusable. Just allowing it without actually making tweaks to something they didn't intend for is a bad idea, and usually can be exploited somehow without said tweaks.
-
@BACKSTABBER said:
there should be hidden (NASTY) reasons I dont understand why survs use gen tappingplease someone tell
For instance to bypass hex ruin or doctors random skill checks are obvious reasons.
I think there should be consequences to gen-tapping other than it takes longer, as you're directly trying to bypass something that is there to hinder your progress. -
I think it's a good idea, but it shouldn't be directly based on random chance.
I think there should be a 50/50 split between game elements that work in both sides favor.
So there is the standard shack layout, then the above, and there should be a neutral sided one as well.
Where if one layout is spawned in favor one side, then the other spawns in favor of the other side, and so for forth with the rest of loopable areas. -
The hatch standoff is not a good gameplay part, and it litterally just waste both players time.
It would be much better if there was an interactable game-element that would allow the last survivor to directly open the exit gates without having to work the generators, like an emergency generator. Implementing this should obviously remove the hatch.Gameplay-wise the survivor can go for this element, the killer can protect it, but it's not something that would allow escape outright. This way, if the survivor activates the element, then the exit gates still needs to be powered. Which would make it much more close to the normal end gameplay.
Another angle is simply remove the hatch, but when there is only one survivor left, it could automaticallly power the exit gates, where they would still need to be unlocked. This might seem to easy for the last survivor, but this is much closer to the end gameplay, which also allows for end gameplay elements to come into play, like for instance NOED, Adrenaline, etc.
-
Yes you can counter 360s, it's all about predicting it and then make your hit, no lunge.
However, given the nature of how the game is designed, also the p2p part, means that
there is a part of it that might be abusable. -
Yeah, I wonder about this too, especially with the part about unopened important balance discussions.
-
Then you should like the new update that is effective from now on, both have been merged and now share progress. Completing a vial with either role will earn Putrid Serum that may be used to unlock the Halloween cosmetics in the Store.
-
The only reason why it can be abused so hard, is due to the turning speed isn't capped, it's unrestrictive.
It's basically just a matter how fast you can move your mouse, because you can turn as fast as you can move your mouse. This can be abused hard, which it is in 360s but certainly also in loops, even areas that aren't intended as a loopable area. The only way to fix this, is to put a turning speed cap on. However 360s aren't inherently bad, but they're bad when they can be abused to a point where you can't do anything about them, which to my knowledge you can, as long as you know how. But you can't do anything about that where it's being used in areas that aren't intended as loopable areas, especially those areas where the game doesn't recoqnize it as a chase so blood lust doesn't trigger, blood lust goes of because it suddenly thinks you're not in a chase any longer. Thats the impact a non-restrictive turning speed can have on the gamebalance - fun right? Not! It screws the intended game balance royaly over. -
Honestly, they should have a completely different mode for events like these. Because they especially screw over the intended gameplay, which also screws over the intended balanced, which will affect ranking to be incorrectly reflected - like killers having a higher rank than what they're normally capable of, or survivors deranking because they lose more trials now because of the event.
-
@Chrona said:
First, look at the size of the developer and publishers. Big difference. In order to have decent dedicated servers, they need servers (and enough of them) on, at minimum, every continent. Second, look at players per march. Dbd? 5. CoD? Up to 88?
Also, if dedicated servers are always better no matter what, why do fighting games, for example, actively avoid them?There are smaller studios, smaller than what BHVR was when the game was released, who've actually set up dedicated servers for a little less than the double amount of players, in various regions, so not being a large studio isn't a good excuse, because it's certainly doable, and not really as costly as it's being made out to be. Also, it certainly also depends on if they're making use of 3rd party services or trying to do it all themselves - I can tell you there are cost efficient alternatives, but of course if you want to profit the most, you'll put the expense on the players rather than your business.
Another important part to mention, p2p has some serious issues, not just internet safety issues, but also the fact that if host has any network or connection problems, EVERYONE will suffer for it. Just take a game as Warhammer: Vermintide - End Times, that game is p2p, a great game with a network model that everyone playing the game suffers for, like for instance when you're going for legendary loot, and even when it's possible to get all possible three in one game, that just gets ruined because of a connection issue - in this case it was steam that went down. My point is that we the players are the one that suffers from them choosing a p2p model, them putting the expense on us.
-
@SmokePotion said:
There are two playstyles that are both supported in the game, and actively punished by it.One you will never double pip from, and another, even though it has perks supporting it in the game and is a core concept, you will be lucky to safety pip if you do it.On the killer side, you have Board Control play being punished. By this I mean controling what generators are taken and when, so you set up an endgame that you can control. IE: Ending up with 3 generators close by. There are Killers who excel at this, and even seem built for it (the doctor comes with Overcharge, and his tracking ability lets you make sure they are working on the generators you want them to) However I keep finding myself getting 2-3 person hatched in these games. Even though i've done everything right, they got to hatch out. Which means I will never double pip like that. Which promotes a hyper agressive killer pool. Killers that can put a whole team down by the second gen.
On the survivor side is stealth play. There's whole perk sets revolving around it, on both sides. But if you do it well, you'll be lucky to pip. Instead of rewarding that I unhooked a comrade, and did 2 gens by myself without the killer ever laying eyes on me. I might get to hold my rank, cause I literally have 0 evasion score... which is weird, cause i did a TON of evading.
I completely agree with this.
Something odd here as well, the perk quick & quiet, is build for stealth play, but if you also equip sprint burst, you won't be able to actually use it without actually activating sprint burst because they use the same button.
What is even more bizarre is, that while I've been pointing this out, people have been like, "why would you waste a SB on a QQ move, thats just stupid?" all while failing to realize that they both use the same button to activate. This is something BHVR should fix as well, because there is really no point in not having individual activation buttons for them, instead of just having one trigger button - not having seperate trigger buttons is the stupid thing.I think they implement a lot of things without thinking them through, and very often they will go with what sounds great but in practice isn't, where they for the most of the times won't use the tons of feedback provided to fix it, but instead apply their own twist to it and potentially making it even worse. To me it seems like they don't really know what they're doing they're just trying things out and hope it works out. Some devs also seem to have some unfortunate developer philosophies and ideas, which has been proven by various statements on their weekly streams. This game has a lot of potential and a playerbase to support it, unfortunately its not being used well.
-
@Peanits said:
In winter. December is not confirmed.Uhm, isn't that a bit late? Considering that Halloween is an event in October.
-
@Boss said:
It's all opinion-based.
Been exclusively playing Wraith for about a month now.
Besides the usual, i got no new complaints.Maybe so, but it doesn't change the fact that the game is what it is - namely very repetitive.
It doesn't change the fact either that there are "features" which are broken, even if they're working as intended.
Like for instance, the chase and mechanics loop mechanics in the game - most are actually broken, in the sense of it being imbalanced and is fundamentally flawed, where no amount of tweaking will fix it. Take blood lust for example, it's good when it actually or finally triggers, but when it doesn't trigger, then it's a joke where the killer is paying dearly for it. Certain areas can continously be looped without ever having to actually drop the pallet, obviously some killers deals better with this than others, which is why it's flawed fundamentally, because every killer should be able to deal with it efficiently. So you may say it's all opinion-based, but it doesn't change the facts of the game, and the facts of the game has consequences as well, both good and bad.One thing with the event I definitely can say isn't a very good thing, is that due to the secondary objective taking so much focus, it screws the intended gamebalance over, where a lot more killers are able to win than normal, which inherently provides them with a higher rank than what they're actually capable of handling.
-
Perhaps @Patricia would like to chime in instead?
-
There is music, but there are those annoying flower sounds that are much louder than the music.
-
It's not just the event effects, the game is very repetitive, and various "features" of the game are broken and the devs either don't realize it or refuse to acknowledge it and do something about it. I've lately been finding myself coming closer and closer to not wanting to play the game, simply because it's that repetitive and there many issues which gets abused, which leads to a gameplay experience that cannot be enjoyed because it's that bad.
-
Despite the reaspons for and against dedicated servers, it is for the better of the game overall, and they should be working on bringing it over to dedicated servers, even if that part would be a work in progress for a good while, it's definitely something they should be working towards. It may be that they didn't have that much funds to begin with, but they've had tremendous amounts of growth, both in terms of infrastructure, technologies, more staff members, more funds to work with, etc. I'm not saying they shouldn't be making new content, but they should also be working on bringing it over to dedicated servers.
I think it's also important enough to mention that, having it P2P isn't just putting everyone's safety who's connected in jeopardy,, but it also imposes a lot of performance issues unto the host, which will affect everyone if the hosts computer isn't capable enough to act as a server while also playing the game, then that will severely affect the systems performance, which certainly also will translate into bad network performance. So yes, dedicated servers most certainly is a must, and it's not because they cannot afford it or that it will take too much time, its that if they do, they will profit less.
-
@nssBoB said:
on topic though gaming and especially PvO gaming is full of bug and minor exploits that end up regular mechanics. What is and what is not intended is irrelevant. What is relevant is what is accessible in the game we play and as long as it is not deemed bannable exploit (of which to my knowledge the only widespread thing was DHing on top of things that are not supposed to be accessible). Just play the game and wait for devs to sort out the stuff they do not want in it.Thats why we're providing the devs feedback through the community, because it is things like this that should absolutely be dealth with and fixed, rather than end up as a regular mechanic just because people ignored it even when they felt it was actually a problem....and it's not just a minor few people who feel it's a problem, it's actually quite many.
-
The 360 move is really abusive and should be changed. It shouldn't be possible to do a 360 turn as fast as you currently can, which is currently near instant. There should be limitation in place - I think turning speed acceleration would help in this regard, so one can't just turn 180 degrees, and certainly not 360 degrees near instantaneously.
-
It is one sided and quite poorly executed, but don't expect them to fix this during the event, because quite frankly I don't think they care enough. They will make note of it, and hopefully they'll avoid making the same mistake, although I seriously doubt it as they'd rather go with their spin on things instead of making something that is balanced and is actually working. Even the feedback they get from the PTB they don't take as is, they either ignore it or take it and put their spin on it..... and apparently in their mind it doesn't have to be viable nor balanced for both sides.
-
@SovererignKing said:
To play Trapper effectively at high rank requires more brain power than Nurse. Nurse you have to plan ahead only during the chase, Trapper you have to plan before, during, and after chases. He also requires you know Survivors running paths to an extreme degree, in order to “push” them toward areas you have traps set. This is either to actually trap them, or cut off all possible escape routes. Which is my favorite as I love to do this and as soon as they go the way I want them to, I often laugh and say “Well, now what genius?”If you think you can just “set traps” and hope on blind luck, you’re in for a world of hurt.
I just have to say this, if you need that much for him to be viable at high ranks, then its quite obvious he actually needs a rework. Why? Think about it, Nurse has the highest skill cap in the game, but also the strongest power in the game, but requires less skill than trapper at high ranks. Obviously, any killer that isn't that viable at high ranks will require even more skill to be viable at higher ranks. It's the same with the trapper, does it make the trapper viable as is at high ranks? Certainly not, it's the player behind who's making it viable.
So to make it equally viable the trapper should require equal skill and have an equally strong power as the nurse to be considered equally viable.Personally I think the trapper needs a rework to make him more viable, as I've outlined above.
-
When it comes to balancing, they shouldn't be considering the skill of the players, as it would played differently in different hands, plus the fact that skill has nothing to with the balance of the actual killer.
I think he should be reworked so that his traps would get utilized better, instead traps just lying around why not actually have him be able to not just trap the ground, but also trap various other interactables like:
- Chests
- Lockers
- Windows
- Pallets (both non-activated and activated)
...in the sense of boobytrapping these, where they would become harder to spot, but also potentially not be able to spot them at all unless you run small game, like if he had boobytrapped a locker, so you'd only know when you interacted with it. If they could also be used on pallets that haven't been activated and that have been, that could quite easily surprise the victims, and more over prevent them from actually using them without becoming trapped. See this would make him a lot stronger, and he'd even be a killer I'd consider to play if he was capable of this.
-
Well.. That does tell something about that there is an inherent problem somewhere with how the game has been designed, because if there isn't enough survivors/victims to go around, then there is not enough people to support the game, then the other way around, if there aren't enough killers, then aren't enough people to host the game.. It says something, doesn't it?
-
...well they're only survivors IF they actually survive - so victims is fitting!
-
@Peanits said:
The only changes I could really get behind are a slightly larger trap hitbox and maybe +1 trap carrying capacity by default. Replacing the RNG struggling with a set time would be nice too.I've already suggested something like this before, and boy did many trapper mains dislike that idea, replacing the RNG for something else. Personally, I'd like it to be more skillbased, where you'd have to solve a puzzle or pass some other tough challenge than just hitting the skill check or keep pressing M1 to maybe get free.
-
Me neither, it's stupid and quite frankly seriously annoying as it just wastes our time.
-
Killers are ensured the putrid nectar provided they use the canker hooks, so if they do 3 hookings on average, then it's just two trials to get one serum.
Survivors aren't ensured any putrid nectar, only if they collect to the indicated sections on the vials, where harvesting this from a full putrid flower can potentially net the survivor around a half full vial, provided that the survirvor is able to get to one that hasn't been fully harvested yet, and with only two default ones spawning. Basically only if all have used the event offering will all survivors be able to POTENTIALLY get the putrid nectar.
Harvesting the nectar as a survivor is the equivalent of doing a totem, which means if all have used the event offering then there are suddenly 7 more totems to, so in total 12 plus 5 generators. And if they don't manage to collect a full vial then they lose some, which is very, very likely when MOST of the survivors are trying to collect this nectar. Not only that, it's not even possible to sabotage those canker hooks, not even those that have been drained, which is of benefit to the killer and another disadvantage to the survivors.
The concept, idea and lore for the event is great, but they have executed it poorly. Personally I find how the ideas has been implemented gamemechanically, has harmed the gameplay more than it has actually contributed, and it's incredibly bias towards the killer. I mainly play killer, so I can definitely tell that it affects balance a great deal, because getting those 4 kills per trial is easier than it ever has been.
It would've been a lot better if all hooks had been canker hooks and were sabotageable, where whoever actually drained it got the putrid nectar. So it could be sabotaged to drain it and a survivor could be hooked to drain it. In effect it would make getting the nectar contested between the survivors and the killer, it would lead to more hooks becoming temporarily disabled but at the cost of generators not being worked on - which it normally would be if people decided to sabotage hooks. But as it is now, survivors are forced to actually do secondary activities if they want that putrid nectar, activities that only harm the gamebalance and doesn't do anything else.
At the very least if they force secondary activities on the survivors to get the nectar, so should it be on the killer. Like say the killer had to bring the survivor to a putrid plant that could entangle the survivor - immobilize the survivor for a short amount of time, where the survivor would be released on injured state rather than dying state. That way, the killer is forced to decide - do I want the putrid nectar or do I want to work on sacrificing the survivors. Just like the the survivors are forced to either harvest the putrid nectar or work on the generators, OR any of the other activities they already have forced down on them, like cleansing totems, avoiding and escaping chases, unhooks, etc.
It's quite clear they really should change ASAP how the event is being done.
As a side note, I also hate that event screen popping up after each trial, same goes with the news popup.
First time, ok, then it should be much more minimal, like showing a +1 icon for the serum being moved to a counter area in the ui would've been more than enough. -
@Bug_Reporter said:
@Kaelum said:
@Bug_Reporter BHVR has said that doing this in the way that you are doing it, and for the reasons that you have given, is a violation of the EULA. However, they also said that is is almost impossible to prove, so they can’t do anything about it. You are harming the other survivors by removing yourself from the intended gameplay, making their gameplay suffer, which is the violation that they are referring to.Im playing as intended, the objective here during the event is to get Serum, i get all the needed serum, die (which is a possible fate inside the game) and then look for another match, devs stated at streams that if u dont wanna play just die on the hook, u shouldnt DC, but suiciding on a hook is not an offese at all, its part of the game.
Also at the game page u can clearely see that working together or helping anyone AT ALL is a matter of CHOICE, u can play by youself, throw survivors in front of the killer, u can do anything in order to survive a little longer, as long as that doesnt include glitchs and bug abuses.
No, the objective of the game for survivors is to ESCAPE, where getting the Serum is OPTIONAL. So Kaelum is right, by playing the way you did you were indeed harming the survivors chances of escaping. Why? That should be obvious when I now remind you that the game is balanced around being 4v1, so if just one leave or let him/herself be sacrificed, then it's going to suddenly be 3v1, who all have to perform that much better to actually escape.
With the part about the devs saying if people don't want to play they should suicide rather than DC, is just bad. If one doesn't want to play, then DON'T COMMIT to a match. It's that simple. Also, it's much harder to actually to survive the trial and still get the putrid nectar, because the game was balanced around doing primary objectives for both sides. So when one side suddenly has to split the focus between either doing the primary or doing the secondary non-essential activities in the game, it wrecks the intended balance. Personally I play mainly killer, and the survivor matches I've played during this event have been bad because people just focus on getting the nectar instead of the objectives. Not only that, many just suicide first chance they get, which just means people have to do more matches to actually get the serum because they lose some of the harvested unless they have a full vial.
-
Not only what OP said, but there isn't enough Putrid Nectar for every survivor, not even with offerings, and the fact that you also lose some if you don't survive isn't a good thing when there isn't enough for all, and considering how much it actually detracts from normal gameplay and wrecks balance even further, it's even worse that you lose some if you don't survive trial. Now putting on top that you only get event blood points if you harvested putrid nectar AND spent an event offering. Consider that you might not even be getting any putrid nectar from an entire, even consecutive matches where you've spent event offering (BP's) to be able to get more blood points and better chances of getting putrid nectar, but one is still not ensured any.
Basically put.. For the killer to gain the putrid nectar the killer just have to keep doing the killers objective, where the survivors have to deviate from the objective and risk that everyone gets killed in the process or in the end. Not the smartest move by BHVR. It doesn't make it any better that the hooks cannot even be sabotaged, which screws over the survivors chances of removing some of the hooks temporarily.
-
I guess the devs don't really care about their players well being when playing the game, which to me says alot about the devs.
-
@SovererignKing - I had a very similar theory, very close to yours in fact.
I'm suspecting this may lead to a new killer and survivor from the RE series, which would be cool
-
@MhhBurgers said:
tbh I think his power should just have a charge-meter similar to spirit. Nurse just needs a cooldown on her power AFTER she hit somebody. make it 3 secs or sth. All of those things naturally only should happen if we have killers more powerful in general.Or Billy should possibly have a fuel type of mechanic, like the huntress has to replenish her hatchets, and considering huntress doesn't even have any other use with her power where Billy can use it to travel the map indefinitely which is insanely powerful in relation to map pressure. In general I think most killers should have some kind limiter on how much they can actually use their power, especially when considering some have and they're not even that strong. Take trapper, his power can easily be countered and is very situational/conditional of them actually walking/running into them, a perk that reveals them, and there is a limited supply of them. Same with hag, her traps can be easily countered and even be destroyed, it requires that survivors to trigger them, and she has a limited suppply. There should be limiters in place, and survivors mechanics and elements should be reworked and rebalanced accordingly (nerf).
-
@Peasant said:
@JudgementPersonal Example
Mate, you're not entitled to see the full value of an offering every match. In the game I just played, I used the "Yamoaka Family Crest" to get the Family Residence map for the generator achievement. I repaired the generator but died at the end-game after rescuing a Claudette (no regrets!). I shouldn't whine about not getting my intended use out of the offering just as you shouldn't either.
Number crunching
A "Bloody Party Streamers" costs 5000BP, assuming that the effect was applied + the Bloodhunt you should have gained a total of 15000BP. That BP gain should be enough to sate your BP thirst as the average match where a survivor dies at the end nets roughly 15k-18k BP. Besides, its not like you won't see more of them.
While it's true that we for the most part won't get full value of our offering, but you clearly can see, OP did not even get it's benefit, because it didn't trigger, not even the bloodhunt event triggered. So in all fairness, OP got absolutely nothing out of actually using it.
-
@George_Soros said:
Geez, it's a single offering. Get more from the Bloodweb.
If your whole progress is lost that's a different thing and from what I hear they actually care about this ("refunded" millions of BP-s to some players to whom this happened), but come on, one Bloody Party Streamers is such a trifle.Most players who lost progress actually got way more back than what they had earned and lost, because they basically got something like max blood points for 4 games per hour of game time, based on the amount of game-hours when they reported/created the ticket. That resulted in something like 4x32k BP per game hour, which is 128k BP per game hour. To put this into perspective, when my fiancée lost all her progress I had way more game hours than she did, and had a lot more character progress than she did, but when she got "reimbursed" the BP she was able max level most her characters were I didn't have that many leveled that high at the time. Personally, I was also hoping to lose progress so I could get of all those yummy bloodpoints.
I've lost a lot BP my self in between sessions, and I have lost in the area of millions due to an issue with losing progress between sessions as opposed to losing it all, and I have not been reimbursed anything at all, do I cry? No, but do I find it very annoying? Most certainly, and would like all of those BP reimbursed, but support has done nothing about it that part as they haven't been able to figure out the cause of this.
However, I can understand why OP wants to get the offerings back, as they're not happening in the bloodweb as frequent as they used to, and considering it's a bloodhunt event weekend and losing offerings in general due to this is certainly annoying and if you begin to count, it might a lot of BP that is actually lost this way.
-
@Nickenzie said:
DISCLAIMER: The numbers are just rough values/placer holders. So if you see anything that is too low or too high in my "Generator Rework" thread, feel free to suggest a better number value! Thanks!REPAIR TIMES:
Generator repair times for the number of survivors on a generator: Left repair time is one survivor repairing a generator 0% to 100% and the right number is three survivors repairing a generator 0% to 100%.
1 Survivor; 2 Survivors; 3 Survivors
80sec /65sec /50secA generator will no longer have all four sides available for all four survivors to repair a generator! A generator will always spawn with at least one side being blocked by the environment!
GENERATOR PARTS:
There will be 12 generator parts in every trial that survivors can pick up. Auras of generator parts will be revealed to survivors within a 12 meter range and generator parts will be spaced 32 meters from one and another. When a survivor is carrying a generator part, the survivor cannot use their items but the survivor can drop the generator part at anytime.
INSTALL GENERATOR PART:
Generators need only two generator parts to be fully repaired. The first installed generator part will allow the generator to be repaired to 50% but cannot be repaired any further. However two installed generator parts will allow the generator to be repaired to 100%.
You cannot start repairing a generator when no generator parts have been installed in that generator!
When a survivor begins to install a generator part which takes 5 seconds, the survivor will be faced with two difficult skill checks during that time frame. Succeeding both of the skill checks will install the generator part but failing any of the skill checks will cause the survivor to start over on the install generator part action WITHOUT alerting the killer.
DONE!
Leave civil feedback below and tell me how you feel about your opinion! If you're gonna disagree with me, make sure you have reasoning and justification!
I think this is a great idea, of course it will need to be tested tweaked a lot before being fully implemented.
This would make doing the generators more interesting, though I think it should be more than just parts, perhaps it should be several different types of parts and also require fuel to be activated.Also, I think instead the skill check it should be a puzzle-like minigame, especially as those tend to get really intense when under pressure, like for instance time (which could be you know the killer is about to close in on you).
-
@Peanits said:
Please file a support ticket at https://support.deadbydaylight.com/hc/en-usSomeone should be able to help you there.
I've had this issue for a long time (it keeps recurring and random times), and I was in contact with support and they haven't been able to help me, of course they may able to now, since it's quite some time now since I were in contact with them about it. However, this issue is different from losing all progress.
-
@Grey87 said:
I'm pretty sure the devs made it this way on purpose.
Not a problem.
Stop crying.
Good day.Just because they make it that way on purpose doesn't mean that there isn't a problem.
Currently the entire game is made that way on purpose, and yet it has tons of problems and issues.@Sarief said:
They don't with his rarest addons. Killing does not take away speed bonus.
Play with your food is back up plan
Technically, according to the description they should be. Because there is nothing the text that says otherwise.
-
Actually... I completely agree. However, if one didn't lose tokens after the obsession was sacrificed or killed, then it would make more sense. But in essence MM's perks are based around obsession, so it makes sense that some of them might counteract each other. However I don't think their unique perks should counteract each other that way.
StBfL: Attacking your Obsession will make you lose 4/3/2 Tokens. You can no longer gain Tokens if your Obsession is sacrificed or killed. <--- That should have added: ,however you won't lose any gained tokens, if the obsession is no longer alive.
With that change it would be more conducive with Dying light.
-
@Elegant & @cetruzzo - It doens't really what you do in relation to that, because not every killer player will do as you do, furthermore, the gameplay experience will differ greatly where it would be a lot better to not be forced to play it with balanced skewed even further. It would be a lot better to not be forced play it.
Consider that there are many who play killers ruthlessly irregardless of how many players are in, some play extremely competitively and plays to win and will use every bit of advantage presented to them.
Furthermore, the game is balanced around being 4v1, not 3v1, 2v1 or 1v1, anything less than 4v1 is going to be even more unbalanced, where they neeed to be able to reliably balance the game. They can balance after how people play, because we all play so differently. They can only balance after known static facts.
-
@CoolAKn said:
If the game starts out as a 3v1, there is one less generator to repair, meaning survivors only need to repair 4 generators to power the Exit Gates, but with one less person.If there are less players, the killer MIGHT spare you because of the person that DC'd or did not load in.
I have only ever seen one time where a game started 1v1.
It's still far from balanced! The game is 4v1 for a reason, one less generator does not equate one generator in balance terms. Objectives-wise yes, but only objectives-wise, because there is still one less survivor to deal with, that means more pressure on those 3 players, and it's even worse if there are few players. Furthermore, people that quit during the match but where an equivalent of generators have been fixed is even worse.
I agree, I don't think the match should play out if it loads with less survivors, and they should be returned to the lobby to find more players. They should keep their of offerings and anything they brought into the match.
I think in matches where players quit before an equal amount of generators have been fixed it should immediately reduce the amount of the generators needed.
-
@Sarief said:
Steam mod banned @DocOctober for post that 3 weeks old.
He had to go through all his messages to find one that was "justifiable" and not banning anyone else on the discussion either. It happens a lot on Steam forums, just ignore it.
If you got banned, it means the troll you were arguing with was moderator (happened to me) and him calling you dick is OK, since he's mod.If it was IRL, I would say "welcome to Russia" but since this is not...
ps: Steam forum is independent and things that happen there are "managed" by other people. just fyi
It certainly sucks that you have been banned on the Steam for something that actually wasn't a justifiable and valid reason. I don't see DocOctober as part of the moderator team on steam or here for that matter, it is very likely however as you say it's a second or even personal account of the moderators that you were dealing with, it also possible that a moderator was influenced to ban you, like it is with the above situation.
Steam isn't independent, that was their original community forum and it is the one that is officially associated with the game on Steam, so no it is not independent, furthermore, all the moderators there have been chosen by BHVR, and are supposed to follow their rules and code of conduct ALONG with steams rules and code of conduct.
I'm not going disclose who the members in question are, nor am I'm going to disclose who the moderator in question is, that is reserved for those with correct priviliges.
Mod authority and power abuse is most certainly a problem and should be handled, and that you @Sarief have been a victim of this too, makes me believe even more that there is at least one if not more who are abusing their moderator authority and power entrusted to them by BHVR. This kind of abuse should not be tolerated at all, and BHVR and community managers should investigate this much further, and should also appoint one to be looking into these matters.
I encourage more to stand out and share your experiences with DbD moderator authority and power abuse, so that we may get rid of those moderators.
PS. @Sarief, I did make a reply earlier to your post, but unfortunately it got flagged after a typo edit, and apparently ended up getting deleted.
-
@ZombieGenesis said:
A single token wouldn't affect this perk at all. You still need 2 more hooks and by then the survivors will have found it and destroyed it. DH itself doesn't need a fix, the hex system as a whole does.Perhaps a fix like in this threads original post: Buff General Hexplay ?
-
@AshleyWB said:
What about a hex which buffers all survivor perks after the first gen is completed. This hex perk lights up after a single gen repair.
This perk deactivates all survivor perks on everyone until the hex is destroyed.
No mither would remain the same but every other perk would be deactivated until hex destroyed.
As if you brought in no perks at all.Should have it's own topic.
-
I actually made a post here, had to edit it for single typo, and now has to be approved - sigh.
In short, I think it's a good idea, but there should be done several things to improve hex totem play.
Also revise devour hope to be more fitting of how current mechanics are now. -
I think something like this should be implemented.
Considering it works in stages and only becomes more powerful with more stacks/tokens, it should light up depending on how powered it is, so perhaps something like this ->
2 Token it becomes faintly lit.
3 Tokens it becomes dimly lit
4 Tokens it becomes moderately lit
5 Tokens it becomes fully lit.Perhaps change it to whenever survivor safely unhooks a survivor the killer gains a devour hope token.
Also, I think in general hex perks should be buffed more, hex totems should start as dull totems and only when their trigger happens do they activate revealing their location. Furthermore cleansing the hex totem won't be enough to rid the survivors of any hex. Any active hex on a survivor or token won't be removed when a hex is totem is cleansed. Survivors can remove the hex from each other but not by one self, they should also implement an equipment for this, so one can remove a hex by one self.
To give an example:
Devour Hope - The killer has gotten a number of tokens, the hex totem gets cleansed, the killer keeps the tokens.
Hex: Ruin - When a survivor get a skill check with it triggers and hexes the survivor, where cleansing the hex: ruin totem won't remove the hex from the survivors, only individually cleansing them from each other will.
Obviously, there are some hex totems where this might be a bit too strong, like No One Escapes Death, but rather than empowering the killer it should debuff the survivors individually so they will need to remove the hex totem and cleanse it individually.
I think this would make hex perks much more viable.
-
Devour Hope works quite differently from what was described.
I think it would be better if it was changed into -> When all survivors are at injured state, the hex totem activates making survivors unable to heal. Breaking the hex totem breaks the curse, however if there are any dull totems left, the hex can activate again. If it's the last totem, the moon becomes dark red and the survivors suffer from the the exposed status as well.
-
@Orion said:
You need to be right up the Survivors' asses and press M1. It's not like a Memento Mori.But thats what I did, use it up close while in EW3, tried several times, and it wouldn't allow me.
-
Well, one of the primary problems of p2p is when the host's system or internet connection isn't adequate enough to be the host, where acting as the host requires more of the system and the internet connection, whics leads to various issues that is a detriment to the overall gameplay experience.
Example
One who has a system that can just barely run the game (meeting minimum requirements), will have very poor performance ingame, even with setting the game's graphic settings to the absolute minimum. Now say this player decides to play killer, not only will this player have an even worse performance as killer, but this will also affect the system's performance and thus also negatively affect the network performance which will undoubtedly will cause issues in the game, which will be experienced as rubberbanding. P2P is not a good solution, especially not when it's competitive game.