Jb94
Jb94
About
- Username
- Jb94
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,333
- Last Active
Comments
-
They're also a nice way to accumulate points- a good game will end with max brutality, but a couple k extra on a bad game doesn't hurt.
-
Clearly the meta is to run de ja vu and visionary at the same time for maximum coverage.
Dunno if the devs realised this, probably need to nerf both?
-
I agree with this- imo exhaustion needs to more interactable either by improving killer ways to inflict it or by grading how long the exhaustion should be based on usage (so DH and SB have a longer exhaustion cooldown than lithe or balanced which are situational in comparison).
Borrowed time and unbreakable are both fine on their own, decisive makes them both horrible (small pp, and the complete negation of the need to attempt to unhook safely). Imo decisive should come with a penalty after its used- sure you have it as a contingency, but in the current state people go out of their way to weaponise their DS- a penalty would make it a last resort.
But yeah, I think the survivor meta is very stale and encourages poor gameplay on both sides- killer also needs a shakeup, but I think that should be done through buffs either to fringe perks or killer basekit.
-
I play ps4. First game was a slugging nurse. Refused to hook anyone which was annoying for me as I was the last survivor alive and still had loads of time on my bleed out timer.
I feel like PC killers are flexing by showing off the worst they have to offer.
-
I don't love how this request is worded- while I broadly agree that more diversity would be better, I actually think this is something that the devs are aware of and working on, so it's not the best accusation to make right now.
That said: I also really dislike the 'proportion of the population' argument people are making to handwave this topic. Dbd is a. international game, not only in its player base, but also its setting. The idea that either BHVR or the entity should aim to have the game represent ethnic representation within in America/Canada is at best really really boring and at worst... Well y'know.
Final point: licenced survivors really scew the proportions of representation- quentin, nancy, Steve, Laurie, Ash and bill are bump up the Caucasian population of the game. Of these quentin is meh, but the rest all have some degree of brand recognition which justify their inclusion.
Tl:dr- to OP- they're visibly working on it.
To anyone using the phrase 'representative of the population', stop making me cringe and switch your brain on for a change.
-
@EuphoricBliss35 said:
Look it up, don’t come to the forums smh
Actually I genuinely can't get over how stupidly rude this is: what about this topic is unfitting for the general discussion section of the forum?
I haven't seen anything about this specific glitch or whatever and I'm just curious dude. What's with the policing?
-
@EuphoricBliss35 said:
Look it up, don’t come to the forums smh
How would I look it up?
Apologies: I'll make sure my next post involves the words 'springtrap', 'x killer is ruined' or 'MMR' so we can really just keep this forum purely focused on the important issues at hand.
-
I had the same idea. Sadly I'm at rank 1 and play enough to stay there.
Rank 1 you need all 4 emblems at iri. Gatekeeper and devout are both entirely dependant on survivor behaviour--if they get a decent rush you're on gold gatekeeper, if they start Dcing/ hook suiciding you'll be on gold devout. By far the worst is chaser though- as far as I can tell the only reliable way to get this to iri is to drag out the game to a painful degree. Occasionally this happens naturally, but the vast vast majority of games result in a gold emblem. This is before we get on to killers who underperform in the emblem system by actually using their powers...
If you're at literally any other rank than red it should be viable though!
-
I think it would be good to start creating links in lore, I think this specific idea is a little too simple to be worth implementing.
At a push this could be implemented through legendary skins- but I'm not really sure what meg's brother brings to the game that any other character doesn't already offer it.
There is potential for some interactions based on proximity. Rin, Yui and Adam all lived in Japan at around the same time, it would be interesting if any of them came across each other in passing- some kind of butterfly effect situation. Jeff and legion all come from the same town and that's not been explored either, but could be interesting.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1380829#Comment_1380829
Are you playing non-licensed killers?
Yep. Reset the game and got my first as trapper, so I guess that's a fix of sorts!
-
I've played back to back killer games ending with the glow, yet to receive a crown. This a bug?
-
@dastru said:
you can thank hypersensitive people who cant ignore messages
Why not thank the people who can't help but send abuse after a game?
-
@DeadArsenal said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1349862#Comment_1349862
That's nice, but you know what I see? I see a bunch of self-important self-righteous amateur social engineers making demands for a team of artists to change their work or else. Typical behavior from dictators, fascists, bigots, and the social justice community alike.
OK. So. Words mean things. I love that your word of the day calander has been useful in expanding your vocabulary, but you might want to start reading the definition of some the words you use:
Capitulation: capitulation is basically giving in to the demands of an opponent. I've not seen anyone strongly push for this, and I've never felt like BHVR were staunch opponents of the lgbt+ community. An ACTUAL example of capitulation would be BHVR going back on the tweet to appease people offended by the inclusion of LGBT people in the game- the thing you seem to be pushing for in opposition to their current stance.
Bigot: a bigot is someone who holds intolerant views usually based on ignorance. I don't think people responding positively to this announcement is bigoted- like who is this bigoted against? Homophobes because they have to be reminded that gay people exist? I have seen a lot of very calm and good faith responses to the kinds of claims your making across the forum over the last couple of days--very little active dismissal, mostly attempts to educate with many people drawing on personal experience. That you feel so hostile on this topic that you've resorted to throwing out buzz words looks like bigotry on your part to me.
Fasism:... Do I need to bother with this one? There's hyperbole, but then there's genuinely inappropriate comparisons. Fascism is a form of right wing government which tends to specifically target marginalised people in order to create an exclusionary group identity- typically backed up with violence. A very famous fascist government (you know the one) was known for targeting lgbt people specifically and they're a common target for fascist rhetoric. I'm sorry, but giving Nea an ex girlfriend and a rainbow beanie is not a form of violence or oppression. If you don't like it, just don't engage with it- you aren't in any danger of being forced to engage with this stuff and the fact that you feel you are is utterly pathetic. I don't want to have to point the mirror back at you like I did with capitulation and bigot... But those feet of yours sure look like they would slip comfortably into some fashy boots.
-
@yikers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1349664#Comment_1349664
The official twitter account of the company that runs the game yes where they talk about politics and how that will affect the game in the future.
Why are you focusing on a reply you think is off-topic rather than the valid responses to your original post? Lol
-
Less glib reply:
Everything is political. Video games partipate in reflecting and shaping culture for many individuals-your personal ideology is not apolitical, chances are its just the status quo which you rush to defend the second someone a little outside of your homogenous view of the world tries to be heard.
-
So firstly you're using 'political' to mean 'acknowledges the existence of non straight people' right?
My dictionary isn't the homophobic edition so the definition in mine is a tad different!
-
@MongolPSR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1348626#Comment_1348626
@KRG so.... I told myself I was going to stay away from the thread after the amount of negativity. However after a night of thinking about it and hanging with my friends and relaxing I really feel like I need to defend myself on this. I'm bi, if you think that me simply mentioning my sexuality is screaming it than I feel sorry for you because that kind of annoyance must be so draining. Here's the thing though, this isn't your safe space, this isn't my safe space either. This is a forum board where I appropriately took the time to talk about a decision from the devs and what that meant for me as a person. Everyone here has a right to say what they feel but that also means others have a right to respond in kind, or in some peoples cases hatred. This also means that I did need to mention that this kind of decision is incredible different from the world I grew up in and that it brings me tears of joy that companies are finally starting to take a stand for basic human rights. You can be supportive without speaking, but vocal support is so much stronger than silent support. That's why I'm so happy that Behavior is taking a public stand.
You say don't play the victim and I'm not, I use to be a victim but I'm not anymore because I refuse to be. You're trying to take this post into a different direction that it was never meant to be in simply because of the subject matter that you don't approve of. I refuse to apologize for this, but I do feel empathy towards you and any grievance this may have caused because if I cant do that for you how could I ever expect you to do it for me. People simply talking about there sexuality isn't the same as screaming it, it also doesn't define me, being bi is a part of myself and a very intimate one at that but I am also so many things than just my sexuality. The thing is though is that this recent decision by the devs is centered around sexuality, so the focus is put onto it.
You say that it has no place in gaming but you're wrong. Videogames are devices to tell stories and ideas, they could be simple or they can be complex but ultimately they reflect ourselves and our world. The devs are writing and showing us the backstory of these characters that we play, this means we will learn about them and that includes their sexuality. This doesn't mean the devs will be writing erotic fiction for their characters the most likely outcome from this decision is that they wont be bothered or hold themselves back anymore by mentioning who people use to have relationships with like they recently have done for David, Nurse, Wraith, and Dwight. This is also the best outcome because the ultimate goal of representation is that it should just be normal. Writing a gay character is more offensive than not writing one, the best thing to do is to write a character who happens to be gay, it can be a part of them but shouldn't have to define them. This fits well with all the characters who have already been written simply because we know so little about them. Nobody is born knowing they are gay, or bi, or lesbian or whatever. They discover it as they grow into themselves as a person. this also means people don't introduce themselves as gay when they meet someone, that's discovered when they feel like it matters. If the devs decide to let us in on the sexuality of a character that's fine because they are deciding that it was finally the time to discus it.
This post was never suppose to be about me, it was always suppose to be about my happiness for the decision and to say thank you for the writing team at Behavior.
So there, that's my piece on the subject and to anyone who had issues with my post. I'm not sorry but I do feel empathy for you, I hope you all can grow as people an eventually be able to do the same.
Thanks for your time. Lots of love.
I hope you've seen that there have been a lot of people on the same page as you too! The negativety is tough to face, but you definitely aren't alone in seeing this a positive step for the game and gaming at large ^^
-
I've seen hag and wraith mentioned but no survivors.
Total guess:
So far no killer has shared a rift with the survivor they were released with so that rules out Ace.
I also doubt we'll see the recently released survivors (yui and karina).
So Meg, Jake, Nea, Adam and jeff are all on the table.
So fair they've paired one base game survivor with a DLC survivor of the opposite sex (david/Jane, dwight/Kate), so I expect Meg or Nea will be paired with Adam or Jeff.
Flip of a coin here, but my money is on Meg over Nea.
-
@BigBrainMegMain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1349058#Comment_1349058
Except I'm gay too and he/she has a point.
It's with out our intention, pushed forcibly down everyone's throat and it creates further dislike to our community.
It's not our fault that companies White Knight like this without us even wanting it to. There is no true, pure intention other than it'll make them some money while simultaneously pushing others away.
I'm just gonna assume everyone on here is gay cause that seems to be the case at this point lol.
You say 'our' and 'us' a lot. I take you don't mean the lgbt community at large or else you'd take note of the voices on here who DO appreciate the gesture and would like to see this implemented. You're talking about you and the other guy who feel a boiling hatred whenever another lgbt person is vocal on their sexuality. Accusing you of internalised homophobia might come off as patronising, but I do think you're more concerned with how this might make bigoted straight people unhappy than make lgbt+ people happy?
I can't take any accusation of disingenuous marketing seriously because... That's all marketing? If it'll 'make money while pushing other away' surely that suggests a more ideological motivation than a fiscal one?
-
@KRG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1348753#Comment_1348753
I ve started playing recently and also recently joined the forums as you can see from the number of my posts. I'd reacted the same way cuz i don't see stuff like this important for the game. How about they fix bugs and balance it better. Priorities my people and not this. Use youre imagination and every character can be gay, straight or whatever else you want him to be.
This argument is more than a little facile.
Lore is something being added to the game which is a big draw to some people. The team that writes the lore probably aren't the same people who fix the bugs. Both can exist.
If you 'don't see how stuff like this is important for the game' that's great! Go jump on the thread about hook suicides, nerfing swf or reworking leigion- whatever the hot topics are right now.
It would be a real shame if a significant portion of your first forum comments were spent arguing over something you don't think is important.
-
If representation is not something you personally need, that's great! However your 'hatred' for those who do seems misplaced--you seem to have a very clear idea on how you would like to express your sexuality (to keep it to yourself and conform to what 'everyone else' is like). That others have a different approach doesn't seem to impact you in any palpable way.
It seems that you feel strongly because other lgbt+ people behave in a way you find embarrassing--and because you are lgbt+ too you feel this reflects poorly on you. While you could try and shame and belittle others into feeling the same way you do, I think it would be more healthy to reconsider whether the desire for representation and visibility IS a unfair demand. There might be a more healthy forum for you to ask others what they get from expressing their sexuality in a visible and active way- even if it's not something you can feel yourself, a better understanding might help reduce the anger you feel on this topic.
-
@BigBrainMegMain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1348749#Comment_1348749
First game with a playable Trans character is The Last of Us 2.
You play as a trans person the second half of the game. I'm not giving spoilers.
Cool. That's a massive spoiler I wasn't aware of. Thanks.
-
@SewerSwans said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1348749#Comment_1348749
You... You, I like very much. This is a surpassingly excellent post. My only disagreement is that I can totally see a milquetoast white and masc gay guy, a la Soldier 69 in Overwatch. That ground has been fairly well-trod. As far as #hashtag #representation (#####) goes, I would shrug off my coat of grimy cynicism for a tough trans woman character, but I know I will not be getting anything of the sort.
Thank you! I ended up thanking orion for fighting the good fight in another thread, but I was really impressed by your contributions here too! I feel second hand frustration for anyone who puts energy into a good faith response only the be met with the same brain dead replies over and over- well done for keeping at it!
I could possibly see a guy gay on reflection-- definitely heavily coded and signposted so that none of the straight dudes accidently identify with him for even a second though :p
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1348747#Comment_1348747
Heterosexuality was added to the game a few years ago, where was your outrage then?
PS: My reference to "people like this" wasn't even about you.
Props on being a voice of reason on this discussion on multiple fronts. It's a lot of energy and it really doesn't seem to work on people who believe sexuality is an inherently 'political' topic, but you and a few other people are doing a really good job of outlining the hypocritical thinking that this tweet seems to have inspired. Thank you!
-
Beyond the inconvent detail that LGBT people actually exist and so logically would end up being present within the 50+ characters in the game already, I think people are being exceptionally unimaginative with storytelling potential sexuality (in all forms) brings. Finding out a character had someone they loved makes them more sympathetic and tragic. Finding out they had someone who loved them that they betrayed takes things the opposite way.
Completely off the top of my head:
Evans lore seems to hinge on torn loyalty between his miner friends and his father- a catalyst for turning against the miners could be a confession of love met with rejection. Rather than Evan having 'bad blood' or whatever, his shame and conflict over the rejection could lead to him accepting his father's ideology and becoming cruel as a defense mechanism.
This isn't that good I'll admit, but it's SOMETHING and an example of how sexuality can be an interesting part of a character's backstory- it being a minor background detail is fine too, but kinda dull.
Sexuality CAN be more than harmless lipservice and frankly is a ridiculously underutilised element of human experience in gaming precisely because of the unaddressed sqeamishness of straight dudes when it comes to sexualities that they can't relate to.
Plus we're throwing around 'LGBT' a lot: I can say with 100% certainty we will never see a trans character in this game. If BHVR take the plunge they'll still play it as safe as possible for the exact reasons outlined in this thread: the gaming community just doesn't have enough critical thinking to deal with this topic as things stand.
My money is on one female survivor confirmed as bisexual, without this playing into her lore in a significant way beyond an aside about finding two individuals equally attractive- probably yui or karina. If we see a gay male character I will be shocked, if we have a trans character DBD may actually be the first game with a playable trans character? (I don't follow MOBAs and stuff so it might already have happened).
TLDR: Don't worry OP I'm personally confident your throat is safe.
-
@Freudentrauma said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1335745#Comment_1335745
Nah, it would too less perk diversity between survivors. They either will switch to SB, because it will become the most reliable exhaustion perk in avoiding it's deactivation or they would switch it for other meta perks, which they couldn't include in their build before.
So you will see more DS, BT, Unbreakable, Iron Will, Kindred (Solos), etc. and in the end a smaller pool of Meta perks used by survivors.
Best (first) counter argument so far.
Technically you'd only be removing dead hard (SB is first pick over lithe and BL), but sure, this my yahoo questions chosen answer.
-
@DelsKibara said:
I blame the "ever-changing" meta.
If every Killer could inflict exhaustion without much issue, like the others have said, there will be riots.
Imagine if Wraith, instead of Mangled or Blindess inflicted exhaustion with a surprise attack?
Or Trapper's traps inflict exhaustion when a Survivor successfully untraps themselves?
Hell, imagine if Freddy had Exhaustion Add-ons for Snares or Pallets, he would be actually broken rather than well balanced.
Point is, the ability to cause exhaustion can be game changing because most survivora always has one Exhaustion perk. Because it has zero risk but all of the rewards if you know how to use it.
Its not a gamble like Blindness where its usefulness is gimped.
Exhaustion add-ons can make the game relatively easy.
This is precisely what I'm imagining. I don't think there's any reason to make an oppressive anti-exhaustion perk (high tier killers don't need the help), but for killers without much going for them it's a potentially powerful tool which gives them more weapons in their arsenal.
For your examples: wraith inflicting exhaustion on a surprise hit sounds fine? You'd have to successfully sneak up and get the hit in the fairly small window out of stealth. This seems fine for a green to me.
As for trapper, keeping in mind that trapper basically has to commit to bringing a bag in one slot, this seems like a pretty weak choice for a second addon- far less powerful than some of his other effects. The addon would diversify what the trapper can do in theory but likely almost never be used. Hardly game breaking.
It would be stupid if freddy could inflict it in the way you describe, and we're pretty far off of my original suggestion of leigion inflicting the effect on a second stab. Idk, it seems bad faith to offer an example SO far from anything I've suggested.
I don't understand how you can acknowledge that exhaustion perks are so powerful that almost every survivor brings one in sentence AND say that anti-exhaustion triggers would make the game too easy for killer in the next breath. The 'ease' would be due to survivors having access to inherently uncounterable perks and would be invalidated by a more felixble meta which anti-exhaustion would encourage.
I'm not saying exhaustion should be stapled to everything in the game--but the current level of avoiding its use at all seems excessive.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1335628#Comment_1335628
You’re not understanding the point of this post.
If survivors were aware of more ways more killers can inflict exhaustion, survivors may be inclined to think more carefully about equipping an exhaustion perk, and we might see more diversity and creativity across Survivor builds.
Thank you!
I've found this thread pretty frustrating-- I don't want to ######### about perceived skill, I don't want to remove exhaustion from the game, I literally just want to throw around the idea that exhaustion might not need such strong regulation and more access might be a healthy thing for the game.
-
@thrawn3054 said:
Because exhaustion addons are a waste of an addon.
Most addons in the game are bad. I genuinely think there's room for exhaustion addons just in terms of being slightly better than the current offerings.
-
@Blueberry said:
The Exhaustion perks end up being crutches that give survivors re-usable second chances. Good Exhaustion addons or perks would maybe change the meta some as it would be risky to run them, but since the devs refuse to take the survivors second chances away because there would be outrage, here we are. You'd be surprised how much less time survivors could waste without all those second chances every game. There's a reason everyone runs an Exhaustion perk. There's literally zero risk, zero cost and a high game swinging effect. Meanwhile every killer perk is given a cost, a situational activation, or a long cooldown...many times multiple of these all together.
The devs keep making good survivor perks that counter popular killer perks, but all the killer perks we get to counter survivor ones are always way undertuned and not worth running. Which is why after the initial new killer hype dies down we generally never see any of the new perks again.
I agree with this. I don't like the survivor vs killer rhetoric that the forum devolves into, but I do think it's very strange that killer perks have so many checks and balances whereas meta survivors perks don't.
Outrage isn't the worst thing that can happen- ruin, instaheals, infinites, balanced landing--there have been a lot of meta shifting changes which have been met with backlash, which have pretty much all been healthy for the game in the long run.
I think it's design space that needs to be explored for the health of the game.
-
@Poweas said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1331289#Comment_1331289
Wouldn't you improve more when faced against a challenge?
This.
Killer is a really tough role against half decent survivors, but I'll pick that over picking off babies any day.
Try playing for points not kills, it can really help.
-
@Frankie said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1335625#Comment_1335625
If they needed deadhart or any exhaustion perks to assist them in a chase, they are mediocre at best survivors.
I dunno if this is a particularly helpful line of thinking- but basically you're agreeing with my original point?
-
@Kaiju said:
I wouldn't mind a 10-15s exhaustion add-on tbh, besides I hope they change some of the Huntress add-ons that inflict exhaustion for WAY too much time (I am looking at u 90s of exhaustion)
I agree here tbh. A good huntress doesn't need the help. Exhaustion infliction should be a minute at most.
@Frankie said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1335603#Comment_1335603
Survivors want easy games. Without their exhaustion perks to rely on for when they inevitably screw up, they'd be dead sooner.
Bad survivors go down even with exhaustion perks, good survivors can use them to double the length of an already long chase- dead hard is really bad for that.
As things stand it's a no brainer to bring an exhaustion perk- I can't blame people for that, but challenging this status quo seems healthy to me.
-
@BBQnDemogorgon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1335603#Comment_1335603
Because survivors love exhaustion perks. Having more ways to disable them would upset people.
Right, but this seems like more of a reason to push for this kind of change? Many killers (myself included) hated the idea of the ruin change, but it's removal allowed for toolbox and small speed nerfs. Ruin isnt NEEDED to win now which is healthy for the game at large.
The perks wouldn't be 'disabled' either- just not constantly in play. I don't think the suggestions I made above were overly oppressive?
-
@Lucian said:
Because in doing so would ignite riots across the world.. It's dangerous.
... But why?
-
Yep, I noticed this. They look great together, but the option on the full outfit selection doesn't include the 'hair'. Not the end of the world but slightly vexing.
The way in which they've labeled the cosmetics earnt through the rift is pretty screwy compared to the 'rules' established by the store.
-
Maps are good as they are?
This is a really convoluted suggestion for something that fulfils a niche purpose within the game.
-
@PigNRun said:
Honestly, I have a bigger beef against Blood Lodge than Wrecker's Yard. Bad for M1 Killers and bad for Survivors facing Nurse/Huntress. At least Wrecker's Yard adds spice by the basement always being in the middle.
I do prefer the layout of wreckers to be be fair. Slap the lodge onto wreckers and retire pallet City?
It seems a shame to waste a structure, but I agree that lodge is the worse designed of the two.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
They better not retire the macmillan estate. They are the most fair maps in the game.
Not what I was suggesting tbf. Just shelter Woods. Which actually isn't that balanced .
-
@Steel_Eyed said:
The older maps were the best imo. Somehow most balanced. Ormond on the other hand...
I don’t think survivors like Hawkins and killers shouldn’t like Dead Dawg Saloon.
I massively disagree on the balance side of things. Until the recent update a lot of structures were very survivor sided. On the other hand when I load into shelter Woods as killer I know I'm going to win (there are like 3 safe pallets across the entire map lol).
Ormond is probably the worst of the recent maps, but the central structure is one of the better parts of it IMO. Another recent map I don't much like is sanctum of wrath- but I think that the map is pretty much in line with the older designs (basic central structure surrounded by the realms default jungle gyms and hills). In both cases I just think the size and shape of the map don't quite work.
I love dead dawg as a killer, though I get sidetracked trying to break every wall... And Hawkins is grand on either- I've noticed a lot of survivors don't know how to run indoor maps, they're generally more survivor sided as long as you aren't the kind of person who camps unsafe pallets.
That said, I'm really not sure what the general consensus is- I've noticed streamers seem to ######### about dead dawg a lot, but I don't get why.
-
@Frankie said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/157466/retiring-older-maps
They're updating all the maps in year 4 (this year of the games life time). Complete with new assets etc, even more due to the graphics update.
I know--I mention it in the post :p
Since these maps specifically are made of default realm assets and have no unique structure, an update would only be graphical. You'd still have three maps that are comprised of default jungle gyms and empty space in an ever increasingly diverse roster.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
People go on the ptb to try the new things.
No reason to go on the ptb just to do what you can in the game already.
But there are no rules against it, so do whatever you want.
Don't quite agree here- it's important to try the other killers too to catch any bugs. Pretty sure a few PTBs ago there was a bug that made the huntress able to 1 shot from close range without the add on.
She wasn't the focus of the update, but thanks to someone trying her out this became a known issue in the PTB.
It's also possible that this bug went live (can't remember the specifics) ... But either way testing everything can't hurt!
-
As everyone has said Jane is Hispanic, but I think people fall into the trap of pointing to one character and calling it a day. With the addition of Cheryl we have a total of five petite white girls, with Jane doing double diversity duty due to her ethnicity and size. Of the white girls four are from the U. S (and Nea, the one exception, moved there).
I think people tend to gleefully misinterpret this topic as 'diversity for diversities sake', but honestly at this point more people of colour or a couple more older characters would genuinely just be good to make the cast stand out from each other a little better--as excited as I am to see four more white girls with a leather jacket+side-cut cosmetic combo I'd be happier if the entity could be a little more varied in its choice of victims.
-
@DetailedDetriment said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1310120#Comment_1310120
What I'm trying to get across is a free character's lore shouldn't be locked behind a character who must be purchased through some form.
Google it.
If you aren't bothered by the locked peks, locked characters and are genuinely happy to play the game with the default survivors and killers (of which there are a generous amount) - why on earth would not being able to unlock dwights lore bother you? The lore got leaked when the tome was released, pretty sure the transcript is on the wiki.
Also the challenges never expire so if you ever manage to save up the oh so ridiculous amount of shards to grab Kate, dwights lore will still be there waiting for you.
Honestly you sound so entitled right now. There's no paywall, no big scheme to force you to buy a character- just cute bonus content for a game you clearly don't want to invest any time or money in. What you buy regarding the game is entirely up to you, but bitching about perfectly accessible free content is genuinely embarrassing. Gain some perspective dude.
-
I agree. Unless I have a plan (trapper, near a mostly done gen, some degree of camping etc), or can capitalise on the extra distance survivors have to travel in and out of the basement (spirit, demo etc), I just can't afford the extra time.
-
I only play pallet freddy. Snares are more powerful, but boring.
-
I think this is a solid idea tbh. No one runs the perk, might as well make it more useful for niche meme builds.
The fact it can be disabled so easily makes the already mediocre effect even wors and it literally can't combo with monitor and abuse for oppressive terror radius strata (but even then, no one runs the terror radius perks either so it's really just fine). Good idea :)
-
Bbq, whispers, pop and corrupt intervention.
I run this on almost ever killer by default. I've been playing around with other perks, but whichever perk I remove I always find there's a moment in the game where the missing perk would help me and its not always fun to put myself at that kind of advantage.
Corrupt narrows the field of the early game- it's almost 100% garunteed that you'll start a chase before the perk is up (whispers helps narrow down where survivors are even better).
Bbq tells you where to head right after hooking someone. Just knowing that you're heading in the direction of a survivor is much better and helps avoid the urge to proxy camp.
Pop is currently the only (reliable) perk that helps with gen regression. As long as you're getting downs and hooks, Bbq will show you which gens are worth checking for a hit.
Whispers is just always useful. Basically if it's ever off you're in the wrong place. Good early game for finding your first survivor, amazing at end game for securing the final kill (I personally think a variation of whispers should be base kit- not as strong as the perk version but something that can help out slow killers on big maps not waste their time as much).
-
The fettered
Or
The unfettered
-
It ain't that deep. The slowed timer is very generous, and if you play in way that allows you to take the heat for your team you can get your challenge and sacrafice yourself in the process if you really think the EGC is going to lead to a total team wipe.
Also guess what--by dying at the end of the game (a game which probably ended with 4 survivors alive with only 1 on the hook), you'll probably give the killer a sliver of satisfaction at the end of a game that has been pretty rough for them.
So, look at that, you can get your challenge and prove definitively that you 'care about another persons experience and game enjoyment'.