Johnny_XMan
Johnny_XMan
About
- Username
- Johnny_XMan
- Joined
- Visits
- 7,584
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2990142#Comment_2990142
to be fair, the ability to toggle hats/backpacks for your own customization (not to change the appearance of others) would be pretty cool.
I guess, I just don't see it needed for charms.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2989340#Comment_2989340
Why not? What would it hurt you or anyone if there was an option in the game for the player to disable charm visibility within the match just for that person? It wouldn't effect anyone but them and everyone who wants to see them can. Seems fair to me.
Can't think of a more unnecessary change. What's next, disable hats and backpacks?
You do realize that there is currently nothing that can get disabled like that? Like not even items, and there is a reason for it.
-
I liked the old one, this one seems too… idk the word I’m looking for… basic?
-
I’d argue that not everything has a counter… and that things that absolutely need it, should.
To piggyback off of your example, without some type of counter, Trail Of Torment would give PH more opportunities to cage survivors. Which in theory sounds good, but when you add to the fact that Camping and Tunneling are still playstyles that are common and with hardly any counter. It would make perks like BT and DS become even more useless, because now the survivor is guaranteed to be tormented.
-
Huh?
-
This might be the first DLC I won’t purchase.
Just cannot get hyped for it. The killer looks cool I guess but his power looks like something we’ve already seen to some extent .
-
I wouldn’t say always, but it happens a lot.
These are also the same types that open the gates immediately and dip. It’s one of the perks of playing in soloQ. 😊
-
Even tho killers want to have their cake and eat it too.
The developers have already said Camping is going to be a playstyle that will be looked at.
Specifically because of it being too easy of a playstyle. No need to argue further because it is on their list.
-
Too embarrassed to admit. 😳
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2984553#Comment_2984553
Even if Dead Hard was completely fine in the way it works right now, what is not completely fine is it's pickrate. We all saw the statistics. Those numbers don't lie. Survivors always say they don't want to go against the same 2 killers every match and I understand that. Hell, I don't even like to go to the same map more than twice a day. It's the same for killers. We don't want every single survivor to run Dead Hard. It doesn't completely destroy killers and make matches unwinnable but it makes the game less fun. Waiting until you finally have the mercy to press E and I can hit you isn't fun for me! When I finally get in the position to hit you I should feel the thrill of the kill (or whatever they called it in the live stream, I don't remember) but I can't because I know you still have Dead Hard. If it is fun for you, well, congrats you used your E key in a way that makes my game less fun. Guess I'll return the favor next time and face camp you to death because maybe I have fun watching your charakter die. Or I won't because I know that this isn't fun.
Most killers are completely fine with losing a match. Damn, some of the matches I had the most fun in were losses. Seriously, we don't mind that. It's only normal. But is it normal that you see the same perk pretty much on every survivor in every match no matter their MMR ( even in lower MMR the pick rate is still insane)? At this point making Dead Hard base kit and remove 1 perk slot for survivors wouldn't have that big of an impact on most survivors.
That's why Dead Hard and a bunch of different perks will get an overhaul.
You are right about pickrate, but the problem is the people who are using that information as evidence/context that the perk is somehow "OP" or unbalanced. That is what I have a problem with, and honestly it's a problem with these forums.
Waiting until you finally have the mercy to press E and I can hit you isn't fun for me!
Things like that ^ do not warrant balancing of a perk. This is why people bring up OTHER things that are also unfun, because if we set down the same standard for everything that is deemed "unfun" this game would not be what it is right now. One could argue that Anti-loop killers have no counter other than pressing W which doesn't work sometimes because of it's dependability on Map RNG, does that mean that every anti-loop killer should get hit with the nerf hammer? I don't think so, and I don't think you guys would be happy with that either.
You are wrong that most killers are fine with losing a match, nobody likes losing. That is a fact.
-
@WesCravenFan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2983684#Comment_2983684
You can't "bait out" Dead Hard used to extend a loop. This has been debunked over and over and over and over and over and over again. It's the #1 lie persisting on this forum.
First off "extending a loop" is too broad and generalized.
You (like everyone and their mother on here) claim one single scenario completely ignoring the other many scenarios in which DH isn't useful and you can bait it out.
In order to use DH properly you HAVE to have the right distance. If you are too close to the pallet it will not, I repeat: IT WILL NOT give you the pallet vaccuum (I.E. prompt to drop) if you are too far you won't even make it to said pallet. So the notion that EVERY single time it is used to extend a loop is BS. That is just 1 example where you can bait DH out, because unless you swing early, it will not work. Period.
-
@WesCravenFan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2983601#Comment_2983601
The two concepts have NOTHING to do with each other. At all.
The red stain is a permanent fixture on every killer that doesn't require you to "wait". It is just a queue for the killer's facing.
Dead Hard has nothing to do with mind games, and is nothing more than a cheat for Survivors to avoid going down when they should - which can be doubled down by the fact that its 24/7 availability makes it greedable.
Not the same. Not even close.
Lol agree to disagree.
There is nothing wrong with how DH was designed in terms of baiting it out. You refusing to do so, doesn't make it a bad design.
Would you rather need a perk to counter it? Because I doubt you would. You would still be complaining about it.
-
@WesCravenFan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2983011#Comment_2983011
And as KillaWhale asks later in the video:
Why should "waiting to swing" be part of a Killer's gameplay checklist? How is that even good game design?
Because survivors also have to mindgame when the killer chooses to hide his/her red stain. It is similar concept.
-
@WesCravenFan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2982500#Comment_2982500
https://youtu.be/LNNtGyvAi_U?t=116
Here. I even timestamped it to this particular flavor of nonsense.
First of all that DH where you timestamped he could have waited a bit longer. You have to realize you are ALSO trying to bait them, not just waiting.
So what happens is you get really close and the survivor almost has no choice.
That is actually a bad example because the only DH you cannot bait out is the one where the distance was exactly the distance the survivor needed to get to a pallet. Because only then will they use it early to be able to get to said pallet. That is the only one.
There are also people who legit don’t understand how the perk works and so they do know how to deal with it. This is fact.
-
Stop telling people what to discuss or care about.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2982259#Comment_2982259
I don't think so. Unless you think that disagreeing with a specific item or act of activism means that you are automatically considered bigoted against LGBTQ+ folks, I'm not sure if you can get from one to the other here. Again - disagreeing with them making a song and dance about a gay character doesn't mean you have an issue with LGBTQ+ folks.
Yes, I think they are. I'm not talking about suggestions here, I'm talking about the folks that said that 'making David gay is queer erasure because he doesn't look gay enough' and the like. If that thread is still up, you can probably find it using those exact terms.
Uh...yes, it is an attempt to normalize this stuff. What else would it be? I'm fine with normalizing this stuff - because, again, my ideal world is one where this stuff isn't a big deal. I just don't think that this is the way to do it.
I can't really respond to the last without breaking forum rules (posting a DM sent to me by a red), but...yeah, no - I don't think I can be more specific, unfortunately.
And yes, it's their forums. But this doesn't mean that I have to agree with them, or that I can't think that it's a well intentioned but ultimately counterproductive attempt.
I never used the word "automatically", nor did I say that someone disagreeing means that they are considered bigoted. What I actually said was that BHVR being more inclusive isn't going to somehow change how bigoted someone is. You are what you eat, and if you were brought up with beliefs that "gay people are bad" No gay character in the history of gaming is going to change that.
I don't think it is "normalizing" as much as I think it's educating for some folks that don't necessarily understand because they themselves haven't gone through some of the things LGBTQ+ people go through. I don't see how that is a bad thing.
I know you can disagree with them, I am with you on that. However, it doesn't mean that they are trying to force anything on anyone.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2982105#Comment_2982105
Yeah, we're going around in circles now so I'm going to draw this to a close here.
I'm using the other stuff as an example of what I'm talking about, as this is one small part of a much wider discussion regarding the increasingly toxic discourse and reactions around progressive inclusions and alterations to media within nerd culture.
Again, I'm not holding anything against anyone. I'm just pointing out what seems to be a pretty damn clear problem.
My...claim? I already said it, didn't I?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2982110#Comment_2982110
BHVR? I'm not...well, I could, but that would unfortunately require me to refer to things that would violate the forum rules, as per moderation decisions (I literally can't be any more descriptive without putting my forum account in jeopardy).
I meant this, again, as part of a wider discussion on this stuff as it pertains to media right now.
Who...exactly is acting like that?
I'm not saying BHVR are hyperfocusing exactly (although they did make more of a fuss over this than I would have).
I'm saying that certain parts of the community are, as per the 'this is an insult, you didn't give us an original LBGT character' or 'David is queer erasure, as he doesn't look gay enough' discourse, and at a macro scale, far too much of the media consuming public who identify as progressive are too heavily focused on this stuff.
As for the rest:
- I hate to tell you this, but you can't demand that you be made to feel a certain way. All you can demand is that nobody take any discriminatory actions against you. You can't police what other people think, and you certainly can't police how other people make you feel. Because nobody gets to do that, ever. Not in any sort of free society.
- Now, those countries you are referring to - let's get more specific. What sort of cultural/political systems do they have? Are they remotely analogous to liberal western democracy, or are they ultra-conservative theocracies in the Middle East and Africa? What are human rights like as a whole in those countries and how is a videogame in the west going to alter this (considering that in many, any secular media is defacto illegal?) No, I'm not trying to strawman anyone - but I think you're missing the forest for the trees. These countries need substantial reforms in terms of general human rights and governance, but that can only come from within.
- I think that you've just made my point for me. I'm saying that any overt messaging of this nature is counterproductive, because - as I said - any endorsement of an identity exceptionalizes that identity, and you cannot be both normalized and exceptionalized.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2982112#Comment_2982112
It's a very complicated phenomenon that's probably outside of the scope of this thread, but it comes down to:
- Social media allowing a following to form around what would usually be a fringe ideological nucleus.
- The push for 'intersectionality', which often comes down to a purity spiral where you can't be granular in your beliefs and goals, and are either considered an ally or an enemy based on even slight deviations (I've literally seen the 'if you aren't with us, you're against us' chestnut whipped out multiple times this year on Twitter).
- The push for 'solidarity', which, combined with the above, tends to be interpreted as 'if you don't agree with me, you have a duty to shut up and pretend you do'.
- The normalization of the progressive stack as a concrete, applicable concept.
- Interpreting even the most minor disagreement as evidence of bigotry.
I guess that being an old-school, 'can't we all just get along?' egalitarian makes me a bit of a dinosaur in online spaces now, but it really doesn't look healthy from the outside.
I'm not even sure what you mean by the first sentence. I just asked a simple question, because BHVR being in support of the LGBTQ+ community isn't forcing anyone to accept gay people. I am sure (as it is evident) there are plenty of people who play DBD and still have an issue with LGBTQ+ people.
Also, just because people have suggestions after the announcement doesn't mean they are hyper-focusing on only identity. The announcement was about their (BHVR) stance on showing/allowing/including more diversity etc etc. So, would it not make sense for someone to suggest content that is related to that announcement? I don't see the issue with that. Not everyone is going to be satisfied with what BHVR does, that has been made clear.
Nobody is asking to "normalize" anything. If you think this is an attempt to do that, you are way off. A game including a LGBTQ+ character isn't going to change how uneducated and bigoted someone might be.
I feel like at this point BHVR has made it very clear that if they want to make a fuss about it, they will. They have every right to do that as a company. That isn't saying YOU should do that as well or you should feel that way as well.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2981691#Comment_2981691
Well, yes. Because the lack of orthodoxy within these movements means that something can be both simultaneously praised for being x while also being demonized for being x - it's a perfect lose/lose situation these days, as you cannot appease a base that doesn't actually know what precisely it believes or wants.
Lara Croft was an icon of the genre, and not once did anyone at the time go 'oh wow, a female main character that kicks all the butt!'. Because that just wasn't something people were especially concerned about. Hell, I've always played female avatars, and it's only within the last...maybe 5 years that anyone called attention to it (apparently it's 'massively problematic' for a straight, cisgender male to play a female avatar in World of Warcraft...urgh, that was some ridiculous guild drama).
You say 'rabid'. I say 'irritated'. And it's not because these characters are female, POC or LGBT, it's because this tends to be hyperfocused on to the extent that it becomes the entire focus of the story, often to the detriment of the game, comic or story as a whole.
There probably hasn't been a time when this was completely normalized, but it was definitely a bit less...well, arch than it is now. Again, this is my opinion, but the way to normalize something is to just have it be there, not call a massive amount of attention to it. This was the case with the L and the G, with the rest of that acronym being...difficult, as even within progressive movements there are about 10 different variations, with many of the identity groups themselves being the subject of contention.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2981935#Comment_2981935
Okay, let's dig in here a bit. Again, I'm trying to balance being blunt and not offending anyone, so please read with a charitable mindset.
You are...partially correct, but I think that you're getting things a little out of order.
'Acceptance' is a point on...well, what I'm guessing is that path you're looking for.
It usually goes:
Tolerance -> Acceptance -> Normalization.
You can demand tolerance - in that people won't take actions to stop you from enjoying your identity, but may not agree or be fully comfortable with it. Acceptance and normalization are something that will occur organically, over time.
If you start attempting to bypass tolerance and instead enforce acceptance, it seldom goes well, because it often ends up feeling forced.
I don't think that hyperfocusing on this stuff, and particularly the endless and often venomous criticism or wokescolding of media for not being 'diverse' enough (or worse, 'diverse but not in the way I personally approve of' - see the Cyberpunk drama, Batwoman, MHA etc.) is productive, and may actually work against you - because when people are confronted by extreme criticism/attempts at cancellation for even well intentioned attempts at placation or inclusion, they tend to become resentful.
Also - prejudice? Sure. As long as we are talking in a legalistic sense (you can't demand that anyone thinks a specific way, only how they act). But 'fear of judgement' - that's ridiculously subjective. I don't think there is anyone in the world who doesn't at least partially fear judgement in some sense. And as for 'violence around the world'...I'm not sure that's within the scope of what anyone can demand, because there are large parts of the world where violence is horribly common and there are deeper societal issues that need to be fixed before this stuff is even on the radar.
Beware Kafkatraps - using the criticism of an action as the justification for that action, because that tends to devolve into circularity very fast.
Again - I think you're inferring a negative intent where there is none. I'd say that the vast, vast majority of gamers don't really care about their character's sexual orientation outside of RPGs, because it's not relevant to the game at all in, again, almost any game. When this stuff starts being introduced, it very quickly becomes a minefield (again, see Cyberpunk or Batwoman) and everyone loses.
How is it that you feel that BHVR is enforcing acceptance based on an announcement about their stance in support of the LGBTQ+ community?
Literally they only made an announcement and added to David's lore, and people are acting like they are going to hold some grand same-sex wedding where the entity is officiating the ceremony and the rest of the survivors are holding rainbow flags and it plays as soon as you open the game. You keep using the word hyper-focusing as if somehow BHVR has forgotten that there are other elements/characteristics about said character, which is not true.
I think there are things that you will never understand unless you have actually experienced them for yourself. So when I bring things up like "Fear of Judgement" I am not alluding that other individuals do not in some way, shape, or form experience it. I am simply emphasizing on the fact that this particular group is experiencing it on the daily by simply existing. So no, I wouldn't even attempt to compare seeing as Gay sex is still illegal in 68 countries, and punishable by death in a dozen. Saying "well there is horrible violence in many parts of the world" sounds like strawman.
I am not inferring negative intent. What I don't like is when people think that because they don't understand the messaging of something it is easier to define it as "loud attention". I could not care less if gamers cared or didn't care that a character has a sexual orientation. This means something to the community that I belong to, and in my opinion it gives people more visibility in a world where there is already enough hate.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/326314/lgbtq-representation-in-horror-and-dbd
Okay. My take, as the grumpy old resident forum centrist.
Yes, horror has always been a refuge for a variety of societal outcasts, and deals with themes of alienation and misunderstanding, which would certainly make it attractive to the LGBT crowd. Also us nerds.
I'm also fine with you having representation, if it really matters that much to you.
However...
At the end of the day, if you hyperfocus on one identity criteria, you ensure that that criteria will never be considered normal, let alone 'equal' - because by loudly drawing attention to it, you're setting yourselves apart. I think people were starting to figure this out in the 90s and early 2000s, but we've slid backwards as a species.
Regarding a 'drag queen' survivor, this stuff is a minefield - not from the people who don't care, but from the various, constantly schism-tastic activist groups that could easily take offense at any attempt, no matter how well considered, because it doesn't fit their precise criteria for 'acceptable representation'.
Just look at what happened in MHA, or for a Dead by Daylight example, the wokescolding threads about the Artist patch, and how it's not acceptable to have a POC survivor have his background. Or, hell, the threads about David being 'queer erasure' because he 'didn't look gay enough'.
While I respect your view, I think you are missing the mark when it comes to LGBTQ+ people not being considered "normal" or "equal".
I personally take issue with comments like that because it makes me wonder if you truly understand the messaging, and the why this "attention" part is needed. It goes a lot deeper than a video game and a company making a stance on the issue.
I don't think people like myself (LGBTQ+) are looking to feel "normal", only accepted for who we are. Being treated normal would mean that people have already accepted us for who we are. Without prejudice, without fear of judgement or even violence... none of which is currently happening around the world.
For me, the fact that the devs made a simple message stating their stance on the matter on twitter, followed by the addition of David's lore in making him a homosexual character... and the fact that we are still having a discussion today is just baffling to me.
There is obviously still a problem when the forums erupt simply because the DBD lore now says there is a gay character in-game and the developers who they themselves employ LGBTQ+ people and are in support of them, want to have something to say about it.
It just proves that a lot of people are only comfortable as long they don't have to face this "reality" that one day the game might have a character of a different sexual orientation besides heterosexual. Currently the only attention I see being hyper-focused on is the one where people can't live with that reality.
-
Anything that allows you to perform flicks you aren’t meant to via third party is cheating and shouldn’t be a thing.
-
Having played Evil Dead since launch.
I
Have
To
Agree. 😳
Well. Somewhat. I don’t think the number of people playing is really the issue for me. Not every game that comes out is going to be for everyone. The question is, is the game fun and does it solidify a community that gives the game longevity?
Evil Dead the Game is SO different from DBD I couldn’t compare the two. However, when it comes to mechanics it surpasses any game I have seen, including Friday the 13th (which is what I would compare it to the most) it’s filled with moments with a lot of action and some jump scares and you can feel the tension between you and your opponent. DBD lacks a lot of elements which I feel would make it more interactive. Sitting on a gen holding M1 doesn’t have that same effect.
Imagine if we were able to interact with the map more. Something I have been asking for since forever. Even when there were conversations regarding how to deal with infinite windows (back then) I gave my own idea:
@Johnny_XMan said:
Something that I think has been long talked about since the introduction of many maps, and that I personally believe could be balanced better, are strong windows, specifically on buildings like "The Foundry" in Ironworks of Misery or "Grim Pantry" in Backwater Swamp... etc etc
Many have given their opinions, but from what I've gathered it's either been rework the entire structure by blocking the window or remove it altogether. Personally I am not a fan of either one.
So I came up with this idea where, the window will now have the ability to be destroyed (not by the killer) but by the survivor! Basically the window will go through several "crumbling" phases where the more you vault it, the more it crumbles to the ground, until it is no longer a window and all that is left is a doorway.
Here is a quick visual I made in PS for what I thought each phase could look like. Note that I only created 3 Phases, because currently the entity blocker happens at 3 vaults, but there could be more added depending on what would be considered "fair and balanced"...
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/827/3V3BB55BD2JC.png
This way the window still remains strong, but also overusing it can make it deplete. It also causes the survivors to be more cautious as to whether they want to preserve it or use it right away. Thus creating more creative plays rather than just everyone being like "Let me go back to that window again". The idea behind "phases" is so that if another player goes to try to use it, they understand that the window has already been used and therefore will know how many times they could vault it.
I also believe this could add other fun/creative perks for devs to create. All in all, I think this is a fair way to balance it without completely making it useless or overpowered.
What do you guys think? Share your thoughts please.
And what did we get? Breakable doors that made the map RNG for survivors super frustrating and an indirect side objective for killers because they would now have to break the door or else deal with the loop being too strong. That was the extent of the interaction.
At this point I would say DBD does need to step up it’s game, not because they can’t let the competition “win” but because they have a lot of potential to make the game more interesting and fun.
-
@tomojim said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2979221#Comment_2979221
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2979224#Comment_2979224
I rarely tunnel, and I don't camp either.
What I'm trying to say is, as survivors you don't have to take BT or DS in a match, but killers like me will always assume you have these perks. So killers will be forced to give up so many chances they deserve.
Here the situation gets very weird: a perk exists, but it doesn't exist.
If survivor don't want to be tunneled, bring the perk.
But what actually happens now is, survivors don't have to bring these perks but they still have that effects.
So I proposed that these perks should be visually recognizable.
And you should assume, you wanna know why? Because even though you yourself don’t tunnel and camp, it is other players’ daily playstyles.
Survivors have no other option than to treat Camping and Tunneling as if they are present every match. That isn’t the survivors nor the killers, it’s because BHVR can’t properly balance a playstyle that by design forces survivors to bring anything that half way counters it.
The fact that you don’t know whether someone has a perk or not, is the only saving grace survivors have. Because if they did I can guarantee many more would opt to play this way.
-
You people are unbelievable.
DH does not reward failure. #########? Do you actually know what you need to use DH? Because it’s not just pressing “E”.
-
@tomojim said:
Holy s*** my comment disappeared after edit so I have to rewrite it again.
IMP, killers hate DH, DS, BT because they still function even if survivors don't bring them at all.
BTW I don't really hate UB, because I don't think the situations to use it are the same with the rest.
I prefer to call these 3 "bluffing perks" instead of "second-chance perks."
We see that familiar and kind of stupid dramas in every match: killers can easily hit the survivors but have to wait for DH, whether they have it or not; killers can easily hit the injured survivors just got off the hook but choose not to because of BT, whether they have it or not; killers can easily pick up the dying survivors just got off the hook but still choose not to because of DS, whether that have it or not.
I understand some players may think bluffing is kind of mind game, but I don't think these perks are healthy for DBD. DBD already has lots of mind game elements, but all of them are not bluffing. You can call them "tricky" for sure, but not "bluffing" definitely.
Most importantly, these perks make the gaming process not the way it should be. They force killers to give up so many chance even if survivors don't bring them at all. How ridiculous it is?
In my view, these perks should be "visually recognizable," for example, when the survivor A with BT unhooks survivor B, killers should have seen some kind of highlight aura on B, so no one can bluff, and BT still functions well as a anti-tunneling perk. AND, if A doesn't have BT and he or she unhooks B in front of killers, they should PAY.
Lastly, I really exciting about the upcoming 40s perks rebuild, I think the devs are well aware of these problems, and I believe they will fix them this time.
Look at it this way.
At least you as a killer don’t have to “bluff” when you are flat out just Camping a survivor or tunneling them out of the game. It is pretty clear what you are doing. Nobody needs to guess, because you can simply take advantage of a strategy that you can use by simply existing in the match.
These perks exist for this very reason. Because if you took that “I wonder if they have this perk” part. We both know what killers would be doing more of. Camping and Tunneling. Even with the way those perks work now is bad. Why do you think killers love when they find out the survivor didn’t have BT or DS? They have assurance.
-
Lol yes, remove 2 perks because that’s the answer to everything according to some of you.
Lets make other perks meta so you can once again revisit the same “remove x-y-x” cycle. 🙄
-
Killers hate UB - But they love the fact that they can slug for unlimited amounts of time with 0 downside.
Killers hate DS- But they love the ability to tunnel, because where they felt it was unfair that they got DS'd they don't see that tunneling someone without DS is ALSO unfair.
Killers hate BT- But they love how easy of a strat it is to come back to the hook, or pretend to leave the hook only to come back, or flat out camp. None of them complain about how easy it is for them to do that.
You know why they don't like those perks? Because it makes their access to those strats much harder to pull off, where survivors can at least have a chance and it doesn't make it easier for them to simply tunnel or camp someone out.
-
Maybe you should play something else if you don't find playing the game fun.
-
No because I understand how the perk works. If I found you too early AFTER I didn't tunnel I will still assume you have it. The perk works how the perk works, the fact that I didn't "tunnel" shouldn't stop a perk from working. That's like saying you shouldn't get a Pop stack after you camped....
You are not invincible, you can still go down, I will just slug you. I am not going to get my "feelings" hurt because you T-bagged me because you think you are invincible, but I also hope you don't get yours hurt when you are slugged more than you'd like.
-
Who cares?
Many things are “unfair” in this game. Killer and survivor.
-
The problem with solo queue isn’t a communication problem. It’s a reliability problem. Thus making SWF irrelevant to the majority of the reason why SoloQ just sucks.
From my experience 90% of the solo queue frustrations come from the following:
- - They will not participate by being efficient on a generator when absolutely necessary… and when they actually do they are the first ones off at the sound of a killer TR.
- - They will farm in front of the killer without BT or the slightest idea of what they are doing.
- - They will not take aggro by either taking a hit or trading a hook. Even though they have never been chased the entire match.
- - They are generally not very good in chases . You’ll know this because the minute they get chased they are downed in 2 seconds.
These are just some reasons why. Of course if I had someone in voice it would make some aspects of the match more bare able but I don’t think being in a SWF really makes a difference considering that you can still win without comms if a team is good.
-
@ImAJoke264 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2968591#Comment_2968591
Also the devs in the anniversary stream said that DH takes up too much of the meta, so they plan on reworking or nerfing it. THE DEVS DIRECTLY SAID THAT DH IS TOO OVER POWERED AND WILL BE NERFED.
The devs never said it’s overpowered. This just goes to show how bias you really are.
They said it is used a lot. That doesn’t mean it’s OP.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2968581#Comment_2968581
No need to make your inability to play the game well that obvious
Oh I think it’s the other way around. See, the difference is I see all perspectives of how a perk works.
The downsides, it’s weaknesses, it’s strengths, it’s counters. I take all of it into consideration to form my opinion.
Dead Harding to a pallet (aka what you keep repeating on the daily) isn’t an issue for me because that scenario isn’t always on display or the only one I see when I play against it.
I also see people who Dead Hard because they were found in a bad spot. I also see people who think they had enough distance on me that they wouldn’t get hit through a vault. I also see people who quite frankly should have brought any other exhaustion perk and it would have served them better.
You however seem to have matches where a survivor is just dashing on loop and to a pallet, because it sounds like you are unable to deal with it.
-
@ImAJoke264 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2968173#Comment_2968173
Lets make a fictional perk, lets call it Boon: Steady Feet, this perk allows you to use your exhaustion perk twice, and decreases exhaustion 50% faster. Sounds OP right? Well that’s what DH is like, a perk that extends chases by 40 years, so is I used Balanced Landing Twice I would be able to extend the chase by at least 1-2 minutes.
Continue to exaggerate and see if the devs take you serious.
Because those of us who play killer and know how to deal with it, don’t.
-
@ThatOneDemoPlayer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2968173#Comment_2968173
No, we don't need more Perks that let the Survivor 1v1 the Killer
Yeah that’s why survivors go down immediately after dead Harding. Totally unfair 1v1. 🙄
I get it you don’t like the perk. That’s not a reason to say it is 1v1ing a killer. Maybe YOU are the one who feels that way because you can’t manage. So learn to manage.
-
It is a popular perk that works as a chase extender. Aka what it is meant for.
If there was another perk that also worked during close-up chases rather than to gain long distances you would see it used as well.
We need more perks like DH because otherwise the meta turns to playing it extremely safe and holding W. Which can be unfun.
-
Me to this thread:
-
Because as with other games it wasn’t meant to have first person view for survivors.
-
Giving up because you think you’ve lost the match after a gen is done is just as bad as giving up because 2 people went down and no gens done.
Both types are a part of the problem.
-
They have already nerfed the amount AND introduced weak ones at the same time.
-
Fun to play as and against.
Her stealth is quite strong IMO for an M1 killer.
-
I don’t think DS, UB, and BT should be put in the same category as other “meta” perks.
Because they are there to counter a playstyle not a perk. If they considerably reduced the accessibility of those playstyles and incentivize them. I’d argue we would see other perks being brought instead of the constant feeling to need to have BT in every match or DS because of how the killer chooses to play that day.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2961824#Comment_2961824
I feel like every time i read things in these forums lately I need to try to drop my iq below 1 digit to understand anything that is being said. These posts are nothing but a bunch of circle jerkers that need to validate each other. It's cultist.
I have always questioned the legitimacy of the forums not to mention its maturity level, but I never thought we would get to a point where we are just using characterization to get a point across.
It’s the quotation marks around something that was never said for me. 😂
-
Literally I’ve never seen anyone say what the OP said. These forums are just downgrading by the day aren’t they? Yikes.
Continue to complain even though they just said they are going to be looking at it, because that is what you guys do best. Complain.
-
I totally agree that survivors should have some subtle differences whether in animations or look of their items etc.
-
-
@IlliterateGenocide said:
Did you see that little booty bump, he ain't scared he just doesn't know how to twerk
lmao now I see it 🤣
Edit: since I can't unsee it now I made it into a gif LOL
-
Maybe it could be on a timer? So the killer can choose whether to hook or auto-mori?
-
You are talented amongst us. Well deserved 👏
-
@_AdamFrancis_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2956544#Comment_2956544
Mikaela and Jane would like to know your location
It is at the top models headquaters, their resumes were denied.
-
I don't even know anything about AoT and I want that Dweet one 😭
