Kaitsja
Kaitsja
About
- Username
- Kaitsja
- Joined
- Visits
- 5,184
- Last Active
Comments
-
@BlackRose89 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801583#Comment_3801583
Yes I agree she flawed I'm not arguing that but what you and many other don't get is that these heavy nerfs isn't going to make her any better to go against. She still going to be boring to face and I still think ppl will DC based on that along.
Once again all these nerfs are aim to do it to make the killer garbage so no one wants to play her. Honestly I'm would be fine with that if the rework took a max of 6 months to complete but that's not going to happen. The devs will take 2 or more years to rework her just like they did with twins, and Freddy. I'm complaining bc I think the devs are in the wrong here and should find better solutions to fix there games and not take the easy way out. But hey if you want to continue to drink the devs kool aid, by all means keep drinking. I for one will not and demand them to do better, and be better. Get thier damn priorities straight and actually do things in a reasonable time frame.
Also I do believe ppl hate SM just because she SM. Ppl hated her before her PTB came out for many dumb reasons. Sex bait, failed predator, she wasn't a cyborg, and the list keeps going.
I disagree. A killer that's boring to play against is infinitely better than a killer that is frustrating to play against. I believe that the changes they're making, heavy-handed though they may be, will make SM less frustrating to play against. Boring, perhaps, but you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who'll turn their nose up at a free win even if it's boring.
If the nerfs are, like you say, to make nobody want to play the killer then there's already no need for that since almost nobody plays SM anyway. I understand why you're frustrated, and your complaints are valid, but it's very clear that the devs want SM to be in a healthier spot for both sides. I'm not drinking the devs kool-aid, I'm just seeing it for what it is.
If you want to demand that the devs do better, then by all means do that, but don't hide it behind this guise that people just hate SM for no reason when the hate is justified. It's not just the 3-gen stalemate that was a problem, contrary to popular belief. The whole lock-on mechanic was poorly thought-out, and poorly executed. Drones that act as area denial and anti-loop, with a mechanic that leaves survivors broken after accumulating 3 stacks of being scanned. A radar that doubles as stealth and tracking.
Then there was the whole idea of hacking the drones to disable them only for SM to recall them and just place them back down again. With all that, it's easy to see how SM was destined to be hated.
-
@SpitefulHateful said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801037#Comment_3801037
In any game that allows it, players will tbag. It's funny to them. It's not something to get mad about. It's annoying, sure, but at the end of the day it's ultimately meaningless and not worth getting triggered over.
Ignoring the behavior of people who do their best to channel their insults and disrespect to other people because it lifts their mood means encouraging their behavior. Telling players who just want to play the game and not be a punching bag if they lose to endure the humiliation will only result in a game steadily losing player base.
Imagine you play a board game with a group of friends, but one person is always super toxic. They get upset when they lose, and make excuses for their loss. When they win, they gloat and insult the rest of the group. What do you think happens? The group decides that, from now on, they're not going to include that person anymore. This actively discourages that sort of behavior.
I still don't understand why would they not tolerate such people IRL? Can't they just ignore them and smile to themselves?
By not forcing them out, you're only encouraging their behaviour. The more of your time they waste, the more they enjoy it.
How does coming to watch them mock you doesn't encourage them? There is nothing such people like than to spit in the face one final time.
All the changes in the world won't stop poor sportsmanship.IMHO, it's the opposite. The less options players have to interact with each other outside the gameplay, the less negative experience with toxicity there will be. Removing chat and reducing the opportunities to waste time will remove the ways for toxicity, leaving sore winners no other choice than to move on to the next game. There will never be any semblance of good sportsmanship in online games anyways, so I see no point even bringing it up.
- Ignoring behaviour that isn't a reportable offence discourages it. That's how it works. Report what is reportable, ignore that which isn't. You're not being a punching bag. If getting mad at them worked, they wouldn't do it to begin with.
- Again, you're not understanding how online anonymity emboldens people to behave in ways they otherwise wouldn't. These people behave the way they do because of online anonymity. They wouldn't do it IRL because there are very real consequences. Consequences that range from social ostracism to physical violence.
- You're not coming to watch them mock you. You're actively sending a message. Even if you wait out the full timer, they'll wait until the last possible moment to leave just to waste your time. Forcing them out tells them you're not going to play their silly game. If every killer did this instead of complaining about survs tbagging in the exit gates, they'd stop doing it.
- You can't really remove the opportunity to waste time. You can limit it, but at the end of the day this is an asymmetrical 1v4 pvp game. A win for the team is not necessarily a win for all.
- You see no point in bringing up sportsmanship but that's what this behavior is. If you are humble in victory, and graceful in defeat, that's good sportsmanship. If you're the opposite, that's poor sportsmanship.
I once suggested removing chat, and people were opposed to the idea.
-
@BlackRose89 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801212#Comment_3801212
I'm really confident in saying that even if every single nerf they have planned makes it to Live ppl will continue to "give up" against her. The hate ppl have for SM runs so deep that even when she is the worst killer in the game they still give up against her just so they don't have to play the game against her.
I honestly cannot understand why people jump to this conclusion.
It's not as though it's just hate for the sake of hate, and it's not like people aren't aware of the changes made because of the chess merchant playstyle. Skull Merchant's power just isn't fun to engage with, she has really strong anti-loop, and her kit is just bloated making it hard to explain how to counter her.
If you had to explain a whole bunch of different mechanics, and how to counter them for just one killer to someone who's still relatively fresh to dbd, they'd probably question how they're supposed to keep track of all that.
Skull Merchant is flawed by design, and thus far bhvr has not managed to get it right. You'll always have a minority who rage quit and immediately forfeit, but you can get that with any killer they don't like. Hopefully the rework changes her for the better, since it's important that survivors find her fun to play against just as killers find her fun to play as.
-
Many of these restrictions are by design and intended to make it so that you don't solely rely on your power, as well as allow for counterplay for the survivors.
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800548#Comment_3800548
I mean SM is in such a bad state right now, I don't remember a single match where I was pleasantly surprised the SM wasn't a jerk or a Survivor DCed or any reason to think that match wasn't a complete and total waste of my time. That basically means a SM pick is near 100% sabotaging any Survivor chance of enjoyment, so the SM pick was intentional BM. Even other Killers that many people dislike can't reach that level of hatred. This is a medical procedure for the health of the game, so I can't blame them for doing it. I can blame them for ever thinking an area denial Killer in the heights of 6.1 gen kick perks was a good idea.
I've personally probably only played against a SM like 10 times since her release. I had exactly one enjoyable match against SM, and even that turned sour. They faked farming then betrayed us.
-
@SkeletonDance said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801173#Comment_3801173
That's a really good change, now we just need to remove map offerings 😌
Map offerings should work opposite to how they currently do rather than be removed. Prevents being sent to Macmillan's for the 5th time in a row without an offering.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801176#Comment_3801176
I cut you short in my last replay, something came up irl.
Ill try to give a better reply now.
Unless there are only 2 people left in the game, thats an invalid argument, 1 can stay at the gen and 1-2 (depending on remaining survivors) can go for the save.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801194#Comment_3801194
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801192#Comment_3801192
Can we agree that a team that gets 4 hooks are playing worse than a team that gets 1 hook? (same game but different teams)
Absolutely.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800310#Comment_3800310
One solution instead of a reduced EGC could be that survivors bleed BP the longer they stay in the game after the exit gates are powered (not open). One of the main arguments when NoED got nerfed was that it rewarded bad play, one could also arguing that the longer survivors stay in the map after the last gen is done the worse is the play, even if that means that they are trying to save someone.
I always wonder why people pop last gen if someone is on the hook, this will most likely cause the killer to camp the hook, making a rescue harder. Why not just save and then pop the gen.
I have a different solution. EGC ticks down faster the longer survivors remain within a certain proximity of an open exit gate. x1 per survivor, up to a total of 4x.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801176#Comment_3801176
I disagree, the longer you stay in the game, after last gen pops the worse you play, the hooked person is a result of that play.
The hooked person is usually in chase as the last gen pops. Just bad timing.
-
@CleanseThis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3801005#Comment_3801005
Your right they don't but, if they had to legally send out a notification (Which wouldn't be that hard to do) asking yes or no if you approve of said changes and if not you can get refunded, BHVR and other companies would definitely be more on their toes when it comes to balance instead of this pandering to one-sides complaining and feeling like they are untouchable. I mean cmon bhvr balancing is the most hodgepodge thing I've ever seen.
Except that they are under absolutely no obligation to do so. When you signed that license agreement, you acknowledged and agreed to the terms and conditions.
Your hypothetical would be absolutely terrible for business. The community can't even agree on tunneling, yet you think they could agree on whether or not a proposed change should go through?
Any time you play a live service game, you sign an agreement that states that you acknowledge, understand, and agree to the terms and conditions.
-
@SpitefulHateful said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800589#Comment_3800589
Anti-face camp doesn't work in EGC.
Killer powers still don't work near hooks even during EGC. Also, Survivors usually 99% gates, so they could go for the save, and then open the gates in one click, so they have even more time than 4 minutes.
In my experience, someone usually opens the gate while someone's still hooked and the killer is camping because what else are they supposed to do?
Survivors usually capitalize on the fact that the Killer can land only one hit on them — they go for the unhooked Survivor, that Survivor blocks them with an afterhook BT and they manage both get to the gate.
You didn't deny them the final opportunity to mock you. You wasted your time, and only encouraged the behaviour.
How coming over to the gate and watching the survivors tbag discourages their behavior?
Survivors spam loud noise notifications to annoy the killer
And to make the Killer come to the gates. Coming over in that case gives them the satisfaction because they know the Killer gave in to their mockery.
Tbagging is neither toxic, nor is it positive.
If that was true, tbagging wouldn't have been so frequent. There is a negative and disrespectful connotation behind the gesture.
Your analogy doesn't really work, because the reason people do this is because they're protected by online anonymity. It emboldens them.
Why? These people are just having fun, why are their actions different when they're in a public place instead of an online game? Why suddenly sucking it up and accommodating them is no longer an option?
- There are very few killer powers that don't work near a hooked survivor.
- Survivors 99 the gates in case they need to do an endgame rescue. This is common knowledge, but there are also players who only care about whether or not they themselves escape.
- In any game that allows it, players will tbag. It's funny to them. It's not something to get mad about. It's annoying, sure, but at the end of the day it's ultimately meaningless and not worth getting triggered over.
- Imagine you play a board game with a group of friends, but one person is always super toxic. They get upset when they lose, and make excuses for their loss. When they win, they gloat and insult the rest of the group. What do you think happens? The group decides that, from now on, they're not going to include that person anymore. This actively discourages that sort of behavior.
- Online anonymity emboldens people to behave in ways they otherwise wouldn't. The benefit of online anonymity is that, so long as you aren't breaking the rules, you are only answerable to yourself.
- By not forcing them out, you're only encouraging their behaviour. The more of your time they waste, the more they enjoy it.
The only reportable thing is abusive chat, and that's something you can turn off. Not everyone was raised to practice good sportsmanship. If I enjoyed a match, I'll approach the killer in the exit gates, drop my item at their feet and leave.
All the changes in the world won't stop poor sportsmanship.
-
@GeneralSkien said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800564#Comment_3800564
unplayable may be a stretch, there isn’t a killer that isn’t “unplayable” as you can play as any killer except demo for 2 years, but what I’m trying to say on playability is that she will be very, very bad, it’s not hyperbole to say she will be around D tier, cause doing all that to only apply a 5% hinder simply isn’t worth it when there are better killers
I’m not even an avid skull merchant player, I dropped her around 4 months ago cause I wanted to try other play styles. I’m kinda inbetween doctor, and spirit in terms of killers I currently enjoy.
I am very vocal about skull merchant cause
- I used to main her, and dealing with so much of negative reactions is what drove me to stop playing her
- This is a very long pattern of behavior of messing up balancing and not listening to community feedback. There has been so many victims in recent time to poor balancing, twins, trickster, knight, all have taken severe changes that make the killer worse to play, leading to changes being reversed, or just staple on nerfs. I don’t like the direct they have taken their reworks, so to gut skull merchant for the promise of another failed rework feels very disheartening.
I understand how you feel, don't get me wrong. She's going to be garbage tier, and that sucks for all the SM enjoyers. Unfortunately, this is a case of the few vs the many. She's not even picked frequently enough to warrant such heavy-handed nerfs. They could get away with just removing the haste, and she'd be better to play against.
-
@CleanseThis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800539#Comment_3800539
Its either agree or you cant play the game. It's hardly voluntary.
Then don't play the game. BHVR doesn't need the player base to sign off on every proposed change.
-
@SpitefulHateful said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800533#Comment_3800533
Forcing tbaggers out doesn't give them the satisfaction they crave.
If that was true, tbaggers wouldn't spam noise notifications around the gate in an attempt to make the Killer come over. They specifically want the Killer to chase them out, so they could spit the Killer in the face — this is what makes the happy.
They'll tbag until the timer is almost up, and what have you accomplished by not forcing them out other than wasting your own time? Nothing.
I denied them the final opportunity to mock me and didn't give them what they want. At least I had that.
Survivors don't always make their saves in the first two minutes of EGC. Sometimes it takes a little longer
In my experience, survivors have plenty of opportunities to heal and get the save in the first minutes — the rest they spend on BM and disrespect. With current anti-camping measures and certain Killer powers no longer working near the hook, the save is quite easy.
It isn't toxic to tbag.
If it isn't toxic to tbag, then where are the examples of positive tbagging? When it's seen in a friendly light? The answer is never. Tbagging is seen as an attempt to insult other player.
At the end of the day, it's just a game and getting worked up over a bunch of polygons and pixels isn't worth it.
Would you keep coming to a place that is supposed to be recreational and meant for fun activities if there is constantly a group that is insanely competitive and keeps insulting people and loudly mocking them whenever they win at a board game? Would the answer "so what? don't pay attention" be enough?
- Anti-face camp doesn't work in EGC.
- Survivors spam loud noise notifications to annoy the killer
- You didn't deny them the final opportunity to mock you. You wasted your time, and only encouraged the behaviour.
- In my experience, someone usually opens the gate while someone's still hooked and the killer is camping because what else are they supposed to do?
- Tbagging is neither toxic, nor is it positive.
Your analogy doesn't really work, because the reason people do this is because they're protected by online anonymity. It emboldens them.
The only actual toxic thing they're doing is abusing their opponent in the endgame chat, which you can turn off.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800560#Comment_3800560
No no, you see...
If you spam the forums the devs might reconsider the nerf. It isn't yet live, so screaming early and as often as possible has (unfortunately) been shown to be the most effective way to
manipulateencourage the devs to change their mind.Given that the intention of these changes is to alleviate the frustration of playing against her in the meantime until her rework, I don't see them caving to any demands.
-
@GeneralSkien said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800297#Comment_3800297
you see I wanna make it clear that the main issue is that these are holdover nerfs, unlike with most killers we have a confirmation that skull merchant is going to get reworked, unfortunately that’s one to two years from now, make no mistake this is a gutting. They want to render skull merchant to an unplayable state so people will stop complaining and focus on a rework (that’s likely gonna fail AGAIN)
The only people who will continue to play skull merchant are likely people who will try to get a rise, or make others miserable, this change fails at doing anything healthy- Yes, these are holdover nerfs
- Yes, this is a gutting
- No, this is not to make her unplayable
- The goal is to make her less frustrating to play against in the meantime until her rework
Skull Merchant will still be playable. You will enjoy her less, though.
-
WoO doesn't need a nerf. It's fine as-is.
-
@tippy2k2 said:
BHVR has always felt like it has a bit of a heavy hand when it comes to stuff like this but yeah, I 100% agree that this sets a really bad precedent and leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. Maybe it's only because this time it was outright admitted it was happening or maybe it's because usually stuff that gets nerfed to the ground STARTED super strong and/or overpowered and needed the nerf but something about this go around really hurts BHVRs reputation in my eyes.
The character was free for me (and I imagine many others) and she was not a character well liked so people don't seem to be super bothered about it but as you stated, I hope people remember this if BHVR decides to take a sledgehammer to their favorite thing in the game…
They've been doing this sort of thing for years. The only reason people are kicking up a stink is because SM is a niche killer, and this treatment is usually reserved for overperforming popular picks (be they perks, or killers).
BHVR isn't doing this to spite SM enjoyers. They have the data. They know there are people disconnecting and giving up on hook vs SM. They're aware that people are not enjoying playing against her.
-
@CleanseThis said:
How about we think outside the box here.. Let's say for example, that EULA was updated and now if a developer is going to make a change to a character that a automated notification had to be sent out to players who bought said character and associated in-store cells, cosmetics etc asking if they are ok with the recent proposed changes and if not will be refunded and in the future if they ever decide they want to repurchase the character again there is an upcharge on the next repurchase?
Why would they do that? Everyone who plays DBD agreed to the terms and conditions of the EULA.
Let me make this abundantly clear: BHVR can change anything they want in the game for any reason at any time. They don't require the player base to approve changes.
-
@SpitefulHateful said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800310#Comment_3800310
Reducing the EGC timer won't make things better. Sure, it'd reduce teabagging in the exit gates, but it'd also reduce the time survivors have to make endgame saves. If survivors teabagging in the exit gates annoys you, force them out.
Forcing tbaggers out gives them exactly the satisfaction they crave— they want a reaction from Killer, and they see the Killer coming over to the as that reaction, an opportunity to disrespect them further. I'm not giving them that satisfaction, but it leads to my time being wasted on waiting till the bunch of monkeys is done gloating. Also, Survivors usually make their saves in first two minutes of EGC and spend the rest milking the timer for the opportunity to BM, so I wouldn't say they use all four minutes wisely and only for useful things.
A killer downs me and humps me, I laugh it off. It's not worth getting mad over.
People can ignore BM for only so long. Nothing good ever happened of telling players to accommodate themselves to the toxicity rather than introduce in-game measures for limiting the said toxicity.
Forcing tbaggers out doesn't give them the satisfaction they crave. How you react in the endgame chat gives them the satisfaction. Forcing them out means you're not wasting your time. They'll tbag until the timer is almost up, and what have you accomplished by not forcing them out other than wasting your own time? Nothing.
Survivors don't always make their saves in the first two minutes of EGC. Sometimes it takes a little longer.
You're not really accommodating toxic behavior so much as you are ignoring perceived toxic behavior. It isn't toxic to tbag. The survivors are gloating that they won, so what? The killer humping a survivor on the ground is gloating that they won the chase, so what? At the end of the day, it's just a game and getting worked up over a bunch of polygons and pixels isn't worth it.
The best thing you can do is report abusive chat, and move on. Tbagging and humping are not reportable offenses.
-
@BlackRose89 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800324#Comment_3800324
This isnt a balance change and saying over and over isn't going to make it one. Yes I know it's a live service game but that shouldn't be used as a excuse. Just because it's live service game doesn't give the devs the right to completely gut a character and let that character sit in the trash for two years before they decide they now have time to fix them. As I said these nerfs have nothing to do with balance, the underline goal is to kill SM for its players so they don't want to play her anymore.
I'm for one will not allow the devs to sit behind the "live service game" shield. These devs should be called out for their bad practices and terrible decision making. They need to get their priorities straight, stop worrying about releasing new killers who powers are just copies of other killers powers(Lich and Dark Lord), and actually focus on the already promised reworks and health of the game for both sides.
Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean it's not a balance change. Any time there is a nerf or a buff, it is a balance change. The underlying goal is not to kill SM, it is to make her less frustrating to play against.
Being hyperbolic doesn't make that any less true. They have their priorities straight. Reworks take time. Not everything happens overnight.
@BlackRose89 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3800328#Comment_3800328
Plz... anyone with eyes can see the true purpose for these heavy handed nerfs. Of course the devs aren't going to openly admit they are killing off a killer so thier play rate can take a nose drive. Alot of ppl has said that this is the first time they seen a killer get this heavy nerfed and the nerfs will make the killer the worst killer in the game. Doesn't take a genius to figure out the true purpose behind nerfing SM this much.
For reference: Otz comment about the SM nerfs
"Skull Merchant gets huge nerf, possibly one of the biggest nerfs I remember in DBD history; no longer gets haste, her slowdown is reduced significantly (especially considering she resets bloodlust when placing drones) and the drones now only have one scan line instead of the previous two. Instead of reworking her to be more straight-forward and beginner friendly so she's not a pub stomper, the devs have seemingly gone the route of just making her absolutely terrible. Really strange decision."
Many others both CCs and normal players have said similar things.
It doesn't take a genius to realize that there isn't some large conspiracy going on behind the scenes where bhvr has decided that the few SM enjoyers just deserve to suffer. Your theory is completely unfounded.
SM is already a killer who sees very little play to begin with. If the intent was to kill off SM, they would just nerf her and cancel the rework. The intent is to make her less frustrating to play against until her rework.
- You have the right to be upset about this.
- It's reasonable, even, that you would be upset about this.
- It was not done to "kill the character off"
- This was done to make the character less frustrating to play against until her rework.
- This is a live-service game, and bhvr can change anything they want at any given time. This does not entitle you to compensation.
This is a very clear-cut case of the Few vs The Many. The Many find SM unfun to play against. Weighing the enjoyment of The Few vs the enjoyment of The Many is almost always going to end up favoring The Many, rather than The Few.
-
Everything in a live-service game can be changed at any point in time for any reason. You agreed to that when you accepted the TOS.
With that said, it would be nice if people could stop framing the SM nerfs as BHVR intentionally killing the character. SM will still be playable, you will enjoy her less, but she'll be less frustrating to play against.
-
@GeneralSkien said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/427002/the-skull-merchant-situation
I’m so sorry if anyone here finds out this way, but it was confirmed by the community manager that these nerfs aren’t accidental or done out of balance.
The community manager made a statement saying the point of these changes are to kill the character until they can push out a rework, which is so abysmally stupid that skull merchant is gonna get Freddied for atleast a year or 2Where's the quote on that?
Pretty sure the only thing that was confirmed was that the changes are intentional, and are intended to make SM less frustrating to play against until her rework.
Not everything is some grand conspiracy.
-
@BlackRose89 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3799694#Comment_3799694
God I hate the live service excuse...I firmly believe that live service games have ruined games and the gaming industry. Gamers are so willing to take whatever ######### the devs give them nowadays. I may sound old but I ######### miss the 360 and PS2 days
It's a live-service pvp game. If they just never made balance changes, nobody would be having fun.
-
@SpitefulHateful said:
If you're saying people should not BM and it's a terrible thing to gloat at the exit gates I 100% agree. It's childish. It shouldn't happen. I have stated multiple times that BHVR should, in my opinion, issue a statement regarding good sportsmanship and how to follow good sportsmanship and teabagging, while it is viewed by many as harmless, does not change the fact that many people view it as the digital equivalent of a middle finger and that should be respected. I think a significant chunk of the us vs them discourse would disappear (not a majority but a significant chunk) if survivors stopped teabagging as a taunt.
The thing is, people are going to BM if they can because sportstmanship is kinda dead when it comes to multiplayer games. No amount of reminders and guidelines will suffice (Behavior has enough problems with their Fog Whisperers). The only working way to reduce BM is to incorporate it gameplay-wise by either limiting player's options to do so or to provide a way not to interact with sore winners. IMHO, removing endgame chat entirely and reducing the ECG timer would help. After all, The Journey is considered one of the most wholesome games about friendship and helping each other — but only because the developers have removed every option for players to BM and grief their partner during beta testing (when they realized that people spent more time pushing their partner down the cliff or bodyblocking them rather than working together). I think, DbD would have benefitted immensely from limited interactions.
Teabagging and wasting time at the Killer's exit gate grates on me. Unfortunately, a lot of people do it and now we also have humping on the Killer side which I also find annoying and grating. However, the people doing it are specifically trying to annoy you so I just ignore them now if I see it on the Killer side. If I see a survivor doing it while playing Survivor games and the Killer did not camp or tunnel I make sure to tell the Killer gg, gl next match or something similar.
As I don't camp or tunnel when I play I don't experience that much BM to be honest if I win or if I lose. It does happen still but not frequently. I see it a lot more in games where the Killer is tunnelling and camping. The survivors do stick around at the gates so I come over and take a few hits for BP if I'm down anyway but really I just do it to save time (another option is breaking walls). I also almost never get hateful messages in chat. I'm not saying any of these behaviours (gloating and messages in chat) is justified (it's not) but people that have had a miserable experience are more likely to vent their frustration and, unfortunately, that happens more frequently online than it would in real life.
Well, people sometimes have a very wide definition of camping and tunneling. If they start swarming the hook even before the Killer leaves the area, is Killer a camper for smacking them and capitalizing on the fact that survivors refuse to leave the hook zone? If the Killer is inexperienced and/or keeps finding one and the same Survivor while steadily losing gens, is it tunneling when they are just trying to score a kill? I'm not even mentioning the Killer protecting their only Kill during the endgame collapse — they don't have other options, but they're still called a camper and BMed. So, it's very easy for survivors to rationalize that the Killer was tunneling or camping (I was called a camper for phase-walking from the hooked Survivor as Spirit, because they could see Rin's husk standing next to them) — and therefore, it's easy for them to rationalize that this Killer deserves to be bullied. Not to mention that even playing by survivor's rulebook ends with "haha ez" or "you're so bad, how did you even manage to prestige" — we have also had cases of people going as far as finding the player who lost to them on Steam and social media and harassing them there. People BM because they can — it's a cheap ego boost and they will pretend that it's their sacred duty and God given right to ruin other's people mood. Some of them would even excuse their BM as tough love and "motivating" the players to improve until they are worthy of respect.
If you lose a game, though, it might help to keep in mind that it doesn't reflect on you one way or another in real life. You lost a video game; it's not a personal attack nor anything that you'll care about or remember in the future. Losing a video game is trivial. It is annoying and grating to deal with sore winners and your frustration at that is completely justified; sore winners suck. and they should show sportsmanship instead. But it's not a reflection on you in the slightest.
It doesn't, but the problem is that in the game people are given tools and means to make loss humiliating and punish the player for losing by wasting their time and rubbing their helplessness in. The latter is particularly frustrating for beginner players, who don't yet have the sense of the game, but already see that the community is cruel and unforgiving to new players — so they either drop out or become hellbent on not being on the receiving end (this is one of the reasons why V/H/S didn't make it: there were too many ways to harass the Monster, so the only remaining players were absolutely merciless and played like their lives depended on it). They also learn that the only way for the player to be in control and avoid this, is to win.
This is what I mean — despite the fact that a loss in a video game, where skills don't matter (and which should have never even leaned into "competitive gaming") shouldn't be a big deal, this is not reflected in the gameplay. Sore winners can't be taught good sportsmanship, so the only way to reduce their impact is to limit their options and provide their opponent with something else they could spend time on and actually gain value.
I'll admit I only skimmed this, but:
Players who BM are always going to do that. They want you to take them seriously. You won fair and square, but you lingered at a hook for a second too long? Camper. You won fair and square, but you tunneled because they were bodyblocking? Tunneler. You lost? GG EZ Baby Killer.
The best thing you can do about these people is to not give them the satisfaction that they crave. They want to get a rise out of you.
Reducing the EGC timer won't make things better. Sure, it'd reduce teabagging in the exit gates, but it'd also reduce the time survivors have to make endgame saves. If survivors teabagging in the exit gates annoys you, force them out. A killer downs me and humps me, I laugh it off. It's not worth getting mad over.
-
@Eelanos said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3793926#Comment_3793926
Asymmetric gameplay or not, this is a game. A PvP one at that. They can't balance the game around the killers never having any fear of losing. You're supposed to lose if you play badly. As long as you want to win, the worry is always gonna be there.
Otherwise, what you're asking for is for 4 players to queue to a lost game where they're your plaything and you can do aaaaanything you want to them.
This is actually what a small, but vocal, minority of killer players want. They want to basically be playing a PVE game, because killer is supposed to be the power role.
-
The changes were deserved.
-
@humanbeing1704 said:
I’m confused there’s people actually mad about it?
These people would get pissed off at rainbow six siege then over the years operators usually go down 5000 of the ingame currency every season and a slight drop for the paid
Believe it or not, yes.
Someone complained that since everyone already has the original eight characters, bhvr should give people more new characters.
Others want a partial refund of Auric Cells for already owning the characters.
-
I loved lights out as killer, so I'm happy it's returning.
-
Just ran into this bug against Unknown. Were you running Moment of Glory, by any chance?
-
@NerfDHalready said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3782892#Comment_3782892
you couldn't solo save against a camper, even if it would be a trade. i'm surprised as a survivor player (i'm assuming) having played back then you don't understand the importance of the change.
I understand the importance of the change, but I don't see it as a change that made killer weaker. Sure, you couldn't solo save against a camper, but you just took their place anyway even in the event you won the mindgame. So, really, it didn't make killer weaker. This is why I say it was insignificant, from a balance perspective.
It was certainly significant for the health of the game, but had very little effect on the overall balance of the game. Certainly not even close to having enough of an effect to warrant a hypothetical basekit buff to killers for its removal.
-
@NerfDHalready said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3782852#Comment_3782852
it was a balance change but more so a game health change just like the addition of basekit bt. i do agree balance (or not) changes don't need compensation every time but i heavily disagree it was an insignificant change that didn't weaken killer.
You disagree that it didn't weaken killer? You can still force a trade, and you can still intercept before they reach the hook. I can't count the amount of times I watched someone die because of the stupid hook grab mindgame. So, other than the mindgame, and hurting one playstyle for Hag, what did it do that made killer weaker?
-
@NerfDHalready said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3782218#Comment_3782218
Hook grabs being removed was an insignificant change.
i didn't follow any out of topic discussions after some point but, did you play during those times? removal of unhook grabs were a 10 times better anti face camp solution than self unhook bar we have now. you couldn't go for unhook as one person last second against a camper, you needed 2 people off gens (impossible levels of coordination for soloq) or you risk allowing killer camp a hook and a slug. game is basically over then.
Yes, I did. Contextually, I meant it was an insignificant change balance-wise. I mean, let's be real here. Killers lost the ability to grab survivors attempting an unhook, what could we have possibly given killers to compensate for this that wouldn't just make it pointless? The argument being made is that killers should've received compensation for it, when it didn't actually change their chances of winning or losing.
@Neaxolotl Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. That also has nothing to do with balance.
-
@Jim_Tonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3781754#Comment_3781754
what did killers get in return for removed hook grabs? what did killers get in return for the anti facecamp?
no, it doesnt always have to please both sides. But sure keep these double standards, when killers get something there needs to also be something for survivors but when survivors get these mechanics it doesnt matter if killers get compensated.
"We dont want a solution" is exactly the core issiue i have with all of you.The only one who doesn't want a solution is you. You claim you don't want a guaranteed 4k, but at the same time you say killers need an anti-stall mechanic basekit and survivors should get nothing because killer constantly gets shafted. In other words, you want a guaranteed 4k. You talk about double standards, but isn't that exactly what you're asking for?
Hook grabs being removed was an insignificant change. You can still interrupt an unhook, and you can still get a trade. The only thing that's changed is now there's no silly mindgame being played out at the hook that's going to result in the hooked survivor's death.
While it's certainly not always about getting something in return, when it comes to something significant like an anti-stall mechanic there needs to be a bit of an exchange. You may have liked hook grabs, but that doesn't mean they were healthy for the game.
-
@まうっす said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3781914#Comment_3781914
Killers and survivors are not friends.
It's quite normal to balance the game by nerfing advantageous survivors, especially SWFs.
At least in other games.Other games nerf things that are advantageous but don't actually harm the experience of playing with friends. No game that I know of punishes people for playing with their friends.
-
@HexHuntressThighs said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3766410#Comment_3766410
Killers are often told to stop relying on aura reads and develop "game sense"
I would say the exact same thing for Windows of Op. You don't have to use your brain at all and remember where chases have happened and potentially what pallets have been used. Its literally survivor game sense made manifest as a perk.
I don't think it should be nerfed really, but it can't be denied it is literally insane value and an auto pilot perk that makes all your chase decisions next to perfect. You will NEVER run to a loop thinking there is a pallet there when there's not ever.
Not quite the same thing.
You can remember where your chases happened, but if you aren't running a perk that shows you the auras of your fellow survivors then you can't really track where their chases happened.
-
@HexHuntressThighs said:
After 500 hours of gameplay the perk is deleted from your account.
The problem is it’s great for new people to teach them the game. And for veterans to not get caught at a loop without a pallet. It’s definitely an autopilot perk that has consistent and insane value. I’m not great at looping but when I use Windows I become borderline uncatchable.
A 10 second cooldown wouldn’t do anything anyways as you could remember 2-3 pallets at a time.
Edit: I better specify the first sentence is a joke before people start going crazy
WoO is a great perk, but it's not the problem. It's a symptom of the problem, which is too many strong loops and tiles within close proximity of each other. Something BHVR has already started working to address.
It's also worth mentioning that many of the newer maps/map reworks are filled with pallets, but most of them are so weak that you can just avoid them altogether.
-
@Jim_Tonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3781481#Comment_3781481
I dont say the solution has to "guarantee a win" thats where you are mistaken and its not my fault you make assumptions. But the fact that we dont even want a solution obviously is where the double standards hit.
It doesnt matter "win" or not. What matters is, that its a very frustrating experience to killer when it happens, the stalling is annoying and happens more than people want to admit. But we are hard against it in this community. Why? because its something that COULD benefit killers even slightly.
Also shall i mention hook grabs removed again? Talk about not guaranteed something, as i said safes used to be a risky play.We do want a solution, just not one that favors either side heavily. If a solution favors killer, then you end up with problems where killer gets a guaranteed 4k while survivors have to get a 4E in order to win.
You want to talk about hook grabs? Okay let's talk about hook grabs. Let's talk about the stupid hook standoffs that would happen because the killer refused to just take a trade. Let's talk about how DS, which was rightfully nerfed, used to allow you to get grabbed, stab the killer, get the rescue, and then have the rescuee body block you with BT.
As I've already pointed out, the solution to this stalling problem needs to be one that doesn't favor either side. It's a give and take situation. Both sides get something, but they both have to give up something in return. Killers want an anti-stall mechanic, well survivors want to feel like it's still possible to escape if there's two of them left and more than one gen still required to activate the exit gates. Nobody's going to agree to just be a sacrificial lamb.
The entire reason survivors stall when there's only two of them left and more than one gen remaining is that neither survivor wants to just give up, but doing gens feels a little pointless given the likelihood of being found since it takes 90 seconds to do a gen solo.
-
@Jim_Tonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3781384#Comment_3781384
Imagine never playing killer. Because i know you dont by the statement of yours. With background player, sabo boxes etc its not even possible to avoid the wiggle free, most of the time when squads play that way they run boil over too..
Dont be disinginious.The only one being disingenuous here is you, buddy. I do play killer. I almost never play against sabo squads. I'd find any claim that suggests they're even remotely common to be dubious at best.
You claimed that sabo plays are guaranteed now, because of the changes to sabo toolboxes, yet never bothered to mention that it's only really guaranteed with sabo squads.
@Jim_Tonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3781384#Comment_3781384
same reason why survivors need their mechanics. To combat annoying scenarios.
Except that the mechanics survivors get to combat annoying scenarios are not guaranteeing them a win. You remarked about double standards, yet you're asking for exactly that. That's rather hypocritical, don't you think?
-
The problem with this subject is that any potential solutions are going to have drawbacks that leave one side unhappy.
Killers don't want survivors to stall, which is fair enough. Survivors feel like it's a lost cause when only two of them are left and there's more than one generator remaining, which is also fair.
The problem is finding a solution that's somewhere in the middle of what both parties want. You can't give killers a mechanic that's going to guarantee them a 4k, as then the two remaining survivors automatically lose.
You also can't give the survivors something that's going to guarantee their escape, either, as then it forces the killer to accept a 2k.
-
@Jim_Tonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3780231#Comment_3780231
For both? no, not at all as the one that doesnt get chased gets to wait for hatch OR do the gens, either way its not fair killers have no mechanic in place for these situations. But ofc in this here community we dont care once its a killer problem, however when its a survivor problem then we can make basekit mechanics to make it easyer for them, despite the fact that killers too could argue how they are more likely in a loosing position with these mechanics as they were without them.
Making UNSAFE hook rescues used to be punished and a bad play, now you can easyly rescue by your own and dont need 2 people for that. And sabo plays are guaranteed now, you can sabo in between the killers little swipe animation while they are holding a survivor and still get away. Sabo plays used to be risky, now its just easy af.
But god forbid killers have something like that, in a situation where they have won alredy anyway. When 2 survs are left and more than 1 gen is still needed completion.
The double standards never cease to shock me…Complaining about hook sabo's when you usually have four hooks all within 8 metres of each other is actually hilarious.
You talk about how making unsafe hook rescues used to be a bad play that could be punished, yet it still is a bad play that can be punished. If you think immediately downing the unhooked survivor, who has no control over when they're unhooked, is punishing the unhooker then you're dead wrong. The unhooker doesn't care. If they did, they wouldn't unsafe unhook in the first place. This is actually why basekit BT became necessary.
Why do killers need a mechanic in place that's going to guarantee them a 4k if they get down to two survivors remaining?
-
@VantablackPharaoh91 said:
It definitely needs to be addressed, as does slugging for a 4k. Nobody likes having their time wasted. The culprits are hatch, hiding, and the game only rewarding Kills/Escapes.
Why not just make it so either the hatch spawns (locked, you need a key to open it so you either must do gens or find a key if you want an out this way) with two players left if not all gens are complete, and then have it close after that person (it can be unlocked again though).
To address slugging for 4k, autosacrifice someone left on the ground this way the second the other person is hooked, or make the bleedout timer 2 minutes. We can stand endgame collapse being 2 minutes, I'm sure nobody will be upset about bleeding out taking 2 minutes either. Make the game based on hookstages and not sacrifices, a 3k should be worth the same as a 4k. A 2k is still a good enough effort against a strong team and it's time to reward people for TAKING that challenge and having a fair tie, both parties need to walk out with something. You can still base MMR on actual kills, but people could then pip by being less than amazing, unlike what the game currently demands from the stifling "only kills/escapes matter and pip you" system we have now.
For hiders? Permanent crows or intermittent aura reveal/noise notifs for lockers after 25 seconds not interacting with gens. You can't be rid of them. You can't hide from it. If aura hiding is a concern, Killer Instinct for free on every Killer when Survs do this. This counts for slugs, too.
You're suggesting they revert some of the hatch changes that have been made? That's a new one.
-
@basedkiller916 said:
I've also been in games as killer where literally 3-4 gens pop back to back. Gotta keep the pressure up somehow but yall never wanna talk about genrush and how little tools killers get to actually deal with it against even semi decent survivors
I've also been in games like that, and honestly it's just bad luck. You aren't going to win every match, and you shouldn't expect to. Killers have plenty of tools to deal with the apparent genrush. Pressure in 2v8 doesn't work the same way as it does in 1v4. Look at it like this: In 2v8, if two survivors are occupied that leaves six survivors, or three groups of two.
Three groups of two can work on three different generators and complete them faster because they're working together. This runs in contrast to 1v4, where if you're chasing one survivor, that leaves one group of two to work a generator and complete it in around 52 seconds while the one remaining survivor has to spend 90 seconds to complete a generator.
The more survivors you have off gens at any given time in 2v8, the better your odds are of winning.
-
I think the finisher mori is unnecessary. I think we could avoid problems like the 4-man slug by simply allowing survivors to bleed out faster, or even a slightly more complex unbreakable that requires another slugged survivor nearby to permanently convert part of their recovery progress to allow their fellow survivor to fully recover from the dying state.
From a UI perspective, this would look similar to the regression meter on a generator. So, Survivor A and Survivor B are both slugged within ~3 metres of each orher. Survivor A permanently converts 25% of their recovery progress to allow Survivor B to pick themselves up. This means that Survivor A can no longer recover beyond 70%.
What purpose is the finisher mori/last survivor standing system supposed to serve? As someone who occasionally plays killer and doesn't care at all about getting the 4k, I don't see a need for it. I enjoy being able to decide if I want to give the last survivor hatch or gate, and I also enjoy being able to have slug races. I don't want to see these positive interactions removed.
Give killers the Ivory (Green) mori basekit, and retire the other mori offerings. I think this alone is a much better idea than the finisher mori.
-
I hope that Plague's iri add-ons don't get changed. I'm particularly fond of the black incense add-on.
-
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772301#Comment_3772301
actually i didnt lie i actually been saying we should also get small killer perk buffs
YOU said it would be too much and massive to add them cause the patch is killer sided (which is not) and you did say equal amount which i did say but you said afterwards i want massive buffs (which i did not you lied and act like thats us vs them but you are the only one saying us vs them mentality not at all i said other side is too strong or said i want more killer perks. if you read my previous post and instead of being a troll you would see i want beast of prey distressing other bad perks to be buff (you can look back i did say that) you think that be op and too strong and killer sided.
I never, at any point, said the patch is killer sided. You did, though. I quoted you on it, and you still denied it. You said the game has been killer sided since launch, which I quoted you on and you denied. You also initially called the patch survivor-sided, so which is it?
What I think is that killer got more than their fair share of buffs this patch, and don't need more. I mean, if you want keep lying and being called out on it, feel free to. I got time to kill.
-
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772282#Comment_3772282
You said equal amount of buffs. You literally said equal. You just admitted you lied
You've been denying that you've lied this entire time. You lied about what I said. You lied about the number of buffs killers got. You lied about what you said.
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772281#Comment_3772281
I know right why buff both sides hell give more buffs to survivors they need like kate said its been killer sided since launch
Oh look, you can't even stay consistent. First you complain that killers didn't get an equal number of buffs, now you say survivors should get more buffs. You're the one who said it's been killer sided since launch. That's another lie.
-
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772273#Comment_3772273
Where did i say i want massive buffs point it out
You just said want an equal number of buffs. Since you're only counting the buffs killers got as a whole rather than individually, that would translate to 9 killers needing to be buffed regardless of how they're performing or the relative strength of the survivor perks that got buffed. That's massive.
-
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772264#Comment_3772264
Never said that again thats a lie. I said i want a balance amount now it pretty sure your a troll that wants reaction and make up lies
Kind of like how you've been lying this entire time?
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772261#Comment_3772261
None came with nerfs all buffs
- Chemical Trap duration reduced to 40/50/60 seconds
- Mirrored Illusion duration reduced to 40/50/60 seconds
Both of those are nerfs. Further, Scratchmarks are now more visible which is a nerf to survivor and a buff to killer.
-
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772233#Comment_3772233
no the logic you used is bad logic. like very bad. doesnt make sense and you are basically saying theres no way its survivor sided and always killer sided (which is funny cause you say i was being us vs them) and its 10-3
It's your logic, though. You made the statement that every patch has been killer-sided, which means that no patches have been survivor-sided. Going by that logic, you should have no reason to complain.
12-9