KateMain86
KateMain86
About
- Username
- KateMain86
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
This is completely normal. I don't play killer but if I did I would give the red carpet treatment to several survivors. Kate being one of them obviously. I tend to even go out of my way often to save other Kates in matches as well as some other survivors just because I like the character. It all depends how much the character itself means to you. It also depends how much winning means to you in this game.
-
Claudette is one of the original characters thats been there from the beginning so she has that going for her. As far as female characters go, exaggerated beauty tends to be a very marketable aspect of them. Some games however that doesn't necessarily have to be the case. In Overwatch I main Moira in the support role. I don't think this character is beautiful or attractive at all, but she is fun as hell to play. In a game like DBD though, survivors come with unique perks but they eventually just become skins as you unlock more perks. The main thing the survivors in DBD really have going for them in my opinion is their looks and cosmetics.
-
@K_Nottie16 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3337160#Comment_3337160
For me im talking about games that i play were you are able to buy skins for them. For instance fortnite used to be not as diverse when it came to its characters. The black characters all had the same face model and stereotypical hairstyles while the white characters had variety. Thats what im talking about games dont have variety when it come to black people. Now fortnite is very diverse and actually trying with their skins. Another example is cod. In cold war they had 2 black women characters one was masculine and the other had some feminine qualities along with masculine. But the white women characters had so many options when it came to their looks. I feel like people are lying when they say that in games white characters dont get more representation than black characters because they do. Even in games like the sims they didnt have much diversity until white games came together and EA finally listened and put out more diversity not only for black simmer but asian ones too. So back to my point is that Feng can get cosmetics but so can others it just seems like laziness when it comes to black cosmetics. And it really seems like in this toxic community no one cares about how black gamers feel at all and it really shows. And your right there are black characters that i look up to but buying outfits arent apart of those games. I love Marlene and Riley from that last of us. And lee and clementine from the walking dead but once again outfits dont matter for those games. But they do play a part in dead by daylight. The outfits they give to Elodie is the most weirdest outfits ive seen they dont even make since for her characters in my opinion. All im saying is that everyone should be able to get some outfits not just Feng. But i guess in this ignorant community thats not reasonable
The community isn't being ignorant about this. You don't seem to understand how the market works in gaming. When you say things like "everyone should be able to get some outfits not just Feng" you're saying that as if there is only good to come out of that and no loss. People have to make these outfits. They have to be paid for it. It takes time and DBD exists to make profit, not to cater to every demand of every player who plays the game. Feng obviously generates good profit, which supports the game's continuation and innovation going into the future. If they spent the rest of this year focusing on making outfits for characters and characters themselves that the consumers just aren't going to respond to that well then the game is going to suffer financial loss, and those servers don't pay for themselves.
I understand you like Elodie. That's fine. But unless there are a LOT (and by a lot I mean thousands) more people like you who play the game and are willing to spend money on a character like Elodie then coming here and complaining about Feng being an attention hog isn't exactly going to change anything. I'm pretty sure Elodie was better received by the community than Haddie was but I don't think she is anywhere near up there in popularity as characters like Feng. She'll likely get something new here and there, but purely from a financial perspective it wouldn't make sense to put as much or even half as much focus on characters that simply do not produce as much of a return as others. You have to look at this from a marketing perspective rather than a personal one to understand why things happen the way they do. You can certainly voice your opinion but ultimately it comes down to numbers in the data. If one day the player base shifts more towards characters like Elodie then you'll likely see more stuff available for her.
-
@K_Nottie16 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3336993#Comment_3336993
Lol. So Elodie might not be relatable FOR YOU. She is for me and many other black people who play dead by daylight. For me and many others there arent many good black representation in games. We're just in the game to say hey look everyone heres our black character.
That is not true at all. There are lots of amazing black video game characters. Lucio from Overwatch is one of my top most played characters in that game. Barret from Final Fantasy 7 is just simply legendary to name a couple.
-
@K_Nottie16 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3336859#Comment_3336859
To me yui isnt that popular and they dont really pay much attention to her either
It doesn't matter what she is to you. The only thing that matters is what is true about the character itself. Yui was very well received. I see her in almost every match. I play her a lot myself. She has a good selection of cosmetics and even was one of the characters chosen for the Attack on Titan skins. Yui as a character is very cool and looks great even in her default outfit. She was a total win survivor.
-
@K_Nottie16 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3336439#Comment_3336439
Honestly i dont think Feng would be as popular if she didnt have the best cosmetics in the game. Which is why i feel like behavior should put effort in other characters as well. Because at this point making new characters is a waste if you're gonna just forget about them.
It all depends on how well the character is received. There is no point in staying focused on a character that the player base didn't respond well to. Making new characters is always risky but it is possible to make a new character that will become a new fan favorite or as popular as other favorites. I remember when Yui's chapter was announced and I knew everyone would love her and they did. She was received very well. I see her in almost every lobby I'm in. What they need to do is create a character like that again, or an even better one.
-
@K_Nottie16 said:
Feng Min gets way too many cosmetics. I get it shes a fan favorite but i feel like others would get a chance to be a fan favorite too if they actually got cute cosmetics as well. Im a girl so obviously i want cute clothes for my main. Theres a lot of girls who play this game and the only one who really gets girly cosmetics is Feng. So it only makes sense for girls to gravitate towards Feng. My main is Elodie and she doesnt get the recognition she deserves. For me when Elodie came into the game it made me really happy to see someone who looks like me in the dead by daylight world. But her outfits are just ugly. Her cosmetics age her up. There are so many different styles they could do with her and they waste it. The only good outfit she has is the afro punk one that was made by a fan. Its not just with Elodie its with other characters as well. To me Haddie is good representation but sadly not many people main her because she doesnt have a good selection of cosmetics.
Feng isn't the only survivor, she's just one of the most popular and well received ones. Its never really too much when one of your best character designs is giving you a great return on the work you put into it. I don't think 50 good outfits for Haddie would make people play her. Feng gets unreasonable criticism as well as the developers about this. People complain and want them to create outfits that will only appeal to a small amount of people. If the character isn't first received well it doesn't make sense to keep making cosmetics for them. I'm sure Elodie and Haddie will get more stuff eventually, but its completely reasonable that the stars of the game receive the most attention. I saw people using Feng's newer outfits the first day they came out. I haven't seen Haddie in a lobby since her chapter was released. In the end its about what is marketable and not every character or cosmetic they make is going to be as marketable as others.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3335578#Comment_3335578
I know I seem to be going hard at defending Haddie but I actually don't play her much and the reason is because I don't like her outfits.
As for being generic or uninteresting, since I don't really find the lore of the survivors that interesting (which is strange because usually I love reading lore) I, like you seem to do base who I play on their look. Look is not always about "attractiveness" either.
I know this might be fighting words for some but I don't find David that attractive (sure he looks good shirtless) but he has a few good outfits so I'll play him. Another example, I never used to play Zarina and this was solely because I'm not a fan of her base cosmetic. I have a ton of envelopes on her because I just P3 her. If I was going to play her to use up the envelopes I decided to get a new outfit for her and now I really like that outfit so I'll probably play her a lot more.
The lore of the characters would be more relevant if the game had a story mode or something that made the lore have more substantive value. I'm pretty sure most sales within the game are based entirely on the appearance of the outfit and character themselves rather than the lore pertaining to them. For licensed characters however that is a different story. I'm a huge Resident Evil fan so when they introduced an RE chapter I didn't hesitate to buy it for myself and even gifted the chapter to my friends who played at the time. The characters themselves look very cool, but they are also very rich in lore and have a long established fan base. When you're designing a new original character that doesn't have those things you have to consider what people are more willing to respond to in a positive way if you want them to be and continue to be marketable.
-
@Alen_Starkly said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3335532#Comment_3335532
There are us who like/love Haddie. I would play her more if she had more cosmetics (and especially good cosmetics). I don't think Haddie should have been like Kate, Yui or Feng. Haddie is unique both in regards to her race/ethnicity, and her body type. A lot of DBD players can relate to her on that level. Seeing BHVR not caring about Indians and/or women of her body type isn't sending a good message. Also, they are missing out on creating that deeper connection between players who relate to Haddie, and the game/devs.
I love Kate, Yui and Feng, but god do I get tired of seeing them all the time sometimes... I want more Haddies, more Davids, more Adams, more Janes, Élodies, Zarinas, Jeffs, ... Rather than dumping away these characters, the devs could make them more appealing to play. For example, finally make all survivors equally loud, so people don't avoid playing Jane/Jeff for the reason that they are loud . Then, start giving them more cosmetics that are actually good, so they would be more appealing to play. I myself didn't really play Jane or Jeff much until BHVR finally started giving them some cool rift outfits. Getting those outfits made me actually want to play them. I am a kind of person that plays every survivor, and changes their cosmetics often. If I can't do that with someone, I don't really feel like playing them most of the time.
What a boring game DBD will become, if BHVR starts giving (good) cosmetics to only hot (by popular opinion) females, and other survivors suffer lack of them. Every lobby will be just females of the same body features. Even now it's often like that. It's so f-ing boring and bland. I want variety. Give me interesting lobbies, various characters, male, female, other genders, slim people, people with bigger boddies, hairy, etc. Variety is awesome. Not lobbies full of clones of females that are "beatiful by the popular standards" smh.
P.S. Dear BHVR, give us guys with body hair, give us a granny survivor <3
It would be boring to you, but it would appeal to the majority. I think its pretty lame and unfair to say they don't care about Indians and women of her body type because they aren't focusing on making her new cosmetics right now. They didn't have to make Haddie to begin with, so why are you here saying they don't care? DBD has to stay profitable for it to stay online and for them to invest more time and money into it. Its not that they don't care about Indians and people who look like Haddie. Its the fact that the consumers didn't respond well to her. You want them to keep producing content that doesn't appeal to a large enough crowd to make it worth producing to begin with. At this point it would've been better had they not made Haddie at all just to avoid the constant complaining from the small amount of players who do play her. You gotta look at this from a marketing perspective instead of a personal one to understand why things shift more in certain directions than others. Haddie is not as marketable as Feng and other characters. Sorry that is just the truth. They're not going to hard focus on her just because you think they don't care about Indian women representation in their game which again was really wrong in you to say. You can demand more representation all you want but if it isn't marketable don't expect them to focus on this more than what is actually producing a good return in their time and work investments.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3335561#Comment_3335561
I don't think cosmetics are the be-all and end-all but yes, I do think they help to a degree.
You still haven't explained why you think she is “generic and uninteresting”.
Every purchase I've made in DBD has been based solely on the cosmetic appearance of the outfit or character. I have my personal preferences, and Haddie fits none of them. If you want an example of an Indian character I like and own every outfit, voice line, emote, highlight intro, victory pose and competitive gold weapon of, look at Symmetra from Overwatch. Overwatch characters do have unique playstyles but I also find Symmetra's overall visual design to be interesting and appealing to me. In DBD, no survivor is going to allow me to play differently than the others so the only thing that persuades me to spend money on them is the visual appearance of the character.
If you think Haddie is not generic or uninteresting then good for you. If so, would you care to explain why?
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3335549#Comment_3335549
But how? How is she anymore “generic and uninteresting” that the rest of the cast? Just using this as an example and I’m not saying this to be rude but Kate is pretty generic looking to me. The only thing that stands out about her to me is she does have some interesting cosmetics. Exactly what people are asking for Haddie.
Do you honestly believe a lack of cosmetics is why Haddie isn't super popular and in lobbies all the time? Most of the Kates I've seen lately had her default outfit on. Things like this come down to preference of the individual but it sure seems to me the preference of many DBD players leans more towards some characters than others. Making new characters in a game thats been out for awhile is always risky. Sometimes they're received well and sometimes they aren't. All I'm saying is new characters going forward would probably have a better chance of being received better if they're designed based around the ideas of the characters that are received well and played often in the game.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3335532#Comment_3335532
“”The character itself is where the failure is.”
In what way?
I already said in my first reply. In my opinion, Haddie is generic and uninteresting. Nothing really stands out with her. She's just a forgettable NPC. I honestly forget she's even in the game because I never see her in lobbies. You know who I do see in lobbies all the time? Feng, Yui, Kate etc.
-
They have shown money isn't the only thing they care about with focus on things you mentioned which isn't where the money is. Making a character gay, or in Haddie's case making a generic, uninteresting character (in my opinion) isn't going to bring the masses in willing to throw money at the game. Honestly what more do you want from them? Not every character design is going to be received well. You learn from that and move on to better ideas that will produce a better response. I don't know what they can do with Haddie at this point to generate more interest in her. Another outfit or even 10 new outfits for her won't suddenly make her one of the top 5 most played survivors. The character itself is where the failure is. They can focus on representation within the game, which they have, but they also have to focus on keeping the game profitable which means creating content that will produce a lot of sales. If characters like Haddie don't do that then it isn't reasonable to expect them to focus on parts of the game that most people simply aren't interested in. They should focus on making the next Feng, the next Yui, the next Kate, etc.
-
I've brought this idea up in the past and feel like it should be part of the game. I think it would spark some new life into the game and give people more reasons to play it.
-
The pause after falling down off something is one of the more annoying things in the game.
-
Yea I do think a lot of the cosmetics would look better without all the dirt.
-
I've just stopped wiggling altogether. I hate the new system, never used it in beta and don't care to use it now.
-
Back when I played SWF we got our butts kicked all the time and that was with using discord and 3/4 of us having years of experience with the game. The thing with SWF is a lot of people like playing games like this with their friends which if anything brought more people to the game over time. So no, I would not say SWF is bad for the game. If they somehow got rid of SWF it would do more harm to the game than good. It would appease a small part of the playerbase who take issue with it but would cause the majority of players to give major backlash over it. Any game that lets you play it with your friends is offering something good, not bad.
-
Haddie who?
I mean it doesn't really make much sense from a business perspective to keep making cosmetics for a character that no one plays. I can't recall the last time I saw Haddie in game other than a couple times when her chapter came out. I have 0 interest in this character, so why would I spend money on her let alone buy her?
@HaunterofShadows said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3327321#Comment_3327321
I mean they aren't exactly wrong. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so what do I know?
If you look at some of the most well received video game characters, particularly female ones, you'll see the kind of beauty most beholders are attracted to. Characters looking cool, beautiful or a combination of both is always a great selling point.
-
@Nazzzak said:
I've been thinking for awhile that stealth play is no longer viable in this game. Between the scratch marks, injured noises, pools of blood, Iron Will nerf, footsteps, and the multitude of aura perks killers seem to get every release now, being stealthy is clearly something the devs want done away with.
Pretty much this. Every time I think about hiding or doing some kind of stealth play I immediately think the killer probably has a perk that'll make it pointless.
-
@notclaudette said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3303408#Comment_3303408
not specifcally a door fight, just literally anything but hatch
a survivor shouldnt be given a pity escape because either I dominated or they were failures
Those aren't always the only reasons the last survivor is there. Often times the last survivor is there because they were the best player on the team. Whatever the reason, it isn't a pity escape. Its simply RNG. The killer already has a lot more power and control over the map than the survivor does so expecting the last survivor to do anything more is basically asking for you to get a pity 4k. Unless the last survivor has a door opening loadout, you will almost always win the door fight.
-
@notclaudette said:
Hatch is just an annoying and outdated feature at this point. Just have endgame activate and power gates instead of a boring hide and seek. Not to mention that unless you find it first (which is basically entirely determined by chance) you arent getting that kill. Cant imagine how veterans feel with how hatch standoffs were....
Hatch rewards survivors for failing their objectives and punishes you for succeeding yours. A 4k is practically never guaranteed, but if the killer worked for it at least let there be a fighting chance. A fighting chance, not a "lemme walk around and hope I get to it first" chance. I get it, its unreasonable for the last surv to do the last gens and escape, so just power gates and give the surv some advantage where you dont automatically lose once in chase. Anything but hatch. Im so sick of all my amazing games ending a 4 gen 3k when I know I worked so much harder than that last survivor for my win. while i consider a 2-3k a win, it'd be nice if we could all stop being bullshitted by hatch at this point.
And when survivors see the killer close the hatch almost right after it spawns we kind of feel the complete opposite. You want the last survivor to be thrown into a door fight with the killer every time it comes down to a 1v1. Not sure if you've ever tried to win that fight but its not easy and in my opinion heavily favors the killer. The old key system was better in my opinion. I don't like the current hatch system, but this suggestion isn't the answer.
-
Almost everything I eat on Thanksgiving just this time there's a Christmas tree.
-
Merry Christmas! I love The Nightmare Before Christmas. I need to watch it tonight.
-
@Anomalist said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3298313#Comment_3298313
Like I said, I was actively lying to get your real thoughts. It's good to know that, unlike the other threads, you aren't blind to a common mistake.
You don't have to. I always give my real thoughts on everything I talk about.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3298258#Comment_3298258
Game concluding by shutdown is not natural end. Killer not allowing bleedout and other survivor not doing objectives is hostage taking - from both killer and survivor. There is 0 progress. Actually breaking this situation is progressing the game and having it come to natural end (everyone dying and killer winning the game) instead of waiting for server shutdown - which of course is NOT natural end of game.
If any of the other 2 players decided to actually do objective, the game would move on. As that's not the case, you and killer both are hostage taking the game. Also the game will not be just a bit longer. You as a survivor will still die after an hour as server shuts down and entity eats you. You are just trapping other player in game without him having any say in it. There's nothing more to discuss here.
Also as last survivor you can still do a gen after some time and hide right after you finish it. If game would progress, there would be 0 need/wanting to help break hostage taking. It might actually force killer to let me bleed out (to my full satisfaction). Just do not hold the game hostage for an hour.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3298288#Comment_3298288
If you + killer hold me on the ground for longer then the actual normal part of game, then sorry. You are holding me hostage and I will try to untangle it any way possible. Should you do gen sneakily, there would be no need to rat you out. Do your part and force killer to leave me bleed out.
That last survivor that you think is taking the game hostage with the killer is actually waiting for you to bleed out so they can try to make the most out of a hopeless situation. In my situation, the killer actively looked for me after slugging the 3rd survivor. When their bleed timer got to about 10% the killer picked them up, let them wiggle off and then followed that survivor to my exact location and then gave THEM the hatch. I did not hold the game hostage and that probably is never the idea or intent behind any survivor who is simply using their last opportunity to escape when multiple gens need to be done. If the killer has even 1 gen perk that notifies them of locations with gen interaction then 1 survivor is never going to complete 5 gens in time to have the chance at opening the exit gates. Your whole "just let the killer win" attitude so you can spend a few less minutes in the match isn't the answer here. If anything the last 2 survivors should have give up options with the bleed out after they've been on the ground for maybe 25% of the bleed out time.
-
@Anomalist said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3298258#Comment_3298258
I'd say it was more of a descent into falsity; however a good question still stands as other threads have popped up similar to this.
If someone is running the Killer and they run past you, resulting in the Killer swapping focus, are you going to report them?
I don't know why you keep making these bizarre comparisons to teaming with circumstantial happenings that occur naturally within the match. I can't take you seriously in this discussion when you keep saying things like this. For some reason in your mind you are equating literal survivor/killer working together intentionally to take out another survivor to normal game play that happens naturally from playing. I have discernment and I know the difference between normal game play and teaming. I can very easily tell when a survivor teams with the killer to take out another survivor. I have 2,500 hours in this game as a survivor main. I've seen it all.
-
@Anomalist said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3297796#Comment_3297796
I'm simply using your own words against you; if they're wrong when I say them, they were wrong from the beginning.
No. You tried to make a bias argument that wasn't based on truth. You compared 2 things as if they were the same when they are not. Natural perk advantages are not the same as blatantly teaming up with the killer to produce an outcome that isn't based on normal game play. You can play whatever word games you want, but you're still wrong.
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3297796#Comment_3297796
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3294013#Comment_3294013
Survivor not doing any objective and waiting for the game to shut down is hostage taking. No discussion there. If I am being taken hostage, I will do everything in my power to break it. That's showing killer where the other survivor is (to break hostage taking) or to DC. No other options are there for me.
It is not hostage taking. The last survivor has no power to take the game hostage. Eventually the 3rd survivor will die. If extending the game through picking up the survivor continuously is what you have problem with, then put the blame on the killer and not the last survivor. They have nothing to do with the killer doing that. You're not breaking hostage taking by showing the killer where the last survivor is. You're teaming up with the killer to cause an unnatural outcome that isn't the result of normal game play. You can try to define hostage taking how you want, but unless the 3rd survivor is being actively avoided by the killer or doing nothing but hiding while the last survivor also is doing nothing then there is no hostage taking happening. Your inconvenience of a match lasting longer than you like doesn't equal hostage taking of a match.
@SmolBlob said:
All 3 of you broke the rules.
You refused to participate in normal gameplay and took the game hostage by hiding and not repairing.
The other survivor and killer teamed up.
Again, your personal definition of "game hostage" doesn't matter. A 5 gen 3rd survivor down situation is by no means taking the game hostage if the last survivor decides to wait out your bleed timer. You're basically saying the last survivor should throw themselves into an unwinnable situation. Waiting a few minutes for a bleed timer to expire doesn't equal taking a game hostage. Until you realize that you won't see this any other way.
-
@Anomalist said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3293711#Comment_3293711
I'm gonna have to disagree solely because of the fact that you said something so irrationally entitled and incorrect. For starters, what do you do when a Survivor blows up a gen you're working on? That Survivor has given away both of your positions; do they get reported? What about when BBQ and Chili gets used? The Survivor got hooked and is now showing your aura. What about Infectious Fright? Perhaps even unhooking you? Do you understand how many situations there are that can be described as "showing the Killer where a Survivor is"; it's a lot.
Now let's use your opinion on obligation as well. The other Survivors are under no obligation to save you, heal you, take hits for you, or loop the Killer; just as how the Killer is under no obligation to not show a little mercy. Teaming is not the same as cheating and cheating will never be the same as teaming; cheats are things like no-clip, x-ray, and insta-popped gens while teaming is only unsportsmanlike. If you believe being unsportsmanlike is cheating, then your entitlement is cheating.
Teaming is cheating. A survivor showing the killer where another survivor is and the killer sparing the survivor that did that is, in fact, cheating. They teamed up to gain an advantage they would not normally have otherwise. The things you mentioned are called hacks. There is a difference and clearly you did not discern between the two in your reply. The fact you compared a survivor knowing exactly where the last survivor is by being downed and showing the killer where that survivor is to missing skill checks and natural perk advantages is very telling.
-
I feel like the hype for the first RE chapter was way higher.
-
More survivors need to become aware of situations when it matters most. Too many survivors help killers secure 4ks either indirectly or in my case, directly by teaming with the killer. If 2 survivors are eliminated and you're the 3rd to go down with multiple generators needing to be done just to power the doors then you need to read that situation well enough so that the last survivor has a chance to escape. Teaming with the killer because you think its wrong for the last survivor to hide while you're being slugged is wrong. This isn't just a survivor problem either. Killer mains need to not go along with snitching survivors because that too is teaming. Sometimes you have to realize that a match is over and your best option is to give the last survivor a fighting chance to escape.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3293711#Comment_3293711
Yes I am teaming with killer. You are holding me hostage. Report for report. What does that solve? I presume nothing. You will not be happy about your fully deserved ban. It would be much more productive, if devs implemented some solution that prevents this situation altogether
Your bleed out timer doesn't last forever. If the killer picks you up to prolong it, wiggle off. If after that you show the killer where the last survivor is, you teamed with the killer and they cheated. You wanted to help the killer because it was convenient for you to get out of the match. It doesn't matter how you paint it. It was still wrong.
-
@Gandor said:
Disagree. The situation should not happen to begin with. But I was in the shoes of slugged survivor - and from my POW, I just wanted to go next game ASAP, but was held hostage by other survivor and killer.
You can't die, because killer will pick you up. You can't loose killer, because scratchmarks and grunts of pain exists. You can't loop him long enough, because other survivor is just hiding and NEVER touching gens.
So I was left with 2 options. DC, or show location of other survivor. Why wouldn't I do that? That other survivor was (together with killer) holding me hostage. So both of them got reported.
Its cheating and teaming. It doesn't matter how you personally look at the situation. The only thing that matters is the truth. If a survivor shows the killer where another survivor is regardless of the situation then they are teaming with the killer. The other survivor is under no obligation to throw themselves into a hopeless situation just to guarantee the killer gets a 4k. In my situation, there were 5 gens needing to be done still and the killer started working with the survivor to find me. They even let them get the hatch after. That is blatant cheating and teaming.
-
@FreddyVoorhees said:
I suggested this before. It wasnt received well.
I don't understand why people would have a problem with this. It makes sense in any PvP game where you have some people who just play to troll or bum off the labor of others.
-
@Mat_Sella said:
The killer got 3 kills with only 3 perks, they deserve every second of the No Way Out that they got since you massively outperked them at every moment up until this point.
Dont be upset that you died, learn that not everything in life is supposed to be in your favor.
I'm pretty sure we're talking about a video game here. Suggesting a perk be balanced around a circumstantial situation is not me wanting everything in life to be in my favor... good grief. 🤣
-
The snowman shenanigans must return!
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3281181#Comment_3281181
I have to admit I kind of understand what he meant in the first place... The survivor already got a 2nd chance with hatch after he and his team failed to do the objective and now he gets a third one... That's kind of rough...
The hatch can also spawn right under the survivors feet so that argument does not really work... It is a stupid luck/rng dependant mechanic... And I'd much rather have something more skillfull instead of it... I mean sure, it is a death sentence at that point... But the survivor already had a 2nd chance to get out with hatch? What else do you want the killer to do? 1. Find hatch first 2. Hope the survivor was not waiting at a door 3. Patrol Gates 3. Hope the survivor does not have (found) a key 4. Hope Gates are positioned in a way that makes it possible to patrol them properly... Rng in this game is just so annoying sometimes... Usually gate spawns are really onsided and never really fair... Having both on one side visible from a spot 30m away from both and so on...
Why should the last survivor not be punished for his teams mistakes? He was part of the team?? Then how about we make it something more skillfull for the last survivor?
The last survivor should not be punished for their team's mistakes because you can't control what other people do. It doesn't matter if they are part of the team. Half the time I feel like I don't even have a team. Being punished for simply hitting the ready button and getting matched with random people who may or may not play like you isn't fair. Yes I do agree there should be a skill element for the last survivor. There should never be a situation where the last survivor is caught in a "game over" moment because the killer found you after closing the hatch. Honestly what can you do at that point? Nothing. You can't run the killer enough where you'll gain enough distance to finish opening the exit gates. If the killer finds you after the hatch is closed, you lose. There is no point in even running. You're only delaying the inevitable. I've had too many matches where the killer found the hatch almost instantly and then a moment later found me. That is not fair. Those situations should never happen. If the last survivor is able to evade the killer in a chase after the hatch is closed why should the end result always be the last survivor dying? If you want to talk about skill, THAT is when the last survivor should be rewarded for their efforts instead of punished for it.
-
@Finn_Furwolf said:
I feel like, I get punished for playing well as killer with how the hatch currently works. I don't have a problem with giving the last survivor a second chance, but if I as killer find the hatch first, the survivor gets another second chance, because the gates are getting powered.
Therefore I suggest these changes to the behaviour of the hatch:
1. If the killer closes the hatch before all generators are completed, endgame collapse doesn't start and the gates are not powered. The last survivor has to complete the remaining generators and open an exit gate to escape or reopen the hatch with a key. After the hatch is closed, the killer is able to open an exit gate to trigger endgame collapse normally, regardless of not all generators being completed, if he wishes to end the game.
-> Why should the survivor get the option to open a gate for free, after the killer found the hatch first? The rest of the team died and the killer found the hatch first, so you lost entirely and should be punished for that.
2. If the exit gates are powered, the hatch can no longer spawn.
-> Why have a secondary escape option, if the primary one is available?
No... just no. You're being incredibly one sided with these ideas and falling on the assumption that the killer basically deserves to win because they found the hatch first even when it sometimes spawns right by them. The idea of the last survivor having to complete the remaining generators and open the door is basically a death sentence for the survivor. They might as well give up at that point. All you'd have to do is patrol the generators until the last survivor is either found or just gives up after realizing the hopeless situation they are in. The killer would NEVER open the gate themselves if they are trying to win. That is not a fair trade off to support this idea.
The last survivor should not be punished for the incompetence of their team. It doesn't matter if you found the hatch first. Sometimes the hatch spawns right at your feet, same with survivors. The last survivor also doesn't get to "open a gate for free." Unless the survivor is running all of the exit gate speed boost perks, you're most likely going to win the exit gate fight. I basically feel obligated to use sole survivor and wake up in all my builds now as a backup escape plan when I'm the last survivor. Even with those perks you're not guaranteed to escape. You have to time your dash to the exit gate just right and hope the killer doesn't do a quick turn and sees you there.
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
If you're spending more time healing than doing anything else, you're not playing against Legion properly. It's not worth healing super often against them.
Having the mend heal itself over time just completely defeats the point of Legion. Their power is meant to locate survivors and slow the game down in exchange for its (mostly) non-lethality.
Yea! Legion's ability to do this needs to be scaled down a bit. A decent Legion player with the right perks can extend a match way longer than it should go on for. I'm over mending myself and my team after about the 5th time. Also seeing 5 gens still needing to be done after several mends is also very annoying.
@Starrseed said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3280915#Comment_3280915
Then bring some ideas to the round some ideas that would keep legions playstyle as it is. Running around stabbing people being fast hit and run but less frustrating for the survivors. I know your not a dev but constructive ideas work better then just that's boring and I can't stand it. Devs would sit in the same space and struggle to grasp an idea even befor thinking about if that idea is even possible
My initial post was mostly just feedback regarding my experience playing against Legion with nearly 2500 hours played as survivor. As far as ideas on what should be done to rework this killer I don't really know. The only thing I can come up with at the moment would be for the deep wounds to wear off over time. Its up to the devs to consider feedback and determine if anything in the game would benefit from a rework of any kind. My main concern here was just stating how unfun it is for me to play against this killer and the reasons why.
-
@Starrseed said:
First of all don't heal against legion you waste so michb time and a good legion will focus stabbing you over people that just mend.
Second your last sentence shows that you don't grasp legions design. They are hit and run. There whole thing is being fast and stab as much people as you can and for that you need a slowdown or else people will just sit at the gens while you run around.
If you take away mending you would need to give them another slowdown like a big workspeed decrease and there is not much difference between mending and then working or working very slowly and not make real progress.
Many people love legion because they can run around and stabb people and if they lose that it would be the biggest f u from bhvr since og Freddy
I grasp his design very well. I know this killer is not fun to play against and has caused more boredom and headaches than any other killer in the game for me. His power is basically for tracking the survivors down. The problem is it applies a debuff that has to constantly be dealt with by survivors in a repetitive way that quickly becomes tedious and annoying. I've played against Legions that abused their power simply to prevent survivors from doing gens. This is a killer where its too easy to troll survivors. Constant mending is not fun. Having to do it at the risk of literally downing yourself is not fun. The fact he can also fast vault pallets and windows in his power makes it almost impossible to avoid getting hit with it if he finds you. This is not a killer that has an engaging or interesting power. I have never been excited to play against a Legion when I found out that is the killer for the match. Back when I did SWF it was also often a game breaker for us to play something else especially after getting Legion multiple times in a row.
-
Yea matches like this are not fun. I do find it strange that the gen requirement to power the exit gates stays the same no matter what happens. 2 survivors can get taken out early and you're still required to do 5 gens to have the chance at opening the exit gates. Matches like this usually come down to the hatch, which the killer will likely find first.
-
I don't eat corn dogs anymore but when I did it was usually the breakfast style kind with sausage. I ate them with maple syrup. The regular corn dogs I used to eat with mayonnaise or a combination of mustard and mayonnaise.
@entertainment720 said:
I have never even CONSIDERED putting something on a corndog before this post!
I am half way tempted now to break my diet and try a corn dog with sour cream. 😄
-
Honestly Twitter is and probably always will be the best place for communicating news. Even still, I don't think it would be a bad idea for gaming companies to setup an account on all relevant social media platforms out there. I'm not really sure how many there are though. These days Twitter seems to be the main focus for communicating with the world so that's still the best place to keep up to date on things in my opinion.
-
@Jago said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3271573#Comment_3271573
Funny one time, 2 times, 3 times.... After 500 it feels old.
You can tab out of the game while you're looking for a match or you can mute it. No one is forcing you to sit there and be jumped scared by it over and over again. Every killer has animations when they are idle. If its really an issue then they can just change it to where after a few minutes the killer just stands idle. It doesn't bother me so I don't care.
-
@AnneBonny said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/GH2UJQZ9KKNS/image.png
so much cosmetic potential for a medieval character and the first thing we get is this
man
Medieval fiction is filled with men who look like this. Besides that, as many times as I've seen shirtless dude requests on these forums I'm sure this outfit is going to sell quite well.
-
@Steel_Eyed said:
I’m not going to hell. I tunnel for the lord.
This made me laugh. 😅
-
I actually like that they do things like this. It is supposed to be a scary game after all.
-
In Kratos' reality, he pulls the entity into his realm... and then destroys it like every enemy that has ever crossed his path.
-
Reminds me of that snowman on Ormond that I keep forgetting is there. I wonder how many players haven't seen it yet.
-
@JustAnotherNewbie said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3268770#Comment_3268770
That happens like once every a hundred games though. And in your case maybe even less.
That many saves in a single match, yea about that often. However flashlight saves aren't as uncommon as you think. You may go awhile without seeing any successful ones but there are a lot of flashlight wizards in this game. Its all about timing the pick up animation just right so the iframes on the killer don't kick in.