KayTwoAyy
KayTwoAyy
About
- Username
- KayTwoAyy
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
I'd argue that Shadowstep is a better perk than Circle of Healing. However, because rapid healing provides players with a certain degree of security and a safety net of recklessness, it is the better perk for average players.
Think back just to last year. Everyone was obsessed with running Iron Will, Reslience, Spine Chill, & Dead Hard. Good players weren't healing, because they didn't need to. They still don't need to. They do it just because they can, and its convenient.
Shadow Step effectively EMPs a section of the map for killers, and a survivor who boons next to generators they are working on can rip gens completely undisturbed for as along as their heart desires. Unless a killer is running tinkerer, they have no context for walking across the map to patrol a generator until a chase leads them over there.
BBQ & Chilli, the most popular killer perk in the game, is hard-countered by Shadow Step. Its a gamble for someone to assume they didn't see any auras from BBQ because of Shadow Step, and then decide to walk across the map to double check their hypothesis. But if they dont... well there goes any chance they had at stopping those gens from being finished.
All that said, Shadow Step is also a stronger version of Lucky Break.
-
@RainehDaze said:
Oh yeah, blood's super obvious in Eyrie, or Lery's. Most other maps have pretty dark floors IIRC. The Game's got quite bright ones, but it should go without saying that that would be possibly the worst place to be stuck with blood only. Freakin' twisty interconnected mess...
Hm, 1/4 of a perk might then be too weak for anyone to bother? It's a weird balancing act. It needs to be strong enough someone might bring it (especially if on their own), but not so strong that it's almost obligatory for someone to have it.
I think we've had enough play time with boons to see that it's not practical for killers to go out of their way to break a boon totem. I've even seen content creators who think it is a waste of time to snuff a boon totem when they are right next to one (presumably because it is hardly inconvenient for a survivor to boon another totem).
As a killer, I'm fine with boons providing a huge buff--but only if a broken boon equals a broken totem. As a survivor, I'd never run a perk that can be destroyed without any value, so I wouldn't like to see broken boons become broken totems. I seldom use hex perks as killer, because the high-risk high-reward just never pays off for me; it feels very 'damned if I do, damned if I don't' as a result.
I assume BHVR wants to keep boons relatively as-is mechanically, so my compromise is a huge nerf and the ability to stack boon effects.
Killers are frequently in a lose-lose situation right now with boon totems, so anything that provides value without being outright powerful gets two thumbs up from me.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2712816#Comment_2712816
Problem is that the blood is sporadic, often hidden by grass on the floor, and super desaturated anyway. Having to fall back on it consistently as your only means of tracking someone would be suffering unless DBD got a lot more vibrancy and a lot less random clutter (but then Trapper pays for it). And if that became meta, Spirit's kind of screwed.
"Boons providing lesser mapwide effects" would only vaguely approach balance if Killers had some possible way to find the things. Otherwise, they're still teamwide shared perks, just weaker ones... but now the entire team is always benefiting, which is a direct buff in some ways? Take Exponential, for instance.
All great points. I played on the new map right before my reply, and chased an injured survivor thru Shadow Step, so recency bias had me saying "blood is so easy to see, I don't even need the scratch marks." But yes, there are absolutely maps that would be horrendous for tracking just blood without Bloodhound--Autohaven specifically would be a nightmare.
With regard to map-wide boons, I think it would be balanced if the benefit is 1/4th as strong as a regular perk. Take Leader for example; it provides survivors within 8m a 25% speed boost to healing, sabotage, unhooking, cleansing, opening gates, and chests. What if we had a boon that did the same exact thing (except for heal buff), but only 7%? Even if all 4 survivors run it, it is still weaker than Leader (21% buff each), at which point all 4 survivors might as well be running Leader. However, its strength comes from the convenience--not needing to be next to someone to give them the buff.
Now do the same thing with Circle of Healing, but make it 1/4 as strong as Botany Knowledge. It becomes a map wide 8% healing speed buff, up to
24%33% if all 4 Survivors are running it.Kind of weak--in fact, you might as well be running Resilience or Leader.If all 4 survivors are running it, they might as well have been using Botany Knowledge. But one or two survivors running Circle of Healing to provide a minor buff for their team feels like a nice compromise.The convenience of buffing your team should be the real strength of a boon totem, not necessarily the buff itself.
Edit: Crossed out incorrect percentage and subsequent thoughts. Additionally, on further reflection, 1/4 might just be a tad too weak. I think there is a case to be made that if all 4 survivors boon a totem then the total buff should be better than singular perks of similar effect.
-
@Akumakaji said:
One of my biggest gripes with the system in general is this:
All killers share some basic characteristics, but everyone has three unique perks and a very special power, that essentially establishes their identity.
Survivors also all got three unique perks, but once these are unlocked, the survivors essentially just turn into skins, losing any uniqueness they got.
I know that this would be a hard sell to long-standing survivor mains and involve quite some work, but I would love for the survivors to retain some of their identity.
Maybe make it so that one of their load out perks always has to be one of their unique perks, or maybe the "best" perk can only be used by them?
Or maybe give them all some sort of minor passive?
Oh how I've longed for survivors to have something unique about them, mechanically.
I never even thought it'd need to be major. Give Claud a 5-10% healing speed buff, Nea a small stagger reduction, Ace a 5% luck increase, etc.
Anything of the sort would be warmly welcomed.
-
The Artist is the first killer to ever respect my intelligence about each map's layout. While some survivors might genuinely "just hold W," I am using all of my brain to pinpoint what loops will be best to kite her towards, and in what directions I need to run to get the most out of my chase.
-
@Ghouled_Mojo said:
I always thought survivors should have to select their perks on a shared screen amongst the other survivors with no perk being allowed more than once and only if it is unlocked for that particular survivor. It would ensure perk diversity amongst the 4 survivors it could cause some issues I’m sure but it would allow for interesting games.
good work btw. You put in some good thought into this discussion.
If they found a solution for players who wouldn't be able to use DS (and maybe BT), I'd definitely want to see something like that as well. Not something I see as essential, but always thought it'd be an interesting way to solve the "all 4 survivors are running the same 4 perks" problem. Worth experimenting and testing on PTB or even live servers, at the least.
@RainehDaze said:
I don't want to see a buffed mapwide Shadow Step for the inevitable Iron Will combo, thanks.
The overall point is good, but "boons could be LITERALLY ANYWHERE and will then affect the entire map with slightly lesser buffs" would only exacerbate their current problems.
I completely understand why you feel that way.
I suppose I'm a bit optomistic about a killer's ability to track blood without scratchmarks after watching a few hours of VHS gameplay. I thought that'd be the main talking point or at least initial gameplay concerns for VHS, but I've been surprised to see everyone playtesting it is managing just fine without.
-
@AngyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2710868#Comment_2710868
No way.
Imagine someone bodyblocking you non-stop because they know, for a fact, you can't pick them up, ever.
Imagine someone having DS after the exit gates open; Welp! You can no longer pick them up, or stop them from crawling out the exit gates, or to the open Hatch. Because they have Infinite DS!
This would be broken in such a massive, MASSIVE way.
I'm not going to waste my time arguing this with you. It's BHVR's game. Their job to fix and improve it--not mine.
OP's question was answered. I agree with the changes they'd like to see implemented. Came here to show my support. Did that, now I'm moving on. Something needs to change, and I'll leave it to BHVR to figure out what. If they can't, so be it; I'll play a different game. I couldn't care less at this point.
-
@VikingDragonXii said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2710868#Comment_2710868
It would make too many ways for survivors to bully and harass the Killers and fellow survivors. The timer is fone the way it is.
I wouldn't say its 'fine.'
As it stands, there are still ways for killers to bully survivors--even if they have DS.
Suggests there is still a huge problem.
-
@AngyKiller said:
The basement SHOULD be powerful. Come on; it's the only no-sabo hooks in the game. It's clearly the Killer's lair.
Why does anything Killer-sided need to be 'fair' (Read: Survivor-sided) instead?
Something about the word "lair" and my experience with D&D makes me wish DBD expanded upon the basement concept and created an entire subterranean network on every map that has multiple gens (one of which needs to be completed) and grants the killer various boosts or lair actions.
-
Deactivating the timer brings its own challenges, but I think its a step in the right direction.
Personally, I'd like to see some more radical changes being made to address camping & tunneling, but that discussion may be best saved for another time & place.
-
Don't have one at the moment.
Maybe... Distortion, OoO, Boon: CoH & SS
I don't often run Boons, because other people usually got me covered with em, so I'll cycle them out for Smash Hit & Vigil
I don't play as frequently as I used to, so I'm behind on the archive challenges. My build is constantly tailored to whatever challenge I'm doing.
-
Try to kill themself on first hook, so they can "go next." ...kind of like a certain streamer just did to my teammates and I.
Thanks for ruining everyone else's trial, because you couldn't keep your emotions in check for 3 seconds. Really appreciate it.
-
@BenihimeWrath said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2710137#Comment_2710137
I think they are hesitant to do that because too many people take it as 'this thing will definitely happen'. I remember the meltdown that the bloodlust experiment brought.
Very true, I can definitely see that. To everyone's credit however, they had announced it as a test, and it wasn't opt-in (aside from just not playing the game). I'm curious how people would respond if its pitched as an LTM just to shake things up for a weekend.
-
@BenihimeWrath said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2709017#Comment_2709017
"DS will be used for body blocking"
"Okay, so what if survivors lose collision so they can't body block you when they have DS"
"I NEVER MENTIONED COLLISION."
Good argument. But can't have it both ways, you can't say "Survivors can body block, but for a cost" and then turn around say body blocking would become a problem. The cost of a survivor body blocking with DS is they get downed and slugged for 60 seconds to bypass DS. And because you, as a killer, know EVERY survivor has a DS EVERY TIME they get unhooked, you know how to play accordingly. And if you say they'll use the free BT/DS to body block and still not go down, please refer to my response where survivors with BT lose collision.
Also, I did respond to you, I just didn't link you in the post where I did because I used someones more recent reply which covered the same stuff. My bad I suppose.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2709125#Comment_2709125
I edited the main post to clarify, but yes I was suggesting that ruin regression be base line only but a killer physically still has to go damage the generator unless they have a perk like jolt, eruption, or pain resonance that starts regression remotely. Where the only difference with the hex is that the hex does it automatically. Ultimately the change is meant to have more back and forth possible between survivors and killers over the main objective. Without straight up making the generators a grueling, long slog, and rewarding killers more appropriately for generating pressure. Currently you strictly need a gen regression perk for anything meaningful, which results in a system that its always the wrong decision to damage a generator without them. A poorly designed system indeed.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2709030#Comment_2709030
I'm not considering the worst possible situation, because such a situation is an outlier and not indicative of normal or average gameplay. To me, worst case scenario is that a few more slugs with DS make it out the exit gate, but if you aren't killing people before the gates are open thats sort of on you making poor macro decisions for the entire game up until then and thats okay that just means there are things to get better at.
Roger that. I've heard a few similar proposals with regards to basekit Ruin regression, so I didn't want to make too many assumptions about where you stood on the matter.
I really wish BHVR felt more comfortable running weekend tests that explored alternate mechanics. Make an alternate game mode, name it an LTM--available for weekend only--and see what people have to say about it. Worst that happens is people don't enjoy it, so they take it out of rotation and keep the popular LTMs on loop.
-
They had us in the first half not gonna lie
-
@Marigoria said:
It is live, it just sucks.
no, you're trolling
-
@Myla said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2709563#Comment_2709563
Because people are acting as if casual mode will suddenly repair the idea that people would just play to have fun. It doesn't. It's just a reality check for you guys. Queue time is a problem because the game isn't equipped to handle the player base being split in half. It can barely handle queue time already and just flat out give baby killers to veteran survivor groups because there's not enough players.
Here's what happens when the queue time is anything longer than 3-5 minutes. It gives you killers like these. Below 50 hours while the survivors have over hundred if not thousands hours in the game.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/HK63M9Y06GOK/image.png
Ah placebo game mode. You're not playing something else. You're playing the same game except there's a word that says casual mode. You'd have to add something to validate another game mode otherwise it's useless.
I'm not sure you can make this claim with certainty. It may sound like it would logically follow, given the game's history and current state, but something like a perk-roulette game mode is so alien to DBD that its hard to predict its influence on queue times and player behavior.
Will people try to win in such a game mode? I hope so. They still have an objective to complete.
But if an overwhelming amount of players want a casual game mode where they play with whatever perks & items the game gives them, there is inevitably going to be a ripple effect on gameplay and the mental/emotional state of players before, during, and after a match.
A killer can't get mad at survivors for bringing 4 beemers, because the game gave it to them.
Survivors can't get mad at a killer for having Franklin's because the game gave it to them.
Its not easy to predict how it will be received, which is why BHVR should be testing this ######### with events
-
@Pulsar_Pain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2708902#Comment_2708902
Simple, because in that case the game would be more unbalanced that what already is, Ruin and Corrupt are not comparable to DS, Ruin become cleansed after one minute of game and survs camping Corrupt; DS, instead, its a free second chance perk that can carry easy the game and you can't lose it as Ruin and Corrupt, in some case camping is necessary for change the game situation, and who complains about camping its because never has play Killer at high rank.
Repeat, base kit its a good idea, but first game must be balanced.
The OP never went into detail, but I believe they want Ruin basekit as in "not a hex that can be cleansed."
I'm speaking for myself when I say, I think a 100% or maybe 150% regression when not working on a gen is worth testing as basekit. I don't know if the OP thinks 200% regression basekit is balanced, but I certainly think its too strong.
Personally, if 150% or 200% Ruin Regression was basekit and not a breakable hex totem, I think it would surpass current DS in strength. I've played too many games that end with 4 or 5 gens remaining and Ruin still active to believe otherwise. Therefore, a buff to DS and BT would feel appropriate.
Just my two cents
-
@cantelope said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2709020#Comment_2709020
Because you went off on a generalized comment concerning the entire forum while trying to defend one person. Never tried to make you look stupid.
Honestly, have a good day.
Look at the comment two above the one I'm responding to. Case in point.
I removed that rant 30s after I posted it, because I recognized that it was tangent to the current discussion. Alas, the problem is so prevalent I think it may deserve the attention I was trying to give it.
I'd hardly say I was defending the OP, moreso I was pointing out how they're willing to facilitate a discussion rather than participate in childish discourse. Whether or not they feel obligated to respond to your own woes is not something I care to address, as it is an entirely seperate argument from the one I was originally making.
Edit: For the record, you're not a part of the problem. I can tell you're genuinely interested in discussion. So I respect you for that.
-
@cantelope said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2708936#Comment_2708936
I never brought up collision, I said all DS would be used for is to bodyblock, and it would be because it is now. DS lasts longer than Borrowed Time afterall. I never argued removing collision.
If you had actually responded to me without me having to make a new post I would have argued at that point why not just have the survivor run off playing the sonic invincibility music instead of either of your suggestions. It'd be better. Hell just have the survivor teleport away. Still better than double ds, but that would have required you replying.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2708984#Comment_2708984
You seem to have missed my point. I don't care what pulsar said. I pointed out op refused to directly make an argument, and is now hilariously try to argue points I never made but other people did, and it's apperently my fault because I'm supposed to be constantly checking this one thread to see if they indirectly addressed something I said.
Your argument is "BUT PULSAR SAID THIS!"
I dont care what pulsar said. I care what op did, and it doesn't help your point.
Why are you trying to instigate?
You commented on my response to Pulsar. If I wanted to talk to you, I would have commented on your issues with body blocking, seeing as I have my own point of view.
You addressed me, in my response to Pulsar. Of course I'm going to tailor my response around the context of a conversation I was trying to have with anyone other than yourself. You can't springboard off my conversation and then back peddle out of that conversation to try and make me look stupid.
You played yourself. Good day.
-
@cantelope said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2708902#Comment_2708902
Okay but what if you do that and the result is the person just stops responding because they don't like that they can't argue it. I said that ds would just become a bodyblock perk and the answer was "well make Borrowed Timen unable to be used with bodyblocking, or just play Myers and Ghostface."
When I and another person argued those aren't answers.... dead silence.
That's my pet peeve as it were. I either get repeated replies that have nothing to do with what I said or sandbagged.
I wasn't claiming that people can't have debate. Of course you can debate.
But Pulsar_Pain's response (and the typical response of many others on this forum) is not how you debate. They're laughing at OP right now for ever considering the idea, and have posted in this thread just to mic-drop a one-liner.
It seems Benihime has already settled on a solution to body blocking, so they've provided you with a way to solve your problem. I don't agree with Benihime's solution (I don't actually think body blocking is an inherent problem), but if you disagree with Benihime it becomes your responsibility to challenge a solution they seem content with.
Pulsar wasn't adding to the conversation. Benihime was. Thats the difference.
-
I'm not a fan of my teammates hiding all game, but I would love to see BHVR implement more interactables that encourage different play styles.
I think my issue with my teammates hiding largely stems from how bad of a strategy it is at present. Despite its many perks, DBD doesn't offer survivors much in the way of gameplay variety.
-
@Pulsar_Pain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2707080#Comment_2707080
I hope you joke, DS its just an unbalanced perks, if it became twice Killers would stop definitely to play.
Why are you taking this singular suggestion out of context, and acting as if BenihimeWrath didn't also make this post claiming that Corrupt Intervention and Ruin should be basekit?
Edit: [Rant Redacted]
-
@dallasmedicbag said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/300965/lightborn-is-a-valid-perk
A perk that removes a game mechanic such as flashlight saves shouldn't be a thing. No idea why they would buff lightborn after hard nerfing flashlights, 5 seconds to blind a lightborn user was already bad enough, now they're immune to it.
It'd be better if lightborn is immune to blinds, but can still be flashlight saved with the regular timing.
Allow me to introduce you to Iron Will & Calm Spirit + Lucky Break, Breakdown, Off the Record, and Bite the Bullet.
These two perks remove a mechanic from the game at no cost to the survivor + I've listed some that have limited use or situational value.
On the killer side, you have Lightborn + Corrupt Intervention, Franklin's, Knock Out, Cruel Limits, Mindbreaker, Deadlock, and No Way Out.
This singular perk removes a mechanic from the game at no cost to the killer + I've listed some that have limited use or situational value.
Passive perks have a place in DBD just as much as active perks. I'd argue the game would do better with more passive perks (for killers in particular), so players don't have to wonder whether or not their perks are going to get any value during a trial.
-
@Impartiality @dugman that video was so painful to watch. I don't think I've ever seen a killer get bullied so hard. He had the Nea in a locker while in deep wound. All he had to do was stand at the locker and wait till she entered dying state because of deep wound timer. It was pretty clear no gens were going to be done in that time. He should have been using frenzy more often to negate the locker viability. Other killers have their own abilities to counter this, so I don't know how busted it is as a bullying tool. All I know is that Wraith would be at the mercy of this SWF.
I don't think he was intentionally playing at a lower-level; he just prioritizes chat over winning in situations that call for more focus. Some people want to be known for their talent and others want to be known for their personality. When push comes to shove, Tru3 picks his personality every time.
-
Yes, that is exactly what it is.
Feels like it has enough pallets to rival the Game, while also all the best tile spawns to make for easy 5+ minute long chases.
-
@HommeBizarre said:
Personnaly, if it wasn't for the rift, I would have stopped playing by now (I just don't want to miss any content).
Stating how boring the game is if you don't play Survive with Friends as a survivor, and if you are not playing nurse as a killer... (my point of view though).
I wonder what makes you guys keep playing ?
In today's age of Battle Passes, Weekly Challenges, Unlockables, Limited Time Items, & In-Game Purchases...
There is a sobering moment I have every time I decide to move on to other games; a realization that all of the time, money, and energy I spent on the game amounted to virtually nothing.
Of all the games that have left me feeling this way, DBD (almost) hits the hardest. Second only to endless hours in a minecraft server my friends eventually stop paying for. ...so long all my hard work.
As a result, I don't advise falling for the FOMO marketing ploys and playing for the "material" gain you'll acquire. One day you'll decide to move on and lament how much sooner you could have started enjoying something else, had only you moved on when you stopped enjoying the game for the gameplay itself.
As for why I still play the game? The [BAD WORD] if I know. Something is wrong with me, probably.
I just typed up this entire response while waiting for my 15 minute matchmaking lock to end, because I didn't want to entertain the Nemesis who face camped and BM'd the first person he hooked before we even finished a single gen. I then watched him face camp the second survivor he hooked in the basement.
Its ludicrous that this type of perverse behavior has a stage in any game, that people turn a blind-eye to this deplorable behavior, and its even more [BAD WORD] that I'm readying up for another like my experience is going to be any different.
-
I've always seen heal tech as an over simplification for what could be better mechanics (i.e. guard/defend, or carry).
If we're going to get technical and make the claim that the killer is the "power role," then just make a case for them insta-downing or grabbing every survivor they see where they stand.
No reason I can't make the same argument that one survivor should be able pull another to safety, or carry them when they're on the ground.
At the end of the day, BHVR chose less contextual inputs to simplify the game and make it easier to pick up and play.
-
I haven't been here since day one, so I this is all anecdotal to me, but there are a few reasons I'd imagine the attitude is "shifting."
First and foremost, "Dead by Daylight is improving" is highly subjective.
While there may be improvements made to the game that we can objectively point to, a person's opinion on whether or not their experience has actually improved is subjective. For example, the graphic updates to the maps may be regarded by many as improvements, but I know a handful of people who prefered the old aesthetic and would quickly revert their game to that state if given the option.
From a marketing standpoint, I think the graphics overhaul is a massive improvement with regards to attracting a wider audience, but there have been overwhelming reports of performance issues following the string of graphic updates. Optimization plays a key role in a player's impressions of a game, so any degredation in performance is going to be looked at as a set-back rather than an improvement--especially when the graphic updates still come up short compared to the detail AAA studios are producing these days.
Personally, I couldn't be bothered to give DBD a chance 4 years ago, because I thought their graphics looked amateurish. It took the persuasion of a friend and a free weekend around the release of Deathgarden to give DBD any of my time.
I imagine the graphic updates have attracted some players who had previously discarded DBD for its jagged appearance. And with them probably came a wave of new expectations for the game.
Second, Dead by Daylight is constantly taking 2 steps forward then 1 step back.
Improvements are coming at a snail's pace.
Additionally, improvements to the game play surprisingly lack any correlation to feedback provided by the community. So whenever we receive a mid-chapter patch or a health patch thats aimed at improving the state of play, we see a massive disconnect between the community and the developer's decision making.
BHVR occassionally hits the nail on the head and releases content the community can get excited about. But like clockwork, they immediately follow up in the next update with something that breaks the game or significantly hinders the player experience.
Its tough to not be hyper critical over a game whose developers appear to be making an effort, but are struggling so hard whilst the community is handing them solutions daily.
Third, Dead by Daylight is growing.
As the game becomes more popular, the expectations bestowed upon it grow exponentially.
The gaming world is a titan of competition with a surplus of talent looking for work or even offering their services for little to no cost. The recipe for success today is fairly formulaic, meanwhile a ton of big studios are continuing to push the limits and setting precedents for what works and what doesnt.
Information is so public today, that the consumer has a better understanding of why they enjoy their games, and whether or not the features they enjoy are easy to implement. When you hold DBD up to giants like Fortnite, League of Legends, Counter-Strike, and several others... you can't help but notice where BHVR is falling short.
The more people care about DBD, the more likely they are to want the game to improve and hold BHVR accountable for building a better game.
Finally, Dead by Daylight is still plagued with bugs and balance issues that it was released with 5 years ago.
New content is great and all, but not being able to address known issues in 5 years is concerning. If I had been here since day 1, I'd be pissed that DBD still carries the same fundamental flaws it had 2,000 days ago.
-
This is just the bi-product of the game having a low skill ceiling.
At a certain point, you need to ask yourself if you've done all you wish to do with DBD and move on, or if it has replay value despite its predictability.
-
@Aurelle said:
I still don't get why they announced the new chapter so early. Artist literally just came out and now a new chapter that's not coming out until March has been announced. Really weird.
Sometimes people come up with really great theories & predictions for the killers' ability.
I don't know what their timeline looks like for creating killers, but I had joked with a friend about how they announced early so they could see the fan theories and use the most popular for the actual ability.
Unlikely that is the reality, but I secretly want to believe that is why they announced early.
-
I agree, and I wish they considered making variants for killers that struggle on the default map.
For example, they could make an open floor plan hospital for blight (not unlike the rework for the Game's central room).
-
@ilovedbd123 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700310#Comment_2700310
Sorry, but from what the first person you quoted said I'd have to ask for clarification, because from what I can tell what he's saying is "objectively, any measures that have been added previously, and the future measure most ask for, have either been abused, abusable or useless. Therefore, future measures proposed need to be based around the assumption that tunneling and camping are very effective when done correctly, so can we implement a solution that keeps them viable, but less viable than other strategies and balance around that" and also says in turn "camping and tunneling is only prevalent because it's effective and most the time necessary. Remove it and the power differentials will become even more diverse, making the game further in the survivors favour, and also allowing for abusable options for the survivors which will make killer even more difficult. Therefore, they cannot take it out otherwise, as we have seen recently, a lot of killers would walk due to how impossible most games would become".
I know a lot of other people who share this opinion, both on and off forums. So what about this isn't "objective", or have I misrepresented his point somehow?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700289#Comment_2700289
Just quoting you to check that what I've said is a fair generalisation of your posts.
Sunset made the "objective" claim that people cry about Tunneling, Camping, & Slugging (TCS) because they see it as a personal insult. They further claimed that survivors who complain about TCS believe the killer is deliberately trying to ruin their day or antagonize them. Sunset then went on to imply that survivors don't recognize TCS as a viable means to an end (winning strategy).
My response, as you have quoted above, is merely calling BS on Sunset for their "de facto" over-generalization of people who complain about TCS. I'm indignant beceause they painted survivors with a broad brush, and are continuing to stoke the flames of an unnecessary Survivor v. Killer forum war.
-
I didn't realize they did.
Also, this is ironic.
-
@ManOMaker said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700836#Comment_2700836
But wouldn’t that thinking mean more people would be asking more FNaF? If dbd could get big name licenses then surely dbd could get some indie license, right?
That would be what people would think, so why hasn’t that happenned?
I'm not a FNaF fan, so I definitely couldn't answer that.
From a business perspective, I can only assume that BHVR has little incentive to bring FNaF to the game, considering the high profile clients they've managed to secure thus far. FNaF has little to offer DBD, with regard to garnering a new audience/building a bigger player base, so that collaboration would be strictly fan-service.
I don't see the cross-over happening, as BHVR understandably has their sights set on licenses that will attract the most new players or strengthen their ties to classic icons and solidify their position in the horror genre.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I'm a 100% solo queue player & I agree i've never found it even half as bad as this forum or twitter makes it out to be.
I generally run intel perks kindred, dark sense, spine chill & detectives hunch (use to be small game) & sure swf get most of those perk benefits for free but if more survivors played without the meta or second chances their actual skill would improve.
The biggest issue with solo queue for me is teammates who shouldn't be in my games or players who make stupid plays believing their perks will see them through regardless & more often than not they don't!
I was an initial fan of mmr I must admit during the tests I got really decent results but now not my experience is somewhat mixed, my killers play against survivor levels all over the place (killers I don't use get high rank survivors, my main killers get lambs to slaughter!)
As a survivor most killers I face seem to be very good players for the most part which I'm fine with but as I already covered most of my teammates most certainly aren't likely due to inflated mmr purely from escaping a few games in a row some how or another.
This is exactly how my experience has been. MMR was implemented, and I felt like it was great--I was finally being placed with teammates of similar skill. Each survivor got a 1 or 2 minute chase with the killer before being downed, and the killers even made some really cheeky big-brain plays that could have snowballed the game against lesser survivors.
A couple weeks go by and... MMR doesn't even feel like a thing. For reasons I do not know, I am consistently in lobbies with survivors who lack any signs of intelligent life. I say that harshly, but its painful having 2k+ hrs and being put in a trial with someone who doesn't know what a Nurse's Calling is, or that they should consider the possibility the killer might have it when they decide to heal 4m from the hook I'm being thrown on.
-
Perhaps the Resident Evil chapter revealed that DBD can land a big name game studio, opening doors to other horror icons or series people previously thought just out of reach.
-
@SunsetSherbet said:
Just gonna check out of this convo, honestly. Not worth arguing it.
You made a very bold claim--a negative generalization about a large group in this community--and presented it as fact because that is all you see in a virtual space where people vent all their woes and frustrations. Of course you're going to assume that a certain minority/majority ALWAYS act or think a certain way when your impressions of them are molded in a place with a very specific function or reputation.
Just this past week, a DBD content creator made a poll asking "how do you feel about camping and tunneling?"
At the time of writing, there are 28k responses and only 6% of respondants said "It's toxic, don't do it."
36% of respondants said "it's okay" or "necessary" at the end of a match or against good teams.
47% said its "annoying" but tolerate it
and 11% are unbothered by it
I won't pretend like this poll is a perfect representation of the community, as it is just a representation of this content creator's audience, but it can't be understated how few people find camping & tunneling toxic--even fewer than those completely unbothered by it.
-
@Myla said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700226#Comment_2700226
Honestly I just think it depends on Hook RNG. I've been running the sabo/breakout build and gotten great results from it. There are just times where the Hooks are so spread apart and sometimes where it's so close together that you'd have to bait 1-2 lunge and one sabo in front of their face to get them off.
There is certainly a lot of RNG that goes into it.
Its just been my experience that a smart killer can recourse and make enough distance from me to avoid the breakout buff and reach a safe hook. Bear in mind, I don't shadow chases when running this build. I work on gens at the center of the map, so that I'm in the best position to make a sabo play, while also advancing the objective. Thus, the killer doesn't even go to the hook I can sabo half the time.
As a seperate point... I don't recommend sabo builds as a solo survivor. All of my attempts end in the killer rightfully dropping the survivor, followed by my entire team throwing the game to try and recover said survivor while the killer stands over their body. I always feel like I force the killer into a really advantageous position, and the game snowballs shortly after.
Just my experience, tho. Its still my favorite build/way to play the game; unfortunately, not the most optimal.
-
@SunsetSherbet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700285#Comment_2700285
What I said was objectively true, sorry. It's in this thread as well as others. Feel free to go read it.
Information based solely on your personal experience cannot possibly be objective--that is fundamentally untrue.
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700285#Comment_2700285
They have tried to do anti-camping before, IIRC. I believe it wound up being weaponised against Killers by having them get looped around hooks. And then we have the current farcical state of some powers, which aren't allowed to be used near a hook but you can still shoot them at the unhookee, which is far more useful.
And the problem with the discussion on camping and tunnelling isn't one of complacency or inevitability, it's that far too many people automatically come at it from the position of "I don't like this because it's not fun for me, therefore it's bad, therefore the other person is playing the game wrong and they should be forcefully stopped from doing this!"
Apart from being tiresome, this sort of starting point is: A) excessively confrontational, and B) focuses on punishing people rather than making the other approaches more appealing.
Okay, I'm going to stop you there. Because at this point you are reiterating my argument back at me, as if it is contrary to anything I've said thus far. Good chat. 👍️
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700209#Comment_2700209
Because I shouldn't have to point out the problem with proposals like this; it's already part of the game. Every single anti-tunnelling or anti-camping ability gets used to either try to do things in the Killer's face or take hits for the other Survivors. Consequently, all proposals that aim to make it literally impossible shouldn't need snarky commentary to remind them how this won't be used as intended the instant it's put in.
That's not even considering the less dire consequences like how returning to where you know someone was just unhooked and following the signs of a survivor is a 50/50 shot of being a total waste of time and letting the entire team reset if you're not allowed to hit the wrong person.
Personally, I find it aggravating how 90% of attempts to remove tunnelling come at it from the direction of "how do we stop the Killer from getting away with this", whether by trying to amplify the effects of DS and BT and make them universal, or outright making it pointless. Why not come at it from another angle? Make it so that tunnelling isn't a faster way to win if it happens, or provide stronger incentives to hook multiple people (things like Scourge Hook: Gift of Pain sort of do this, but the problem is that the "penalty" it applies is temporary and niche) before trying to prohibit tunnelling. Shared hookstates is one idea--it could be, e.g., combined with an increasing slowdown to actions as those hooks are used up, and now it doesn't matter who gets hooked.
Will people still be focused down? Sure, they would, sometimes. Maybe they particularly annoyed the Killer. Maybe the rest of their team is being jerks and sacrificing them. Maybe they're just the weak link and the others aren't doing enough to save them and draw aggro.
Behavior can take something out of the game just as easily as they put it in. That is my point here.
People want to make the case that tunneling & camping are inevitables when they most certainly are not.
As far as anyone knows, BHVR could have already gone down the rabbit hole and explored versions of DBD where tunneling and camping are not viable strategies. Its entirely possible they drew conclusions that they don't know how to make it work while preserving DBD's identity. Or perhaps they've just received pushback from investors or lead designers to take that risk and make such radical changes to a game that is doing well enough.
Regardless, I don't think we (the community) should be complacent about tunneling & camping in its current state.
@SunsetSherbet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700232#Comment_2700232
Because they see it as a personal insult. They feel the killer is doing it specifically to ruin their day and get under their skin. Rather than just, you know, trying to win the game as is the point of playing. Meanwhile tbagging at the gates does absolutely nothing to help you win, since you have already won, and it's considered "not a bad thing" and "you need to get over it."
This couldn't be further from the truth.
-
If you bring them with the intention of running a Sabo/Breakout Build, one offering is definitely not enough to always secure the save. And on indoor maps, it feels like the offering has the most insignificant impact on hook spawn.
However, as a killer it is often noticible that the hooks are further apart.
If you can convince all 4 survivors to bring the offering, you'll definitely notice its impact as survivor. Even in the middle of the map, the killer may struggle to find the best hook to go to. Otherwise, just 1 offering has very situational value for sabo builds.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700132#Comment_2700132
ah yes, one survivor becoming untouchable because no matter what the killer does to them it's merely a waste of their time too. Want to do the gens in the Killer's face? Want to be the one who does stuff like Pinhead's box? Mr. Reckless Flashlight? Bodyblock Bob? Sure, go ahead, the worst you can suffer is ~wasting the Killer's time~.
I swear, this hard anti-tunnelling crusade is powered by an inability to consider any consequences.
I swear, this hard anti-tunneling crusade is powered by an inability to consider any consequences.
This mentality is exactly why the game is so fundamentally flawed.
You sound bitter that I'm even attempting to propose a better solution--like I personally attacked you for wanting the game to improve, when I didn't even claim to have given much thought to a solution.
This is how design works, bud
Its not my job to fix the game. I'm not going to waste my time coming up with a better system.
But if I cut through your snide remarks and blatant sarcasm, I can see that you've addressed a flaw with my off-handed proposal. That's a great start, that is how design works. If you were less of a [BAD WORD] about it, maybe I'd take you and your feedback seriously, then come back with a better proposal. As it stands, I can't be bothered to entertain someone who doesn't want a solution. And its no wonder BHVR feels the same.
-
@Unicorn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2700063#Comment_2700063
To be fair, I think discussing the morality of camping & tunneling is assisting in the demand for better solutions. It is in a very indirect way but debating within our community on why it is not fun to face but necessary to do can give the dev insight on what necessary changes can be implemented if they decide to read.
Fair point. I suppose I just disagree with the approach.
Deathslinger was given a half-baked nerfed because he was "unfun to play against," and the backlash was fully deserved.
They experimented with anti-camping mechanics years ago, but never compensated the killer's by providing them with any other means to apply pressure.
At this point, I don't trust BHVR to fix the problem correctly if all they are hearing is "its not fun."
They need to fundamentally change the win-condition for killer, so that camping wont kill a survivor and tunneling won't immediately advance their objective (i.e. 9+ hooks permanently blocks the gates & traps survivors in the trial. A survivor being hooked twice in a row does not progress the hook meter).
-
It upsets me that this community has been stockholm syndromed into believing camping & tunneling is a necessary evil.
Camping & tunneling doesn't need to exist. Regardless of its viability, it victimizes opponents and creates animosity within the community. BHVR has the power to render camping & tunneling obsolete, and provide killers with a better means to apply pressure and win the game.
Instead, here we are for the nth time, discussing the morality of camping & tunneling when we could be demanding BHVR find a better solution.
-
@DorkianBae said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2694632#Comment_2694632
I can't think of many games where my ruin isn't killed in the first minute of less tbh. I am not a fan of running ruin/undying anymore, I've had too many games where I lose both so quickly that I pretty much play with 2 perks.
As for Nemesis being the best face camper I can't agree as he has no insta down. If you have borrowed time and DS it's pretty easy to get that person off a hook.
I do love zombie speed addons with discordance though, keeps gens from being pumped out sometimes.
His camping strength comes from the fact that his zombies are pressuring gens while he stands next to hook and does absolutely nothing.
I have the same experience with Ruin tho. I don't run Ruin/Undying because both totems often break before I even take a health state from a survivor. Every time I go up against Ruin, however, I either waste 2-3 minutes finding 4 dull totems or I don't bother looking for totems and Ruin carries the killer to a 4k.
Wish I had the same luck most of the killers I face have, when it comes to hex perks.
-
I'd prefer they completely overhaul his zombies, rather than buff his basekit ability.
This may be a hot take, but at the moment he is one of the strongest camping killers in the game.
Slap Ruin/Undying/Tinkerer/NOED & Zombie Speed Add-ons on him, and you can 4k a third of your games by face camping & tunneling. While the 1st survivor you down is dying on first hook, the rest of the survivors are wasting time looking for hex totems or trying to kite zombies away from their gen so they can get it done.
By the time the first survivor dies, 2 gens will be complete at most and its easy to win the 3v1--especially if you've reached Tier 2.
The only way you don't 4k is if multiple survivors bring flashlights, survivors spawn on both hex totems, or you throw the game in the first chase.
-
@Superyoshiegg said:
I don't think the Entity would like to have something just as powerful as it in its realm. Pretty sure you could already classify the Entity as eldritch anyhow.
I hear this response quite often, but I never really understand it.
Even in Eldritch Horror, there are varying tiers of abominations. A Star Spawn and a Doppelganger might be powerful horrors, but neither compare to a Great Old One.
For the purposes of DBD, I would imagine the Entity is considered to be a Great Old One, therefore the introduction of say.. a Deep One Hybrid would be great for the entity. Its essentially a darkness the Entity knows with certainty it can control.
-
ah yes, the Prisoner's Dilemma.
How nice it would be if DBD incentivized survivors to work together, rather than throw eachother to the dogs.
-
What you do is uninstall the game, and play something that actually respects your intelligence and your time.