LegendaryLee
LegendaryLee
About
- Username
- LegendaryLee
- Joined
- Visits
- 22
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Power_Guy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2152495#Comment_2152495
While you're not wrong, it's also part of the game.
Look at any FPS without respawns, like CS:GO. If you're the first one shot, do you claim it's 'anti fun' and ask for changes so it does not happen again? I mean, the first one shot is just cancelled out of the match without playing, but it's accepted as part of the game.
Why is it different here? Someone has to die first; why does it matter how it happens? Or when? When matches are 5-7 minutes long, how fair is it to ask for mechanics to prevent the Killer from killing for <x> amount of time, simply because it's 'anti-fun'?
What about the Killer's fun? What about the times where he needs to camp to slow down gen momentum? That first kill can mean the difference between 0 kills and a 4K, sometimes. It's TWO less people doing gens; one on the hook, and one trying to save them. Why should the Killer be forced (as some suggestions are nothing more than forcing the Killer to stop camping) to let the hooked person go? Then you go from 50% working on gens to 100% working on gens again.
Just because no one likes to be the first to go down does not mean you change it, or NO ONE would get killed.
the difference between a fps and dbd is that each player has equal power. Bad comparison, stop using it.
-
@Power_Guy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2152207#Comment_2152207
One of the problems comes about when you look at WHY a Killer might be hook camping.
Sure, to be a jerk. That's one reason.
But what about because 3 gens popped, and this is their first hook? They feel pressured to make sure this Survivor does not get away, lets they don't get ANY kills.
Or how about when I hook someone, and all 3 remaining Survivors hide nearby? Why would I walk away, and why should I, as the Killer, be punished or otherwise have mechanics work against me, just because Survivors are trying to get a 4K escape? I mean, I have all I want right there; someone on the hook, and 3 people not doing gens because they all want to rescue their friend.
When you start throwing in punishments or forced counterplay against those two categories, you're actively punishing the Killer for doing his objective. Or punishing the Killer because the Survivors are playing badly (IE: Hiding near the hook instead of doing gens). And those two reasons are why the devs won't punish or deter camping; because there is no way to code a game to know 'This camper is being a jerk' or 'This one is doing it because it's working'.
It hate to say it, but the best counter play is to just do generators. No Survivor deserves a free unhook, or mechanics or perks to force an unhook or punish camping, simply because they don't like to lose. And that's one of the things behind the whole 'punish camping' movement; people believing that they deserve more 'fun' in the match, or more time to play. Even at the detriment of the Killer doing his objective. Because they don't find it fun to lose, so clearly the Killer should not be allowed to make them lose until they have had some arbitrary amount of fun, or they want to determine when it's okay for themselves to be removed from the game.
Someone is always going to be the first hooked, and sometimes they won't be saved. It's not up to the game, or the Survivors, to decide when the Killer can and cannot kill.
Imagine if that happened in an FPS; you're on a killing streak. You must have gotten 15 kills on the other team...and now your gun jams, or your powers stop working, or your accuracy starts to drift. And the devs claim it's a mechanic so the other team does not get defeated too quickly. Because that would not be fun for them. Well, it would not be fun for you to have your hands arbitrarily get tied for playing your objective (Be that objective killing the enemy team, capping a point, or sacrificing a Survivor), would it?
I couldn't disagree more, you referenced fps's but in those situations, you are all on equal footing and the other plays have just as much opportunities to kill you as you do to them unlike when you're on a hook and are relegated to spamming the struggle button hoping for a rescue. These ideas do no stop you from playing the hook if you need to, and if you do have to hold the hook you should also be looking to hook another person. There are so many ways to play killer objectively without sweating so hard that you have to force another player to not play the game, I can't fathom the argument you're making here, no one here said that if 3 people are pressuring hook that you should leave the hook; if they were gonna 3 man rush the hook the extended time wouldn't have done anything anyways.
Extending the time gives players a chance to see your strategy and adjust to it-its an incentive to try and counterplay your camp especially for players without comms or meta perks.
-
You can try and validate it as a valid strategy for a killer but on the flip side, one player literally just gets cancelled out of a game without playing at that point, its anti fun. I think rather than try to preserve camping strategies we can buff other ways for killers to be strong if we have to but one hook killing someone isn't really skillful or fun.
-
@Power_Guy said:
No. There was already an attempt to make the Struggle meter go slower if the Killer way nearby, and Survivors abused it.
Gen Survivor would work on gens.
Bait Survivors #1 & #2 would stand far enough away from the hook that the Killer could not chase them easily. Thus, the timer was slowed.
If the Killer went after #1, #2 would go for a save, forcing the Killer to back up, and thus keeping the Struggle meter slowed.
Flip it if he went after #2. Again; the Survivors were visible, but far enough away that the Killer would have to work for the chase.
This meant, either the Killer had to camp hook (thus slowing the meter, thus giving Gen Survivor ample time to solo gens), or he had to give up and let Survivors unhook their friend.
As for the third idea; really? No. Why should the Survivor get a free unhook just because they got caught? This is, like the first idea, just a way to punish Killers for attempting to confirm a kill. Do you see any perks that shove Survivors off generators & lock them if they hit too many great skill checks in a row?
Why do you want to punish Killers for doing their job, which is to kill you? Sorry, but your ideas are, in order; an idea that was already abused, and an idea that just gives a free unhook for no reason.
I do agree that Survivors should get points if the Killer stays nearby, however. To take the sting out of being camped. Something about being distracting, or keeping the Killer's attention while on the hook.
I'm glad we agree on the points for the hooked player, I think that would alleviate some unnecessary grief experienced in the game. It is a consolation reward essentially which are kinda lame but its certainly better than losing pips instead.
I wasn't aware that they tried something similar to the first idea but I don't think that the idea is bad simply because a version of the idea has been tried already. I think there's a middle ground that can be made to improve the game for all parties. And no, I do not wish to punish killers for doing their job of killing but seriously name me a game where camping was seen as a fun strategy to play against. There's none that come to mind for me. Every tension point in any game should be fielded with the question "is it fun?", and for the hooked survivor dying to one hook, that answer is 99% of the time no. Perhaps that's the key part to fix, trying to make it harder to one hook kill someone through camping- what are your thoughts on that?
I think it would work out fine if the range was like 8m or 10m, the killer can stay close by without slowing the sacrifice but not close enough to block off all options of approach to get to the unhook. Again, the distance for how far the killer should be to not slow the sacrifice is debatable but if the amount of slow is a buildup to a cap based on how long he sits there then it becomes a game of territory control between the non hooked survivors and the killer- which is way more interactive. The survivors are rewarded for pressuring the killer into a tighter circle and the killer should be trying to not be contained to a small area regardless. I feel that dynamic can be healthy if done right.
Camping may be a strategy but it should have more interactive counterplay than a team abandoning a teammate to do gens across the map while the killer sits next to a player who can't do anything at that point. It's lame no matter how you slice it. All aspects of the game should be highly interactive.
The perk idea was a toss up, just shooting ideas but it certainly isn't free, it would require the killer to be within a small, specific range of the hooked player for however many seconds and like deliverance would only be available on first hook state. It's no more annoying to a killer than DS and probably less so since the killer has direct control over this.
-
@Dino7281 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2150631#Comment_2150631
"it's not like hookstates actually last long enough to go through more than one gen."
One stage takes 60 sec. One Gen takes 80 sec alone, without any perk or toolbox. You can easily finish 3-4 gens during camping.
Camping is valid strategy, some killers are very good at it (Cannibal, Trickster, Twins), so nerfs would hurt them more then others. Survivors have ways to defend against it (BT, DS, Adrenalin).
Just face camp is not good strategy, but when I have 3 gen, totem nearby and hooked survivor, then I am going to stay there, because it is correct play.
The idea here isn't to remove camping entirely though, if you're camping a hook near a 3 gen (which makes sense) you can still be on the hook but it gives the other team more time to pull off the hook if you're defending it. Also the proximity to the hook to trigger this idea doesn't have to be huge, it could literally be less then 20m. It just needs to create more opportunity. I'd rather nerf camp strategies to the ground trying to make the game more fun than leave things as is.
-
@Yords said:
Camping is a strategy, a very weak one at that most of the time. There really is nothing you can do that will discourage it in certain situations. Just do gens while the killer is camping and hope for the best.
Killers also already are punished for this by depiping. And no it is not always toxic.
The third idea is not really that good, at all really. BHVR needs to fix the game, not create a perk that acts as a band-aid fix.
The theory behind these ideas is mostly aimed to help new players who don't have comms with their team and don't know to or when to abandon their ally- I'm not worried about red ranks facing this or even purples. I see where you're coming from but you can't tell me that "There really is nothing you can do that will discourage it in certain situations... and hope for the best" is satisfying. That just screams unhealthy game state, that's a literal admission that there's nothing you can do- which isn't fun. It's a game and it's meant to be fun and interactive. By the time a team has figured out that a killer is camping a body, they may only have enough time to get a generator or two without experience and/or comms, that's a bad tradeoff in favor of the player doing something that I think we can agree is toxic to the game. You're probably right as well when you say it's not always toxic but what % of those instances are not toxic? This idea does not prevent the non toxic forms of camping you say exist (which I also know exist to some extent) but I think these changes truly penalize the worst offenders.
Agreed that the perk idea probably isn't that strong but it also isn't meant to be a meta perk, rather it's meant to be a noob-tailored perk to get players through the early phases of learning the game. It could definitely be improved but it's simply a base of another potential solution.
I disagree that killers are punished enough for this, I can't pull up records since there are none but in that game I referenced and some others, the killer did not lose pips- I'm not certain if they gained but for certain they were not penalized. I'd like to see that behavior penalized more regularly to incentivize more engaging killer play.