Madjura
Madjura
About
- Username
- Madjura
- Joined
- Visits
- 15,299
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Dino7281 said:
I don't mind hard game, if it is hard because of skill.
But it's not really fun to play against survivors carried by offering and items.
And map / tile spawning RNG.
-
@FrenziedRoach said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2566797#Comment_2566797
No fun for what should only be 5 minutes out of your night. Seems like a good trade in order to get past a bad player.
To me, no fun for 5 minutes is better than dealing with rehooks from a camper for the next 10 minutes because you keep feeding them. Besides... if you do it enough you'll eventually train them that it's not profitable.
There is no guarantee that you won't get another camper in your next game. And even if it's "just" 5 minutes, why is that okay? Why is it okay for someone to just ruin the fun of other people?
Besides... if you do it enough you'll eventually train them that it's not profitable.
Camping complaints are as old as the game itself. Your advice is too. How many more years do you think it will take for the campers to stop? Apparently five years was not enough.
-
@DaWeezerd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2565481#Comment_2565481
There's already a remedy: doing gens.
@Noz said:
Just try to kobe and then dont hit skillchecks on hook and go to the next game.
How is that a solution? Why is it okay for one player to just create a situation that isn't fun for four other players and where the only way out is to essentially not play the game?
Being camped isn't fun. Sitting on generators because someone else is being camped isn't fun. The only person having fun in that situation (maybe) is the Killer. No one else is having fun that game. I don't think that's okay.
-
@Kira15233 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2565481#Comment_2565481
Yeah no, Pyramid head already has that ability and it's not that usefull, old PH was funnier because he could put his trail near the cage
I think you can still put the trail near the cage but you need to be quick, if you stay near the cage for too long it moves away, the trail should stay active.
-
I think if the Survivor is wounded then the Survivor has priority. If healthy Killer has priority. For downed I don't know (and I could be completely wrong about healthy / injured priority).
-
@Roadrunner said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2566696#Comment_2566696
How am i supposed to counter that? Do i just lose if everybody brings this addon? Is it even possible to slow down a game with 4 brand new parts?
If you find someone using it before they get the full effect and force them off the generator then it's basically wasted. Outside of Lethal Pursuer and in some cases Discordance I don't think you can really do anything about it.
Brand New Parts are just terribly designed. They don't create interesting gameplay, they create outcomes.
Oh cool, the Survivors used a BNP. Now we all get to play the game less. Amazing?
-
@Trickstaaaaa said:
Name checks out. Legion is gunna get hurt by circle of healing.
But if everyone runs to the area where that perk is in effect then at least it becomes easier to hit everyone with your power quickly and negate their heal.
-
@BrotherLove said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2566544#Comment_2566544
I hear you. But a Charm is like ... so minor lol. Sure they might win trade, I mean I really couldnt care as I would be in Casual lol. Win trade for a charm seems like a small price to pay really lol. Thank you for your insight and thoughts.
This is what the 1st place reward for an automated tournament in Guild Wars 2 looks like: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Champion%27s_Burning_Swords It's more visible than a charm is but you can look pretty extreme in Guild Wars 2 already so it doesn't add all that much visually. Example of a screenshot I just took, literally 3 seconds after logging in without searching: https://imgur.com/UWM8rbR (and that's quite tame by Guild Wars 2 standards)
Charms are minor but there will definitely be wintrading for it. With the added "bonus" of anyone being accused of being a wintrader just because they are high on the leaderboards, and those players being harassed both inside and outside the game because of their rank.
There is actually already an example of something similar to wintrading in Dbd: The props system. In the report menu, the leftmost option is actually positive to give someone props. When it was first introduced players with high props were mentioned during the weekly dev streams (if I remember correctly, it may have been somewhere else). That was stopped after a while. From what I have heard it was because some players were "trading" props to be mentioned.
Bringing back the prop system with leaderboards may be a better idea, if it gets abused it doesn't have an immediate impact on the game like actual wintrading would. If it works out without abuse then maybe a leaderboard based on MMR could be considered. If it gets abused, which I think it very likely will, then that suggests that an MMR leaderboard is a bad idea. Such a leaderboard still shouldn't have exclusive rewards though just to avoid possible abuse. Being visible on the leaderboard should be its own reward.
-
@BrotherLove said:
This discussion is for people who see there is an area of opportunity here to enhance SBMM. If you already think its perfect then plz ignore.
Enhancement #1. Allow players to see their current ELO, create a Leaderboard for each individual Survivor & Killer. Reward the top 100 in each 500k BPS at the end of each month. Create a special in game Charm for each possible #1 which only they receive. Then reset it each month. This will drive content creators to the game. The Elo Grade can appear Below the Grade System (Or Above).
Enhancement #2. The Casual BUTTON. You can click this button once per month Before you Que up as Killer or Survivor. A warning will appear telling you this action cannot be undone for this month.
For killers this button prevents all Kills from counting in your favor. Simply put no matter what happens in the game or at the conclusion of the game. The result will count as 4 losses for the killer and 4 wins for the survivors. During the game Load screen it will inform the survivor above the offerings the killer has enabled Casual Mode.
For Survivors this button prevents all Wins from counting in your favor. Simply put no matter what happens in the game or at the conclusion of the game. The result will count as a Death. During the game load screen it will inform the killer below the offerings Player X has enabled Casual Mode.
What if both the killer and survivor press the Casual button? Then they will both be happy and the game will progress 100% as normal with the survivor who did not pick casual still participating in the ELO MMR system with its possible rewards.
Casual Killers & Players still get the same Blood Points and rewards from the Grade System. They just want a different flavor of Game. For killers this will push their MMR down to the point where they can have fun games & the same with Survivors.
The bare minimum Blood points rewarded for Killer and Survivor will be 50% of Maximum. This Ensures Sweaty Killer & Sweaty Survivors cannot game the system to do the exact same thing they are currently doing.
In theory the MMR of Casual Killers & Survivors will be BELOW new players and new killers preventing any abuse to new players. By Picking Casual mode for the month you will be rewarded with more BPS but punished by giving up ELO rewards and placement on the Leaderboard.
Listen my idea is not perfect. But I think its a equitable solution.
@Pulsar said:
First idea is fine, second one is....not fine.
Public leaderboards are probably fine (but there is a decent chance it will be abused, keep reading).
Unique rewards for being on the leaderboards is not fine. That will lead to win trading and all kinds of other problems. If you are friends with a high rank Killer / Survivor player you can just queue at the same time to attempt to get into the same lobby and then have the Killer focus only on the other three Survivors. This will give the Killer more MMR as well as that one Survivor. The higher your MMR is the easier it should be to get matched into the same lobby together.
Guild Wars 2 has / had this exact problem: Unique titles (special text under your character name) and gizmos (makes an image appear above your character) for the top PvP players, with public leaderboards. This lead to win trading and allegedly even real money trades, i.e. pay me X amount of real money and I will let you win against me to boost your rank. The chance of something similar happening in Dbd is extremely high if public leaderboards are added, and even more so with unique rewards.
Casual mode is fine. I think having a mode that ignores MMR is a good idea. Maybe instead it could be a weekly / monthly special queue with different rules, such as only allowing certain perks for all players, or a completely different objective such as draining pustula petals from that one Halloween event instead of repairing generators. Overwatch has rotating "casual modes" like this for example.
-
@Sabraiz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2556381#Comment_2556381
Suiciding on hook after getting downed in the first minute of the game isn't covered by the timeout system. I am just honestly wondering how it's different from just disconnecting, it ruins the game for the other players either way.
I can't say for sure because I wasn't involved in making the rules but if I had to guess I would say it's because it is a game mechanic. And because it's a game mechanic you are allowed to use it. For example you could be trying to unhook yourself (low chance but it can happen). Just because it didn't work the first two attempts doesn't mean it won't the third time. You can't prove that someone who goes for that isn't trying to get a self-unhook. And in the second phase they could just be bad and missing the skill checks.
You can't prove the intent when someone dies on hook. There could be penalties / bans for failing to unhook yourself and missing skill checks in the second phase but then you would also punish players who are bad and being bad at the game is not something you should be banned for.
-
@Mandy said:
Suiciding on the hook is not a reportable offence at all.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/kb/articles/139-game-rules
Thank you!
@fixdeadhard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2556323#Comment_2556323
There is litterly a report category "unsportsmanlike" with a matching description of OP's situation.
Developers dont see the support tickets, that doesnt mean they dont get information about the reports right? are you saying it doesnt get communicated to devs when the support staff keeps getting the same reports over and over again?
I cant see how this is wasting time of the staff...
The in-game report descriptions are a bit outdated I believe. I think the last one (all the way on the right) says you can report for disconnects (or it did at least in the past - I think it still does but I'd have to check that), the game rules page explicitly says you should NOT do that (that even has its own little "section" in the rules page). Game rules page trumps in-game report descriptions (in my opinion).
@Sabraiz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2556375#Comment_2556375
So intentionally ruining the game for others because you rage quit isn't griefing? Strange because in the in game report system under unsportsmanlike conduct there is mentioning of rage quitting as being included.
Because as someone that plays both sides, I sure can say that playing with people that just rage quit isn't fun for anyone.
Rage quits / disconnects are handled automatically already by the "auto-ban" / timeout system. There is no reason to make a support ticket / in-game report ticket for something that is already handled.
-
@Mandy said:
Please do not use the report system in this manner....nothing that player did is against the rules. It takes the staff time to go through all these reports and therefore takes time away from genuine reports.
Just for clarification: If someone suicides in every game on first hook, that would be against the rules right? If that's wrong and doing that is not against the rules please ignore the rest of my post, it's not relevant then.
What is the correct "process" to report someone suiciding multiple games in a row on first hook? The game rules page says that in-game reports are mandatory, probably because otherwise there is no proof the game actually happened (and videos / screenshots are easy to fake). If I see a Survivor who suicides on first hook in many games (maybe even multiple games in a row) should I make ONE in-game report after it has happened several times (+ a support ticket with additional video proof for example)? Or after every game?
Until I saw your post here I was legitimately under the impression that for such cases you should make multiple in-game reports (= every time it happens) + ONE support ticket with video evidence of multiple games where that player did that. The in-game reports would "generate" proof that the games actually happened in the support ticket system and then the video(s) would be further evidence.
I haven't had such a situation yet but if it ever comes up it would be great to know how I should handle that situation to not make unnecessary in-game reports.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2551945#Comment_2551945
One of the bottom paragraphs suggests that owning the NFT will unlock exclusive content, and they mention Doug Bradley so it's probably got something to do with voice lines. Also they say "A chance" meaning you're not even guaranteed to get what you want.
It sounds like lootboxes + NFT combined to me. I really hope that's not what's about to happen.
Also fun fact: If you the players, or BHVR staff that might be reading this thread, want to see what introducing NFTs does to a game community: Lookup the recent Neopets NFT drama.
-
One of the biggest missing "archetypes" is a Killer who can disguise as a Survivor for the "The killer was someone you knew all along" kind of thing but SWF makes such a concept impossible most likely.
-
@Rey_512 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2542470#Comment_2542470
If an asymmetrical game is balanced towards a 2K/2E that typically means your power role (Killer) is severely hindered.
I think it's also important when the kills happen.
If they happen at 5 gens for example, consistently, then obviously the Killer is very overpowered. If they only happen after the gates are open because Survivors are making horrible plays then Killer is likely very underpowered.
Which is why I think it's important to focus more on fun than the number of kills / escapes.
And for the kill rates to make sense we also need a clearly defined win condition anyway, which is one of the biggest problems with the game.
Example: Killer gets 8 hooks, every Survivor was hooked twice, but no kills. Everyone barely survives. Versus: Killer finds one Survivor, basement camps with Insidious and catches someone going for a save, the other two escape. 0 Kills vs 2 Kills. I think it's fair to say that the second game, even though it has the "correct" number of kills, is less indicative of good game balance than the first one.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2542303#Comment_2542303
Franklin's does work. You don't pick the item up automatically though, and must press space where you hit them after the animation is over.
Neat, thanks!
Does that affect chain hunts? It ends on everyone except for whomever picked it up I believe. Does the Survivor who had the box get a chain hunt or does it reset to 0% chain hunt progress?
-
Oh god yes, absolutely agree.
The game shouldn't be balanced around some more or less arbitrary numbers but fun.
More fun = better
Balance can increase fun but it's not the only relevant factor.
-
Does Franklin's Demise knock the puzzle box out of their hands? It makes sense but for some reason I am under the impression it doesn't work.
I know Hoarder works with it though, so logically Franklin's Demise should too.
Also: >not using Plaything
I like it as a semi-slowdown perk. It forces Survivors off gens or risk getting destroyed. Especially on indoor maps where it's much harder to see you coming.
-
@Nathan13 said:
I’m one of the few people that haven’t had terrible solo games, but kindred needs to be basekit. Would make solo play a little more helpful.
Bond too, or Empathy. All the healing perks are so much worse solo unless you also have Bond or Empathy and at that point half your perk slots are gone just because you want to reliably heal someone else.
Heal perks still not popular in SWF and they get Bond / Empathy essentially for free through voice chat.
-
@KerJuice said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2542054#Comment_2542054
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2542055#Comment_2542055
So wait a min- escaping is what increases your MMR??! Oh F trying to take aggro off other players and being a Martyr so others can escape- I’m being selfish now!
We don't know if it does, but probably. Saving someone and then dying might give you the same MMR change as escaping, but we also don't know how it works in that case.
@BrokenSouI said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2542080#Comment_2542080
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2542135#Comment_2542135
That sounds like an aweful idea. Do you really want the meg that urban evasioned getting the same amount of points as you ? What about the Claudette who self cared in the corner for 40 seconds because of sloppy butcher ? What about the person who killed themselves first hook because they got found/caught first and ######### your team over ?
It could work like in Guild Wars 2 for example, where maps with big, mapwide events track your participation and you get more rewards for high participation.
Could work the same in Dbd: Low participation means you get a low % of points from the shared pool.
-
@R2k said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2542060#Comment_2542060
I'm actually thinking they need to do overall survivor team pool which is capped around 30k BP. So when any survivor does something that benefits his team, points are put into pool. And if team fills it up to 30K, after game each survivor gets 30K no matter the result.
I want to add that this is now possible with dedicated servers! The servers should be able to track the Survivor BP pool and give the points to you even if you die early and the game goes on without you for several more minutes.
This definitely would help a bit with frustrations due to being camped or tunnelled out early.
-
@ThePolice said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2537300#Comment_2537300
what about Dwightcrow then?
Dwightcrow was never announced as an exclusive item that never returns. Legacy was.
-
@Sabraiz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2540960#Comment_2540960
So, like killers in general? Just have to hope that your larger hitbox going around an object can keep up with the survivors smaller hitbox going around the same object.
What you just described is looping in general. But I don't agree with you it doesn't depened on the survivors skill, since they are the ones directing where the chase will be headed for the most part, their skill in decision making absolutely plays a role in determening how to chain tiles together.
I mean when the situation where you aren't near a vault and the Killer is using their power. The only way to stop getting downed at that point is to make them bump into an object to cancel it. With other Killers either their power can't instadown you or it has some kind of restriction that lets you deal with it. Once Leatherface is near you they can just charge up their power really quickly and your only hope is that they bump into something - which you don't have control over as a Survivor, it depends on the skill of the Killer player.
-
@Kebek said:
Sluzzy's freedom of speach is too strong, it could use a toning down.
Ok but seriously, LF is one of the best balanced killers in DBD. If you're looping smart, you can stall him for long time and he enforces some very cool mingames if he plays well.
He's a good killer, we want those since then we have varienty and it's not only spirit, nurse.
Ok but seriously, LF is one of the best balanced killers in DBD. If you're looping smart, you can stall him for long time and he enforces some very cool mingames if he plays well.
I feel like most of the time the strategy is to vault if a vault is near or try to run around some props that have a weird / annoying shape and hope the Killer bumps into them. Whether or not he does though doesn't really depend on your skill but rather only on how good the Killer player is at cutting corners around the hitboxes.
-
@SunaIIanu said:
I dislike it aswell that we can't switch Killer anymore but this one thing is the Community's fault.
There were quite some people who wanted a matchmaking system which differs between the killers but if you want such a system you can't keep the killer switch in the lobby because you could join the lobby with a weaker killer to get weaker Survs and than switch back to a stronger killer and destroy the Survs.
Imo the Community should have asked for a good training mode instead of killer specific matchmaking but now it's too late (not for a training mode, but for the killer switch in the lobby).
I also disagree that survivors always only get support in this forum. A while ago there was a discussion, where a surv complained about losing 20 games without the MMR-System adjusting to it and a bit more recently someone made basically the same discussion from a killers perspective. Both posts had supportive comments and both had comments like "if you lose that often you are just bad".
Just like in the game there are people in this forum who are biased towards Killers and people who are biased towards Survivors and people who are neutral, so there will always be people who support a complaint from one side, people who try to discredit the complain and people who try to have a civil discussion about it but that is not specific to the discussion from one side.
Imo the Community should have asked for a good training mode instead of killer specific matchmaking but now it's too late (not for a training mode, but for the killer switch in the lobby).
A training mode against bots has been requested many times over the years. And also a ranked / unranked (or casual) queue.
The problem that Killers have with not being able to switch I think is mostly that Survivors can just equip keys / flashlights at the last second and you can't react to that at all really. If you are a Killer you are currently levelling and so you don't have any good perks on them at least before you had a small chance to quickly switch your Killer to counter the items that were just equipped. Now you don't have that anymore.
-
@MeltingPenguins said:
Question is: Do the licenses really make DbD better (personally I think they are actually hindering DbD due to how the costs/obligations influence how new content is handled)?
VHS might be good, but it also (mainly due to some 'fight' mechanics from what I've seen) seems to have a lot of potential to attract toxicity. This however might draw toxic players away from dbd, which would be good (though I don't wish it on VHS)
VHS might be good, but it also (mainly due to some 'fight' mechanics from what I've seen) seems to have a lot of potential to attract toxicity. This however might draw toxic players away from dbd, which would be good (though I don't wish it on VHS)
The Killer / Monster has fight mechanics in both, so I think you are not talking about that (<-- just explaining how I read your post, if I am wrong please correct me!)
The Survivors / Teens (I think that's what the human team is called in VHS) also kind of have fight mechanics in both games already. In Dbd you have flashlights and stuns, which I think are not actually that different from the weapons in VHS. Of course in VHS if you get hit often enough the game ends which is a major difference but I think it's actually really important that the fight mechanic is how you win in VHS.
What is often considered toxic in Dbd is not exactly flashlights themselves, but spamming the clicking sound. There is no in-game reason to do so, it's done just to annoy the Killer. While in VHS you have a reason to use your fight mechanics, because that is literally how you win (as human) or lose (as monster / killer).
Instead I think the biggest problem will be that VHS is F2P. That (probably) makes it easy to just create a new account when you get banned for being an awful human being (insults / death threats / using hacks). Having to buy the game doesn't stop people from doing this in Dbd for example:
That's from yesterday. I fear that VHS being F2P is going to attract a lot of those nasty people. Hopefully the report system is actually good so that these kinds of people can be dealt with quickly.
-
@theentitled1 said:
How are you not banned for bringing up another product?
Surely this must be against the rules of this forum
Nah: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/kb/articles/137-forum-rules (at least I don't see any rule that says so or could be interpreted like that)
Another advantage that VHS has that I forgot to mention:
- Goofy cosmetics actually fit the art style of the game.
For example the Survivor fursuits (Penguin and Reindeer / Elk) look out of place in Dbd. They wouldn't in VHS. That gives more "artistic freedom" when designing new cosmetics, there is less of a risk of them looking super out of place.
-
@JohnWeak said:
You are serious when you think that having licences is the main features that make the game on top ?
The fun you get while playing & the way they advertise the game will be the only thing that count, nothing else.
So what do we know ?
About DbD :
- great licences
- great art direction (one of the best, all games compared and by far)
- established and quite solid playerbase that is, however, pissed by what the game has become
- garbage performances with many issues for years now
- outdated gameplay (pretty much 4 years that we have the same basic gameplay)
- totally unbalanced and impossible to balance
- 90% of game changing features useless (perks)
- more frustrating than fun
About VHS :
- F2P
- refreshing, original and fun gameplay
- game looks balanced and devs know their game, they will adjust it
- "bad" art design (to my mind)
- no licence for now
- youtube announcement videos top around 50k average views which is fairly low (to compare, DbD has 500k views)
I honestly think that VHS will be way funnier than DbD but that the lack of good marketing won´t give this game any chance, unfortunately. To my mind, the only game that has a chance to top DbD is Evil Dead The Game if the developers don´t fail the gameplay.
There is another important advantage that VHS has:
- A clear win condition
You always know how close you are to winning / losing. There is a specific goal to work towards, and when the match is over you again know how close to winning / losing you were.
In Dbd we have no idea what's a win and what's a lose. Everyone has to decide that for themselves which can lead to wildly different expectations and goals in the game. If you heal and unhook a lot of Survivors, but then you die, did you win? Did you lose? No one knows. Got 0 hooks the entire game but then you killed everyone with NOED - is that a win? A lose? How about the Survivors, is it a lose for them? Or a win because they denied you hooks the entire game?
Really the sad thing about this is that the MMR could help clarify the win conditions, but we are not allowed to know our MMR and how much we gain / lose after a game because.... uhhh...... reasons? It still wouldn't be as clear as VHS but it would still be a huge improvement!
-
@Lynxx said:
I have noticed getting sent to the same map twice in a row and it happens way too often to be coincidence.
@ukenicky said:
This has been happening way too frequently for me. Just the other day I had four back to back matches on Hawkins (No map offerings mind you). I wanted to DC on the 4th one and just play something else but I didn't do that and I ended up getting a really satisfying 4k but I digress.
I can understand getting the same map again once but when it happens more than that it's weird.
@Chewy102 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2538515#Comment_2538515
Random can't exist in a video game. There is always something that decides what RNG gives. Most use seeds based on time or frame data, others use player input, some do a mix. Point is that random is not random in video games as true random can not exist.
Something about the RNG system DbD uses is ######### as it is clearly favoring certain realms or even exact maps more than others.
Over 2 sessions I had 3 maps be picked twice each in a small sample of games. Others are saying they as well are getting repeats of exact maps or only a small selection of the total. That isn't random, that's a pattern of something wrong in the game's RNG.
After looking back, Iv also noticed the RNG system repeating itself in my bloodwebs. Out of the 90 or so Killer perks in DbD, I have 84 unlocked (don't own 2 Killers). My Cenobite at level 26 has 14 total perks. ALL of them tier 2. Somehow RNG managed to repeat pick 11 perks (you start with the 3 teachables) twice out of 84 in total. What are the odds of that? Compare that to my Clown who's P1 level 27 and hasn't been touched in a long while. He has 26 total perks with 4 of them at tier 2.
A level 26 Killer with 14 tier 2 perks, compared to a level 27 Killer with 26 perks who only 4 are tier 2. Something about the RNG broke and is giving repeats.
My Twins is doing the same thing. Recently ground out them and is at level 40 with 20 perks. 3 tier 3, 14 tier 2, and 3 tier 1. My Twins is showing just as much repeat picks as my Cenobite. Nemesis isn't much better at P1 level 49 with 28 perks and 13 of them being tier 3!
Once more. Something about the RNG system is clearly giving FAR too many repeats and is no where near "random".
I suspect there is some kind of "map queue" that updates once every X minutes. Everyone who loads into a match during the time frame [X, 2X] is assigned the same map. If you your match starts shortly after the new map was pushed to the front of the queue and ends quickly and your next match also starts quickly you will be given the same map again.
Personally I feel like it happens more often to me when I have short games, but of course that could just be confirmation bias on my part. This theory should be easy to test, just have a few people load into a game at the same time (from separate lobbies) and check if they all got the same maps (if no map offerings were used obviously).
-
@Gladonos said:
Really guys? Really? Seriously. How have none of you answered Hex: Ruin...? That is the only killer perk I won't play without. It's basically like the killers equivalent to Borrowed Time.
Ruin is good, but then you get the matches where the game says "You are not allowed to use it this match" and it's destroyed 10 seconds after the game starts.
-
@Rey_512 said:
I don’t care if Legacy stays exclusive or if it’s released to the public, but I do have an opinion about the entitled mentality some have around here.
Just because you play a video game during a certain timeframe does not mean you “deserve” anything special. You didn’t “work” for it, you just sat on your butt (or stood) playing a video game. You didn’t “earn” anything that no one else should be denied. Heck, if the devs wanted to they could throw a kill switch on Legacy cosmetics (or any cosmetics for that matter) and you’d never see them again - and you can’t fight it because you signed their EULA.
The only exceptions I tolerate are of the kickstarter/pre-order variety. You support a game before it comes out = you get certain stuff. I will admit that if something was given to kickstarter supporters (like a cosmetic) but then released shortly thereafter to the public then that would be a jerk move by the devs. However at this point for DBD, the game has been out for years and non-legacy survivors have probably put in more hours than those who do have legacy.
I agree with everything you said except the last part:
However at this point for DBD, the game has been out for years and non-legacy survivors have probably put in more hours than those who do have legacy.
This sort of implied argument, that having a certain amount of hours put into the game means you should have legacy (sorry if I am interpreting your post wrong - please point out if that is not what you meant!).
The hours you had to put into the game to get legacy when it was available were very, very different from now. Actual infinites were a thing. A bug where infinite Survivors loaded into the game until it crashed existed. Disconnect penalty did not exist. Moris could be used after one hook. Bloodwebs were huge. The animations in the bloodweb, actually buying something, took forever. It was absolutely awful. It was a very different experience compared to how it is nice and you shouldn't go by hours spent in the modern game as a justification or argument for giving out legacy.
-
@HealsBadMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536492#Comment_2536492
Turn Boons into empty perk slots? Oh no! We sure wouldn't want valuable perks to become permanently disabled for the rest of the match when the other side deactivates them! /s
Increasing the amount of totems wouldn't work either, as then Boons could more easily overlap and provide those broken effects that are super boosted. Maybe that'll go in live patch but still bad. What they can do is have the Bless timer increase when turning a Hex into a Boon, or maybe have the Hex and Boon effects active at the same time, where the Killer and Survivor can permanently destroy the Totem to negate both effects.
Turn Boons into empty perk slots? Oh no! We sure wouldn't want valuable perks to become permanently disabled for the rest of the match when the other side deactivates them! /s
The thing is that with Hex totems you always get some use out of them. The only problem is that sometimes Survivors can destroy them before you even have a chance to reach it, even if you run straight towards it at the start of the match. But that's something that should be fixed and just because Hexes have this issue doesn't mean Boon perks should be like that too. And of course, you can disable Boon totems consistently as Killer - Haunted Grounds + 3 Hex Perks means you will never have to deal with Boon perks (even if that is a horrible build).
Increasing the amount of totems wouldn't work either, as then Boons could more easily overlap and provide those broken effects that are super boosted. Maybe that'll go in live patch but still bad.
This can be fixed by making it so the effects can't overlap.
What they can do is have the Bless timer increase when turning a Hex into a Boon, or maybe have the Hex and Boon effects active at the same time, where the Killer and Survivor can permanently destroy the Totem to negate both effects.
This is a cool idea, giving both sides the option of shutting down a perk. In this case I think the Boon should be disabled permanently though, to really give it this kind of "mutual destruction" flavor.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536004#Comment_2536004
Someone ######### up when creating her article and then someone else added the false information to the DLC article. She is not included in that DLC.
Could you please provide a source for that?
I agree that it's very unlikely based on the description of that DLC, but personally I wouldn't rule it out completely either. Then again I wasn't aware that it would be paid DLC either - if you happen to have a source for that too I would appreciate it if you could include that.
-
@AnneBonny said:
I'm irritated that they're just giving out the dwightcrow charm this year. I got it off of a code on PS4 last time and felt really happy about that considering how awful typing on that platform is, so this just feels like it invalidates it I guess. I know complaining about a charm of all things is stupid, especially for this game, but here I am regardless lol.
The only thing you should feel bad / upset over is that you feel bad / upset over something that's no one else's business. It's perfectly okay to feel that way. You are confident enough to voice your opinion even if others will likely disagree with you and I think that's pretty cool. The people who should feel bad are those who resort to personal attacks because they can't handle that someone else has a different opinion.
Personally I disagree with you on the charm, I think it's great that the charm is coming back even though I already have it. I don't like such exclusive items, even if they are timed, and personally I would prefer if the code for it was valid at all times and not just during some time of the year. I can see where you are coming from with this though - especially because it is a minor item there wouldn't really be any "damage" if it stayed exclusive but for me it's just personal preference to have it available for other players.
For example, there might be a player out there who really likes the visual of the charm for some reason, but didn't even play the game when it was available. I don't think it's fair that this player is forced to miss out on it just so others, a majority of whom I feel don't even use it ever (for example I have it but I have literally never used it and probably never will) can feel exclusive / special for having it.
But still, your opinion is valid and don't let anyone tell you otherwise 👍
-
@Phasmamain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536748#Comment_2536748
I think his base cosmetic is great but his store outfits have been horrible. Who thought it was a good idea to give a cowboy a red onesie with horns?
I think in terms of model and texture quality it's great but it just feels soooooo bland to me. There is nothing "eyecatching" about him. It's just a guy with a hat and a gun. Cool?
But oh yes that red onesie is really ugly. Again, it's well made but I don't like the look of it. There is a subreddit for that kind of thing, /r/ATBGE (Awful Taste But Great Execution). You can tell that a lot of work and love went into making it but it's just not appealing to me at all.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Nah if I wanna be tortured you are gonna be giving out real cash instead.
Killers are going to need to be paid at the rate they keep adding such ridiculous stuff to survivors that is beyond game breaking with voice coms.
@UnknownKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/284463/yes-swfs-exist
I wanna have fun not bp or exp
@Kurri said:
Yeah I don't care who's in a SWF, I care how many are, and if I've faced one. That information would make Killers better as a whole.
Tl;dr for this wall of text: No. 😉
I am quoting all three of these posts because I think you all actually want the same thing: More fun.
Playing against a SWF is demoralizing, because it feels unfair that they are getting an unintended advantage (<-- I am not saying communication apps are actually unintended, but that it feels that way to most players - partially because, and I will stand by that, the rules do not make it clear enough that using them is not cheating).
I don't think it matters whether or not SWF using communication apps actually gives an advantage, the effect might be entirely psychological, as suggested by an old quote from Mathieu I believe, who said that the survival rate of SWF is not much higher than that of solo Survivors. (Note: This was long ago, maybe 2 years or so? So well before we got MMR, which might have changed that).
It just feels really bad playing against someone who has what feels like an unintended advantage. Even if not all SWF use communication apps at all, and not all of them might even use it to talk about the game, it might just be casual talk, it still feels bad to play against it.
A bloodpoint bonus would help alleviate that a little because then at least you might feel better because at least you get a point bonus, but for a lot of players it's still going to feel unfun.
I honestly think the best way to deal with this is to just add voice chat to the game. Genuinely, just do that. Now it doesn't feel like SWF has an advantage anymore because now everyone has the advantage. The biggest argument against voice chat in the game that I have seen from the developers is that in games with voice chat there are always people who are extremely annoying (spamming music, screaming, etc.) and then you just want to turn off the voice chat as soon as possible. And yes that is a problem, but there are going to be at most 3 other players who are using it in a match, and then you can just mute voice for that one person who is being awful and report them after the game. If someone is being consistently awful with voice chat then eventually they will be banned.
The biggest / most common argument against voice chat from the players is that it will ruin the balance of the game. Which I mean, yes, it will cause balance problems, but, and I think this is a very important point, and also why I have pointed out that the rules TO ME read as if using communication apps is cheating (<---- I am NOT saying it is cheating. I have not said that this at any point, I was explaining why I think the rules say that's how it is), is this:
Actually before I continue let me make this even clearer:
I AM NOT SAYING USING COMMUNICATION APPS IS CHEATING. I WAS EXPLAINING WHY I THINK THE RULES SAY THAT USING THEM IS CHEATING
Okay. Carry on:
- Nothing, and I mean nothing, is stopping you from being matched about against 4 man SWF with communication apps from now until you stop playing the game.*
* This could be wrong because we don't know how the MMR works, but I have never seen any post or comment or anything from the devs or in any of the developer insight posts that suggests that if you get matched against SWF repeatedly eventually the matchmaking assigns you only solo players.
The balance problems that communication apps cause? They are already a reality. Why is it okay for a mechanic to exist that in some games gives the Survivors an advantage? Why are some games allowed to be unbalanced? It would be better to have this advantage in every game, and then balance the game around the mechanic properly.
And because I know this will come up: If you think that having voice chat does not give an advantage, then adding it to the game means that the balance of the game doesn't change. Which means the only downside to having voice chat for you is that you need to deal with people who may be annoying on voice chat. This has a simple solution: An option in the settings that lets you turn off voice chat at all times.
Aaaaand this brings me back to why I have argued that the rules say that communication apps is cheating: This tells us what the developers think.
- It is cheating (debunked by @MandyTalk, thank you for clarifying that!): If you add it to the game you are basically allowing cheating in the game and balancing around cheating.
- It is not cheating (confirmed by @MandyTalk): You can safely add this to the game. The developers think that the advantage it gives is not big*. It is a "safe" option to add it to the game, outside of concerns about people abusing voice chat to harass other players.
* This is just a guess. I think it is fair to say that voice chat gives an advantage, but because the developers say it is not cheating the advantage can't be that massive (this is also supported by the quote from Mathieu I paraphrased above in this wall of text) which means that it's safe to enable it from a balance perspective. Any unbalances that it causes should be relatively simple to fix by just adding a bit of power to the Killer role.
So, in summary, this is what I think:
- playing against SWF feels bad on a "psychological level"
- giving a bloodpoint bonus can help with that, but I don't think it's a great solution
- instead voice chat should be added to the game as a feature for all Survivors, including solo!
- adding voice chat likely will not upset the balance of the game by all that much, and it should be fairly easy to "fix" the balance
- people who abuse voice chat can be muted, in which case your game experience doesn't change from how it currently is
- people who really abuse voice chat can be reported and banned -> eventually you get rid of all of them and everyone is happy
-
@Lochnload_exe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536764#Comment_2536764
I usually use just context and map knowledge. Lets say the team im facing is dwight, meg, claud, and jake. If I pressure and gen and see a dwight and meg, and then i spot a jake and hear a boon in the distance, it is most likely meg. Just stuff like that that you can already do now, just takes practice with the game.
Thanks, that makes sense!
That still definitely leaves an admittedly extreme edge case: What if all Survivors have the same outfit? Sometimes SWF are doing this and as you said SWF being organized and using the Boon totems are the ones most likely to cause problems, not necessarily the solo players who are using a Boon perk.
I want to emphasize that I realize that this is a super specific example but I think it should still be considered. Technically if a 4 man SWF wants to "optimize" their Boon strategy they can use the same outfit. It may not happen often but I feel like there are already a lot of cases of "Well, this doesn't happen often, so it's not an issue" in the game. And eventually you reach "critical" mass with these kinds of situations and you have at least one of them in a lot of your games.
Examples:
- Getting facecamped to death on first hook
- Playing against a Killer who clearly doesn't know what they are doing but they are winning because they used 2 Ultra Rare add-ons and a favorable map offering
- Getting a SWF whose goal is to escape ASAP, not to have an interesting game (the games where the average Survivor score is ~13k or so and everyone escaped because they were just sitting on gens all game)
- Four Brand New Parts
And so on. And now:
- Organized SWF playing around one "Boon user" but they all have the same clothes so you can't really tell who it is that you need to kill ASAP
I know that individually all of these situations are rare but I feel like the more there are in total the more likely it becomes that you encounter one of these in your game. And I think it's fair to say that none of these situations are very fun to go against. Adding more very unfun possible situations, even if they are very rare and specific, is not necessarily a good idea I believe.
-
@Lochnload_exe said:
Boons for 95% of the cast wont be used like always, and they will most likely be ignored, and for SWFs it is going to be like old object. 3 people run regular meta, 1 person runs the super strong boons. Take out the boon guy and you are good. That is my prediction because this community does the same thing for every single patch. "this thing op, me quit game, oh it has been 2 weeks it isnt actually that bad, i will quit next patch"
How will you identify the Boon totem user though? Most likely they won't be activating them while the Killer can see them.
-
@Phasmamain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536722#Comment_2536722
I hope so. He deserves it for all the pain he went through in his lore and by the devs
I don't know if that's included in your "all the pain he went through in his lore and by the devs" but in case not: I want to point out how bad his cosmetics are. I feel like he definitely has the worst selection out of all the Killers.
Especially his default outfit is so bland. He doesn't have interesting features. Make his arm a gun, or his leg, his teeth could be bullet casings, his eyes crosshairs. Go maximun gun. He is just a grandpa with slightly weird eyes and some kind of leg brace.
I think it's okay and even interesting to have a more mundane looking killer but his cosmetics are all just so boring too.
Compare him to Huntress, who is basically just "woman with mask". Visually she is much more interesting and she gets some funky cosmetics too, like that bloody deer / elk outfit. Deathslinger mostly gets different shirts and pants and hat or no hat.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536443#Comment_2536443
This guy gets it. I have no clue why they decided to make one of the better recent perks such a troll pick. Like, why would I want to lead survivors straight to their boon spawns? And people who love Shaman builds? Useless. The counterplay to boons should be hexes. It makes no sense that boons counter hexes while offering benefits beyond what any hex was ever capable of.
@C3Tooth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536430#Comment_2536430
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/C9WULNN01DB1/image.png
Its either they:
- Spend alot of time (especially if Killer has Hex). That they have to turn Hex to Dull before they turn Dull to Boon.
- Killer has choice to turn Boon to Dull, or destroy Boon as their wish
- Hex user will trump Boon and leave only 1 Dull for survivors to use.
Boon gives too many utilities
- 1 step turn Hex into Boon (destroy Hex and benefit survivors at the same time)
- Boon is re-useable & cancel to another Dull (pin point Dull location for teammate to cleanse later if there is Noed)
- 1 totem left and its Boon, Hex like Plaything & Noed cant trump over them. While also benefit survivor.
I think maybe the reason the Boons can overwrite Hexes is that otherwise you could turn the Boon perks into basically empty perk slots.
Consider this: Plaything + any other Hex or 3 Hex perks + Haunted Grounds. This way you can turn every single totem into a Hex. If Boons were not able to overwrite Hexes then in those situations the Survivors are unable to use half their perks at all (if they run both Boons, or potentially all their perks if 2 more are added in the future). Plaything gives them a chance to use them early, but Haunted Grounds + 3 Hexes? Nothing you can do. Game starts, your Boons are unusable. Nothing you can do about it, and that's very unfun.
The simplest solution would be to just increase the number of totems. There are more possible spawns than totems, so this should be easy.
Or, the much cooler idea: Add a 6th totem to the basement. For example right in the middle of the hooks. This totem would never be able to become a Hex. Now you always have a known spot for your Bless totem that you can find easily. But because it's in the basement it's risky.
Bonus! This totem could be used for a Monstrous Shrine rework. Make it so that if the killer has Monstrous Shrine while the basement totem is unblessed the Killer gets a powerup. This totem would be blessable even without a Boon (the totem would glow blue but do nothing else, unless you have a Boon perk of course). Now you have this cool back and forth where the Survivors need to go into the basement to disable Monstrous Shrine and the killer wants to go there to disable the Bless to reactivate Monstrous Shrine. And it gives a target that is always available for Boons.
-
@Marc_go_solo said:
I'm hoping that BHVR are intending it to be a once-only use, but as it was the ptb they thought they'd just see what happens if it is reusable, just in case they're missing a trick.
It's unlikely and moreover them realising now that it would be a really awful decision. Then again, maybe they want to surpass the Hillbilly nerf in terms of most bizaar decision made by them!
Eitherway, I can't see there's any logic in pushing the Boon through as is. It's just too ridiculously powerful in its reusable state. It ought to be a once only, like a Hex. However, if it is once only, the power it offers is fine to stay. Also adds an elemeny of strategy as to when to use the Boon totem.
Nah them being reusable is cool. What is not cool is that you can override Hex totems.
If that was not possible you could run Plaything (or future perks with a similar mechanic) to slowly drain the available totems from the Survivors. That would make for interesting gameplay, you want to hook everyone once as soon as possible to convert regular totems into unblessable Hex totems and Survivors want to prevent that.
That can create interesting situations where for example a Survivor who was already hooked once lets themselves be downed while the Killer is carrying someone who wasn't hooked before to stop another Plaything from popping up and thus removing a Boon target.
-
@Foxy_Teltac said:
Forget all my issues I got with game balance and SBMM and perk variety and killer viability, how tf do Frank and Julie see with those damn masks on bro?
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/OWUK46KUKF6D/50dcecfbc6d0d6203774e1db4c51b1008f3b3769.png
Don't even mention Susie.
The same way Demogorgon, who as far as I can tell, doesn't have eyes but can be blinded.
🌈 Entity magic 🌈
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536338#Comment_2536338
Oh wait they actually changed the daily?? Didn’t notice that (and didn’t get it for some time apparently..)
that’s neat :)
Which Daily was worse: the old Nemesis one or the old Pig one where you had to kill someone with the trap?
Nemesis is fine I feel, apart from zombies getting stuck in random places very, very often. For example on Midwhich by one of the exit gates with the drop, there is always one zombie that gets stuck on a ledge / pipe.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536247#Comment_2536247
And last year the codes were a huge middle finger to those that couldn’t follow streams for whatever reason.
guess what? The ‚hard work‘ was to watch people play a game and give codes away and type them in your own game. Which iirc was also very tedious for console players, many of them could often not get it just because they had to type them in with a controller.
in the end, it’s a charm that never was promised to stay completely exclusive. And is still time exclusive.
We also had codes hidden in pictures where if you have some kind of visual impairment you were disadvantaged in getting them in time.
Timed codes are still a bad idea, I see no reason why the acquisition has to be limited to a specific time of the year. But it's still sooo much better than the other methods that were tried out.
-
@Schardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2534881#Comment_2534881
None of this really matters because comms aren't going anywhere. They're available, they're the defacto baseline we have to work with. Which is why I make the distinction that it is a disadvantage to solos to not have comms, rather than the inverse.
True, they're not going anywhere so it's useless to argue about in anyways. I agree.
Higher MMR for SWF wouldn't work. Again this is penalising people for playing with friends. You shouldn't be forces to play on a higher difficulty setting because you're being social, especially if, like me, you play better solo anyway.
As I've said - other games do that too. Why wouldn't it work in DbD? If you think that matching SWF versus slightly higher skilled killers is "penalizing" playing SWF then by that logic the whole MMR/SBMM system is penalizing highly skilled players and getting better at the game because it's matching you against increasingly stronger opponents.
Matching SWFs against slightly higher MMR killers isn't penalizing them, it's part of a Match Making System which is supposed to balance the match making experience.
If we want to get nitty-gritty we could also say that SBMM already is penalizing you for playing with your friends if your friends in some cases.
Suppose your friends MMR is 1000 and your MMR is 1900 then the MM should get you into a match of around 1450 MMR. Which is too low for you but too high for your friend. Meaning your friend gets fudged over while the killer will grind his teeth because of you and if he's smart he probably won't even chase you more than once.
Plus at the highest MMR bracket, where the real elite SWF squad reside, this would have no effect. You can't increase a SWFs MMR when it's already at max.
That's true but that's just because BHVR limited the MMR cap. This is literally the first game I've ever seen introducing a capped MMR system which just furthermore shows that this game was never been ready to have anything like a SBMM/competitive match making system.
Absolutely agree on QoL information for solo survivors, particularly information that is superfluous to voice comms so that it doesn't benefit SWF and brings solos closer to SWF level, and I've posted ideas for that many times in the feedback forum.
That'd be the most sensible thing to do, yes and I reckon this will happen sooner or later, seeing competitors introducing such ping systems like HSH and the upcoming VHS. That being said, those things will bring the solo experience closer to SWF but it still won't match the efficiency a SWF could have. Though, not even a real ingame voice chat would be able to achieve that anyways since random strangers are way less inclined to really communicate with each other by nature.
But as I said before, I think killers earn more than enough BP already, compared to survivors. Which I think is fair because killer is the higher stress, higher effort role. Basically I think killer is already rewarded for dealing with things like SWF anyway.
I agree, killers already earn enough BP and increased BP also don't really do much for veterans. What are people who already have unlocked everything they wanted with those BP?
That plus increased BP would also naturally increase the amount of super rare add ons. Some add ons are too strong to have them equipped in every single match.
Now BPs in general I think are a tad on the low side, especially with the exponential perk roster maling the perk grind increasingly insurmountable. But the rstio of survivor to killer is fine.
I think that's not as much of a BP problem as it is a general Perk/Blood Web problem. BHVR should, imo, look into re-designing that. Either just flat out remove Perk Tiers and automatically have T3 unlocked by unlocking a Perk for the first time or make the player able to decide what perks they want to learn instead of randomly tossing perks into the BW.
Perk tiers are a legitimately bad concept. They don't really add anything to the game, they just limit design (every perk needs to have some value that changes across tiers) and can even introduce new bugs: Tinkerer 2 used to give infinite Undetectable at one point last year or so for example.
Bonus points for playing against SWF: Yes but actually no.
- Do I think it's warranted? Yes
- Do I think we should have it? Actually no.
Players are asking for it because it often feels worse to play against premade teams. Bonus points would be compensation for having less fun.
But here is a crazy idea: Instead of giving a compensation because the game was (potentially) less fun, we make those games less unfun. If playing against SWF is not less fun (sometimes, I am not saying it always is less fun!) then there is no need for a point bonus anymore. Makung the game more fun overall is a better solution than just giving out bonus points.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2535258#Comment_2535258
That needs me to go down to them in the first place :)
This actually reminded me of an old game. It was 5 years ago, more or less. It was a PvP game and because of an oversight it was literally impossible for one (or multiple, technically) players to lose if the players played in a certain way (that was also as far as I know not bannable). Even though this is obviously horrible game balance players liked the game and it's still alive today. I guess that shows that winning is not the only thing that matters to the players!
... And that game is of course, Dead By Daylight. I am talking about the literal infinites where it was literally impossible for the Killer to down a Survivor if the Survivor played the infinite right (and it was not very difficult to do that).
I feel like recently a lot of focus on more on perfect balance and less on ensuring the game is fun. I don't remember seeing any mentions of "fun" or increasing player satisfaction or anything during any of the MMR discussions for example (from the developer side). Good balance increases the fun, but it is not the only (or even main thing) that determines fun. With how common threads of players saying that they are quitting (like this one for example) are becoming maybe it is time to focus more on fun again, and less on balance.
Old Dbd was horribly unbalanced but it was fun. I am not saying that it isn't still fun or less / more fun (in fact I would keep my opinion on that to myself here) but I will say that I definitely feel like fun hasn't been the #1 priority for the developers lately, more like the #2 or #3 priority.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
If you didn't being the stuff to not die and you died more then you'd actually face players who don't sweat so much and then magic
then you'd actually face players who don't sweat so much and then magic
Your wish is granted, you now get facecamping Insidious Bubbas in every game.*
* Assuming that facecamping lowers your MMR.
@Marc_go_solo said:
There is more to a victory than what perks you use. It is possible to win games against Meta Killers using no perks, if you enjoy learning to improve your skillset.
For me at least the problem is not so much about "winning" (in quotations because the win condition is actually not clearly defined at all) but about having fun. I feel like a lot of complaints that talk about winning/losing are actually more about having fun / not having fun.
As an example: I generally play without add-ons. I know I could do a lot better if I was using add-ons as the vast majority don't have any downsides, only upsides. Still, even with the new MMR, I sometimes get matched against SWF who use Brand New Parts, Keys, ... and it doesn't feel fun for me. Could I use add-ons to get more kills in those games? Yes, but it wouldn't actually increase my fun.
OP seems to have the same problem. If they stopped using the perks they are currently using they could probably lower their MMR naturally, but that, based on my experience at least, won't necessarily mean that you get more fun games. There are a lot of mechanics that, regardless of MMR or "skill level" of the player(s) are just extremely unfun to go against and it is just extremely frustrating because some of these issues, like being found first and getting camped to death, are ancient and nothing has been really done to combat that.
-
@bm33 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2534880#Comment_2534880
I'm glad to hear, limited time feels like fair way to deal out codes for exclusive items like DwightCrow - especially since it seems like you generally have few days atleast to use the code when limited time codes have been given out. The limited use codes just feel unfair and put sour note on what should be fun event.
Bad: Stuff like this Dwightcrow charm - limited time and then never available again, or, in this case, available again for what is probably another limited amount of time
Good: Timed codes for items which are then available again later (for example in the store). For example the christmas sweaters. Some of which you could get with codes but if you missed them you can buy them
Limited codes for stuff that never returns are unfun and a bad system that should not be used anymore.
-
@Mandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2534809#Comment_2534809
Not at all, there were a lot of players who couldn't get this code the last time around and we wanted to rectify that. Also we have a lot of new players since then, there's no reason that they should be denied the opportunity to get this charm.
There are (probably) always going to be new players joining the game. By definition of them being new some (probably a lot actually) of them will have missed some (or a lot) of old, event-specific charms.
Are you going to be bringing back other "temporarily available" charms in the future? Or is that something that has not been decided yet, so you can't comment on it?
-
@xenotimebong said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2533906#Comment_2533906
Why are you nitpicking a kind of clunkily worded sentence instead of actually reading what they’re saying there?
Third party tools are not allowed unless the devs say they’re allowed. They’ve explictly condoned the use of external comms, just as they’ve also whitelisted Nvidia filters.
Everyone with common sense understands that “third party tools that give an unfair advantage” is referring to things like hacks, cheats, modified files, etc. and not people talking to each other outside of the game. The devs don’t ban for that, they never have, they never will, and they couldn’t even if they wanted to, which they clearly don’t. Accept it.
Tl;dr (at the top so you can decide to just skip my post if you want to):
- Game rules as written make it sound like using communication apps is cheating
- This can be fixed easily by adding a sentence like "Communication apps are not cheating."
- Leaving this ambiguity where the rules make it sound like communication apps are cheating (that you don't get banned for) adds to growing frustrations of the player base where it feels like developers are ignoring longstanding issues
@xenotimebong and @Rey_512 Please read my post as literally as possible. I am not saying that it should be considered cheating but that, according to the rules as written, it is cheating. This does not mean that this is the intent of the developers: It is entirely possible that they do not consider it cheating but have written the game rules page not clearly enough (in my opinion - if I am reading the rules wrong then please point where in my post exactly I have made a mistake in my argumentation).
By "they" I assume you mean @Rizzo90 - I (emphasis on the I) read their post as their personal opinion, not as official communication from the development team*. Which I will readily admit could very well be the wrong way to read their post, and it is in fact official communication / an official "ruling". Which is why I have also made a suggestion how the game rules page could be clarified: Either update the text or add the following sentence: "The use of communication apps is not considered cheating."
* This is NOT intended to be an attack against @Rizzo90 (or any other of the forum moderation staff) or their qualifications. In the past forum moderators have pointed out that they are not developers and don't have insight into everything that the developers are doing, and as such I think it is fair to assume that they do not have the power to define or alter the game rules. Which is why I, personally, read their post as them voicing their own opinion on how the game rules page should be read rather than giving an "official ruling". And which is also why I have given a suggestion for how the game rules could be altered - if their "opinion" (assuming it is one, and not actually an official ruling / response) is the way the rules should be read then it is a very "safe" change to the rules that does nothing but make them clearer.
Ultimately whether or not using communication apps is cheating or not only comes down to whether or not using them is officially fair (because you do not get banned for using them - the rules are very clear about that). Emphasis on officially - do the developers think using communication apps is fair? This is what it ultimately boils down to.
And I don't think that this is even a trivial question. Basically since the launch of the game there have been complaints about various things that large numbers of players find unfun or unfair. And a lot of those issues have been "ignored" (in terms of efforts being made to change them) - for example camping is one of if not the oldest complaints about the game: That it is unfun / unfair to play against and that the options you have to "punish" it are either not very good or not very fun or both.
Another old example is what this thread is about: SWF having access to voice chat when the developers have said multiple times in various dev streams that they do not want to add it to the game as an option. They can't stop players using voice chat of course, which is why I believe it is a grey area and explicitly listed as something that no bans are issued for but that is still considered cheating, due to the advantages it gives.
Making it very clear and "official" by, for example, updating the game rules page, that it is not cheating is actually important. Many players do disagree that it is not cheating (even if, again, admittedly the intent could very well be for it to be not cheating) - but if it is cheating (as those players think) then frustrations grow because there have been no (major) changes to how SWF works despite using communication apps being against the rules (in those players minds).