Marc_go_solo
Marc_go_solo
About
- Username
- Marc_go_solo
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,120
- Last Active
Comments
-
I prefer this to what it was before by a country mile, but it needs improvement.
I'd use the emblem system and match people up with others who score similarily in each individual category (e.g.: people who have an average of 4,000-4,999 BP in Survival and Altruism are put in matches together). The killer emblems roughly align, so they can do the same (e.g.: a killer with 5,000-5,999 BP in Devout is matched with survivors with 5,000-5,999 BP in Unbroken).
The aim would be to match people on average, based on performance. All things are considered, so kills or escapes are still important, but so too is altruism, defending gens and so on. I'd say this would accurately be called SBMM, even though it would be a complex system to put in place.
The alternative is stop insisting this is SBMM, and just say it's a basic MMR. Doesn't solve the problem, but does remove the fogscreen of "skill".
-
Just clarifying - and I feel this is what you meant anyway, but am clearing this up for my sake - there's a difference between having fun by winning and winning because of being overly competitive.
The former are usually those who play to do well and win, but if they don't they shrug it off with ease and go to the next trial; not phased by what happened. At most, maybe annoyed, but often look to what they can do to improve.
The latter are often those who lose, get extremely angry or upset, and find it difficult to accept defeat. Some of these guys in particular are often missing something in their lives, spoilt or have an immature outlook on life. They'll blame anyone but themselves, because if they are to blame they consider themselves weak.
Returning to what you said and taking into account the above, I do agree that some people are overly competitive. Yet this doesn't mean all people who play well are not playing for fun nor super-serious.
-
Can't help but feel there will be a portion of players who (knowing their team-mate is on mute) will deliberately grief them because of this, or berate players for not doing what they want.
It wouldn't be a thing I'd have interest in using, and to hear the voices of other players would break the ambience for me, alongside hearing abuse and such.
I can see why some would want this feature, and there are benefits to it, but I honestly feel like I'd hate this to be included.
-
6 of my top choices from non-horror games:
1. Carnage - Serial killer fused with symbiote = great killer choice for Entity
2. Scarecrow - Master of fear, chemicals and looking the part.
3. Deathclaw - Since Demo has gone for newer players, the Deathclaw could become a new monster-type killer.
4. Psycho Mantis - Imagine a killer able to mess with your character controls as a power!
5. Faith Seed - Probably the most innocent-looking of killers, but the Bliss she uses could be a fun power.
6. Tohru Adachi - A bit wayward, but this murderous bastard armed with a Persona could be a new, unique style of killer.
-
It's not bullying to save a fallen survivor with firecrackers which, as some have already mentioned, aren't the best choice when it comes to rescuing them.
Not everything survivors do has to constitute some form of abuse. It is quite possible they might just be playing the game as they ought to and promoting altruism: something that's necessary to get out alive.
-
I feel you can get the information through observation, so there's no real need for any way of seeing in advance. It would feel like too much hand-holding to me. It's nice to use your head and figure out things like scourge hook locations, what perks or add-ons someone is running, etc..
-
Probably a chemical reaction to the compound when he treats his tonic bottles as a year-long xxx jar challenge.
If you look closely, you should see the weeping face of a My Little Pony, desperate to be thrown into The Void.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2782486#Comment_2782486
Mmm, it would have avoided the arguments that "it doesn't reflect skill", but it wouldn't have done anything about how the current setup encourages selfish behaviours, or the backfill/bracket widening ones.
No, and yet the argument wouldn't be as multifaceted neither, and a bigger focus on what needs to be looked at while not be swamped over by others. It's too mashed-up presently.
A clear admittance of what the system is will allow people to move on. As it happens, it's just making the crux more confusing.
Although, regarding the selfish behaviour part of your post, fortunately I'm seeing less of it and that may be because whether people go up or down the MMR, or for the simple fact nobody knows where they are, I feel people are starting to see this bizaar need to claim high MMR for what it is, which is it really doesn't matter because of how strange the matchmaking is anyway.
-
@GiveMeBoops said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2782486#Comment_2782486
I don't really understand why they just didn't use MMR like every other game.
I actually wouldn't mind if they renamed it, just acknowledge it has nothing to do with skill and name is not correct for this system.
It is possible to create system that values skill of the player, but they didn't want to go this way and that's fine.
But this was kinda false advertisement.
Yeah, that was the mistake they made. If they had simply said something like: "We're going to make a system based on escapes and deaths, with the belief that if you die more often you'll be put into matches with similar survivors, against killers with lower kills, and thereby hopefully improve your chance of survival" then that would be fine. As it happens, it feels like they're holding on to the word "skill" to justify a system it doesn't completely work with.
A win/loss MMR feels simpler to me.
-
No real code other than kill James above all others! Anyway, glad there are more of us.
By the way, here was what I was thinking when reading the title:
-
@GiveMeBoops said:
I think main issue of SBMM is the name.
They kinda screwed it from start with using "skill", because it made players to expect system around skill of the player.
System kinda works, but it's not really about skill, it's more like about how much you wanted to win.
Problem is that there is not enough players for this system to work anyway. You could have AI learning system and it would be useless when it doesn't have enough players on both sides with same skill.
Then you whole "unfun" thing where main issue is not really SBMM, it's balancing and their speed of changing things (where success rate is like 50%).
I agree with this: the problem, as I recognise with this system, is the insistence on the word "skill". If it had been labelled MMR then half these .. nay, most of these arguments wouldn't even exist.
If the devs just remove the idea of skill from this system, then it would be accurate to say it is MMR. Just forget SBMM. From a tin-foil conspiracy pov, I'd almost say the devs are using the word "skill" purely to troll.
-
It's always best to make the most of a bad situation. That's why I never give up when there's almost 0% chance of winning: there is always something to learn.
It's a healthy way of looking at difficult situations, and indeed most situations in everyday life.
-
BLOOD PACT: All the same effects as there currently are, but once the healing has been done the scratch marks disappear for 6/8/10 seconds, and the Haste status remains as long as both survivors remain within 4m of each other.
CLAUSTROPHOBIA: Same effect as before, but add that failed skill checks block all vaults within 24m radius for 3 seconds.
-
Probably a longer time to be incapacitated would work better. I can see why it could be useful, with those who go for the quick grab.
I think it's good for a niche type of perk. Not a powerful one, but it would have its use.
Actually, another alteration could be slightly longer, but the effect cancels all actions, including vaulting and perk-related actions such as Dead Hard for that period of time.
-
I chose Meg, because all three of her perks are extremely useful. Most survivors may have up to 2 great perks (Bill is a prime example), but Meg is the only character I feel has 3 perks which give a strong advantage.
-
There's nothing "toxic" about what you've described. If you were to talk about post-game chat with people telling you to die, then I'd absolutely agree with you. Yet, this is just about how the game can be played and not liking it.
@pseudechis said it best about the word "toxic", and it's meaning has been all but watered down to describe when something isn't fun. Much more critical thinking is needed to be applied than the lazy response of "Yeah, I don't like it so must be toxic".
-
It's strong, but there needs to be more options available for alternate playstyles. Just like newer killer perks and perk changes like Pain Resonance, Plaything, Dead Man's Switch, No Way Out and Lethal Pursuer are helping to vary killer setups, likewise survivors need perks to change their playstyles. Deception, Blast Mine, Boons, Overcome are recent attempts at changing it too.
I reckon more perks that have been at the top for a long time will be looked at and gradually nerfed, whilst lesser ones will get buffed eventually, but more in line that they work with other perks, rather than standalones.
-
Territorial Imperative feels worse than Beast of Prey fpr me, because at least I could be under the illusion of doing something!
Unnerving Presence can be useful under pressure, and Overwhelming Pressure is oddly decent against flash-light sqiads who aren't prepared fpr the sudden lack of juice in their torches, but yeah that's me looking for the most generously descriptive views of those perks.
-
More posts like these please! It's so refreshing to see!👍
-
I feel one important aspect is the relationships within the game. By that, I mean both communication between players and devs, and also between players themselves.
There's a strong stench of toxicity and inability to communicate in any way other than a childish prick by some people, and it's a real turn off for a lot of players. Unfortunately, people still wear these insults and ideas of being toxic as a badge - like they were unable to earn anything in the Scouts, so anything will do. Players still have the word "toxic" in their name tags, as if it's some type of flex. It's pathetic.
Other things such as game health and slowing down the amount being churned out in favour of more meaningful, forward-thinking change would be good too. But a majority of the issues feels linked to poisonous relationships and attitudes.
As for saving the game, I don't think it's in a state of needing to be saved just yet: Steam only counts the PC brigade, and whilst it's an interesting indicator to look at, with so many other formats to look at it's probably in no real issue. But it is a concerning indicator.
-
It does save 1 second with great skill checks, but from the killer experience the wiggling seems less effective than it was before. So really it's not that noticeable.
-
Definitely a whole load of audio effects, which are great btw.
On top of that, I wonder if there has been a balqnce on the wiggle system. I've noticed with the wiggle that, yes, there is a buff to survivors with the Great skill check option. A minor one, but it exists nevertheless. However, as killer I've noticed it's easier to take survivors to the hook. The wiggle seems to have become less extreme, and I'm wondering if this was intentional or not. Either way, it evens out concerns over the Great skill checks.
-
You're getting stuff simply by playing a game. 17 items is more than adequate for just playing a game, bearing in mind those items give the game nothing back in funding.
-
@AlexisFox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2773484#Comment_2773484
I'm sorry but unless you can show your medical credentials I'm not going to accept medical advice from a random person on the internet who happened to google a study and most likely only read a summary of it and not the full detailed report. Also even if you did by some random chance actually read the full study I wouldn't trust that you have the medical background to fully comprehend it without seeing credentials.
Well, then that's your perogative. I'm only looking at actual papers, not Google results. It's factual, and also how I overcame my fear of jewellry to be able to put a wedding ring on my wife.
Just bear in mind that because you don't believe doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
-
Neve Campbell for the win every time!
-
We need more wholesome stuff like this!
Certainly better than one of the first meetings of horror icon back before the glory years:
https://youtu.be/-ATfLRMlR9E -
@AlexisFox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2773319#Comment_2773319
Chances of encountering the same player 2 times in a row are really small but not the same killer as any number of players can choose to play a certain killer and various rift challenges ask for specific killers which easily leads to running into the same killer (not player) multiple times in a row. Disabling a specific killer forever is a bad idea though because it does lead into people playing that killer to have longer queue times etc.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2773328#Comment_2773328
Dealing with a phobia through confronting it is done alongside professional psychotherapy and is done under the supervision of a trained and licensed professional, it's not something that is done on your own when playing a video game.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2773347#Comment_2773347
I'm asking for a simple checkbox to be added to allow players the ability to opt into this. I don't see it as something most players would even care if it's a thing or not and even if everyone did it you have so many matches going on all the time that the queue times wouldn't be affected because while the people that just faced killer A wont be available for their next match against anyone using killer A all the players that faced any of the other 19 killers in the game would be available. The dip in the size of the pool of players to match from would be a drop in a bucket, you wouldn't even notice it.
Just a note about phobias being done by professional psychotherapy and such: that's for more complex or traumatic phobias. Simpler phobias are able to be resolved by self-help techniques, with exposure being a choice.
That's why I say it's safer when dealing with computer games as it's a safer barrier. A study at the Universite de Quebec in 2003 discovered games were as effective as dealing with phobias as simulation machines, and requires no professional help.
Also of interest from the more traumatic spectrum of phobias which require professional help, VR is being used to help veterans with PTSD! It's amazing what games can help with these days!
-
As survivor, I have gotten pretty tired of Corrupt Intervention. After that, I kinda figure what the rest of the build is and the predictability just annoys me for some reason. I don't know why, since most games it doesn't feel like it does much.
As killer, Dead Hard is the bane of my existence, although since the update the strange hit registration thing seems to have ended. But it's still a pain and, like killer, you guess fairly quickly what the other perks are.
-
From a male, it would be Evan, because I reckon that would be a powerful bear hug - a proper hug.
From a female, it would be Jane, with Elodie and Cheryl not far behind. I'd be happy for a hug from all 3 at the same time, to be honest😏
-
I'd be slightly worried this may be seen as celebrating a known killer and criminal. I understand he's way, way back but it's probably not a direction the game would want to take and is open to a lot of scrutiny and problems.
Imagine if skins of actual killers came into DBD! Jack the Ripper as Wraith; Harold Shipman as Doctor; Wayne Gacy as Clown; Anna Zimmerman as Hag
None of those are ever gonna make the cut!
-
On the phobia aspect, the best way of dealing with a phobia is always confronting it, so in some ways facing a safe version (a video game clown as an example, which is better than facing one in real life) can weaken the phobia.
But I do agree that it's nice to have an option which maybe prevents you facing the same killer more than twice in a row. So, your few matches may be: Nurse, Nurse, Oni, Trapper, Trapper, Nurse, Nurse, Twins.
I do admit the odds of you ending up with Twins is exceptionally rare though😁
-
@NemeanXIII said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2771860#Comment_2771860
That's the problem right there survivors refuse to adapt,instead the rely on second chance perks and opportunistic aura readers, which there's to much information giving to survivors. Guess what the killer's running something to slow the game down only.All of the killer's perk slots are filled up with something to slow the gamedown smh.
It's true some people don't like change and most people feel a little uncomfortable at the idea, but that's not based on taking a side; it's about peoples individual characteristics. Mains, 50/50s and anyone in between don't become resistant because of the side they take but the person they are.
Anyway, I prefer a tough killer to face as a survivor, and I prefer tough survivors as a killer. Learning to overcome makes people better players. To make a killer as powerful in game as in their lore would result in a dull, tedious game from both sides for me.
I prefer skill over perks anyway. A perk on carries peole so far, and a unskillful player with good perks is not as effective as a skilled player with weak perks. It's just about being brave enough to challenge yourself.
Anyway, the killer buff you're refering to will never happen. There will be no "everyone dies in 10 seconds" event.
-
If the game was tipped towards the powerful versions of the killers you point out then there wouldn't be much of a game left.
A game such as this needs to give everyone a chance at success, so having a killer with powers to decimate any team with ease would make the whole premise completely pointless.
Survivors aren't expected to get an easy ride and neither are killers.
-
@CashelP14 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2769584#Comment_2769584
You interpret them as bad decisions but that's your opinion. What makes what you think is a "bad decision" really right? I don't all your views on this game from balance to fun to updates etc. All I know is that we as a community are why this game is so unfun.
This recent QnA highlighted this for me. We complain the devs aren't as transparent, that they don't do as many streams as before. Then when they do one we ######### all over it, complain they aren't answering the questions we asked 50,000 times and saying it was a waste of time.
I don't mind someone saying you've gotten bored of the game. I just hate this idea "the game is dying because the devs did ___ ". I fully believe it's our entitlement, our belief the game needs to be the exact way we want it, that it's dying.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2769592#Comment_2769592
Literally what I'm saying with the 2nd paragraph.
I also don't mean to lump all good eggs with bad eggs but every person that says "this game is dying because the devs are doing this ___ " to me is part of the problem.
I find these sort of topics hard to explain by texting rather than talking but I hope what I mean came across.
Yeah, I was agreeing with you with that second paragraph and putting forward an example of my own. Maybe I should have been clearer, sorry.
-
@ThePaleKing_ said:
@Marc_go_solo Dr.Jekkyl/Mr.Hyde killer seems a lot like Blight. But they could totally do a Transform kiler of sometype. I am pretty sure Blight might cover that archtype though with his lore and things.
I see what you mean in terms of that, and as you say having a transformative killer that changes drastically mid-game would be good. The Oni is a little like that, as his appearance and attacks change with blood fury, but something more feral would be great.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2761395#Comment_2761395
"This also is illustrated when looking at endgame scores, and there have been many times where a sacrificed survivor has done far better with BP."
This isn't always indicator of someone doing very little. I've had games where I've done 4 gens by myself, opened an exit gate and had the lowest score. Sure, some would argue that's not doing much but that's the only objective a survivor has to do to escape. Everything else is secondary. I'm not saying that survivors who run the killer etc, etc should not get good scores too. I'm just pointing out that low BP doesn't mean doing nothing either.
Not always no, that's fair. Sometimes it is. But on the whole since BP are awarded for actions of various types, it's safe to say a higher BP result means that person has done more than those below. That's the frustration with the system being refered to as skilled.
For the record, I prefer the new system more as my experience has been far better. It's just I wish they don't refer to the system as SBMM when it's really a system that works on balance in terms of results. If they drop the hang-up of skill, at least it would make much more sense. It's just causing confusion and frustration with some at a time when the game is a bit tender.
-
@DeadSacrifice said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2763447#Comment_2763447
Im more accrcted to stealth but Executinoner does have stealth addons but its kinda like indudus perk
Yeah he has stealthy add-ons, yet his stealth style isn't as skillful as Ghost Face. Pyramid Head just charges through, whilst Ghost Face observes and uses his power from a distance, with a bit more control and more deadly in terms of stealth powers.
-
@CashelP14 said:
Thank you for this post. I've realised recently that I hate this community anytime the devs do anything. It's not the devs fault this game is dying, it's our entitled community.
Whilst I wouldn't lump every member of the community together, you have a good point.
Imagine creating a game which you feel is good and understand needs some tweeks, and yet every day you read messages, comments and stuff saying: "You have no ######### clue about your game?", "This game is terrible because the devs suck", "Call yourself devs? You're pathetic!". Whoever you are, you will build a resentfulness. You've built up a game for years and made a success, and yet still berated. I'm certainly not saying that means BHVR ought to respond with jibes - that's unprofessional. But it's clear why some are as they are.
The better aspects of the community needs to make sure that the childish comments the minority make are dealt with.
-
I'd love a werewolf killer! With both that and the spider creature from a recent Tome, those are 2 killers I'd really want prowling about.
Lots of licences as well as unique designs, but if it were a licence I'm gonna go leftfield and put forward Father Gascoigne from Bloodborne. Scary enough when not on wolf form, but terrifying when transformed!
-
Yeah, it certainly is. I experienced it on Haddonfield where a Feng Min was leading a Huntress around killing survivors. One survivor and myself ended up reporting them both.
If that ever happens, get some video captures and send it off.
-
I much prefer the new system over the old.
But it ought to be seen as MMR. SBMM is not the system should be described as.
-
@Trickstom said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768866#Comment_2768866
I also wanna know how he escaped that humanoid spider creature at the last Tome cutscene.
I'd love to see that spider creature as a killer! That thing was a very creative character, and another monster killer is always welcome to me.
-
@FilthyLegionMain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768866#Comment_2768866
I think it's just the entity saying "F**k you. Get out of my realm, you bastard. Take some of these hints and piss off."
Imagine being able to piss off a Deity so badly that it doesn't want to feed off you! That's true power right there!
-
I'm very intrigued by the trailer, and that the Entity took the form of the Jigsaw doll to pass information on to the Archivist. It's a strange connection, since the Archivist has nothing directly linked to Saw, and also the Entity doesn't often give clues for people to try to escape it. So I'm wondering why it's taken such a form.
Reminds me a little of the lore with Cheryl, when as the fog takes her she hears Claudia mock her. Is it possible these memories form their own identities? Could Amanda's memories of Jigsaw create another version of Jigsaw who sees a way out, as he has done so in so many of his games?
This has gone off tangeant, but I'm quite excited to see where this goes and what it means for the lore and the workings of the Fog.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
"This discussion has been closed." is coming.
I'm thinking that. Jist as O finished it I saw another closed. Shame, I was being impartial too!
-
The system is better than what it was. I used it today, and although I used my phone to put in the report (and reported it on the result screen) it was fairly straight forward! The worst bit is just typing in the infinite number of digits for my ID code😁. But it really is alright.
Anyway, for fun, here's the snapshot from the match I reported. It was near enough Chinese New Year, I guess, for fireworks..
-
Firstly, I abhor the way some members of the community react and argue woth a mentality not far off the people from the witch-trials. Patrick didn't deserve the abuse. People are able to question something with a certain amount of decorum, but not start demanding for his job.
The system, as I've always maintained, is a vast improvement on the complete chaos the original one was. It's still flawed, and I was disappointed with it being based on wins and losses. As pointed out, the system won't take into account every tiny flick of a spin. But to call something skill-based is confusing. This system could simply be explained by the devs as a league table, and you go up or down, depending on your result. It's match-based, and they need to stop refering to it as skill.
An SBMM system would work differently. You asked for an example, and mine would be using the Emblems as 4 separate scoring systems. People are paired with others who score similarily in every emblemic score. So, people who score with 6,000bp in boldness and objectives would be paired with others who score the same on average. The killer can have their emblems paired with those survivors. The BP rewards for work and skill in each category.
The above system may be complicated or may get messy, and I'm certainly not a tech guy. But this would be a skill-based system.
I guess I'm backing you for the most part, but the devs have got to stop refering to this as skill-based. It's not - it's result-based, and they ought to refer to it as such to avoid confusion. But to me, it works better and can be worked upon. Mind you, even if they were to enjoy winding up the communitu, I cannot blame them because of the abuse they get. Pretty much those members of the community are pathetic, but it's not the whole community. There are good ones out there.
-
It's the only perk that can completely turn around a possibly 0k round into 4k round. It may not be seen by some as high as S-tier, because it can also be a perk that never sees any use when added to a build. However, in terms of power, and if a killer has a chance to use it, other than Devour Hope there is no Hex stronger.
Speaking of which, I'd say Devour Hope, in terms of power, is also S-tier. Maybe because it's revealed so early makes it less useful?
-
If a buff was required, I'd give them access to the same HUD information as survivor. So, if survivors could see whether another is doing gens or being chased, a killer can also see what action each survivor is doing.
That way, without giving an excessive amount of information such as which gen is being worked on, both sides will know what the state of play is.
It's a small buff, but that way all perks keep their relevance, and a better balance in terms of benefits to both sides is maintained.
-
That was a bit of a poor winner display there. Shame, because if it was just a results board with no comments, or maybe some "ggs" then I would absolutely be with you (and still am) in terms of perks aren't as valuable as skill.
But there was no need to be cocky in victory. Be humble in victory next time, because your next loss may be against someone with only 2 perks. You wouldn't feel great if they mocked you.