MeltingPenguins
MeltingPenguins
About
- Username
- MeltingPenguins
- Joined
- Visits
- 5,923
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Grandpa_Crack_Pipe said:
Have one guy distract the guard and another guy go for the save.
Or if you're feeling brave, get the guard's attention, wait for the banner to spawn and use it to help with the unhook if you're alone in the save.
I haven't played against enough knights to know. And the ones I have played against were not very good at camping.
thing is so far the only thing you can really do when you got a guard on your butt is run away, so, banner isn't an option most of the time (are they supposed to phase through vaults btw?)
-
@Brokenbones said:
Probably because everyone expects Bubba to camp at this point, so if they're playing like that they tend to get 1 kill and nothing else
With the right addons Clown is easily one of the best campers in the game
idk either that or they just like to BM with clown via bottle spam but that's a stretch
Given how they play it feels more like a 'be an arse at all costs and make the match as miserable as possible' childish approach to things.
-
What wiggle type are you using? cause iirc there's still the old (quickly clicking two buttons) and the new one (metronome skillchecks)
-
You'll laugh, these types of killers have already complained that 'no one on dbd wants to have fun with the event' when they bring in a slug-at-5-gens-and-still-tunnel-and-noed-ebony-mori-Devour-build....
-
What I was going for is this:
Many spot reports just say 'oh yeah, there's a spot on x map near y spot'. means the devs have to go through all the tiles that can make up that spot, which takes longer.
-
One thing that could be done here is a Nightmare Mode people have mused about here and there. Basically:
No red stain, no audible TR, no visible buffs/debuffs, no audible totems, generally no audio warning and different skillchecks (like they'd build up on screen gradually was an idea i have seen). perks like small game would work via the screen briefly twitching (as if your character tenses up), while aura reading would be completely disabled. There'd also be more means to fight back, all killers could climb dropped pallets, that sort of thing. Scratchmarks would be more vibrant (bloodhound's basekit here)
-
The RIGHT thing to do would be to get all the coding staff to fix things and push another hotfix asap, even if that means delaying the next chapter a bit. Also expanding the event, cause hell knows how bugged it'll be...
-
if you hit esc (or the respective button) you can see the tile-ID on the screens with ping and offerings if you wanna report what map and tile you found a spot on
-
@HugTheHag said:
On the flipside, I think it looks freaking awesome.
Gameplay wise I can't disagree though.
it's the plight of all recent maps:
They LOOK gorgeous, but are a pain to play on. They are cluttered, having things get stuck on a mere pixels of the local flora
(look, bhvr, it's nice you want a pixel bush easter egg, but I don't think this is the way)lots of stuff that looks like vault points not being any (yes, yes, I know most of the time there are the cloths marking vaults, but if you are being chased and you see an open window, do you really pay much attention to the cloth?), edges of the map not being too clearly defined optically, etc.For the game that dbd is these maps are not good. and let's not about the weird eclipse-neon-tube light the borgo shares with autohaven, that has everything and everyone blend together *squinting lady meme here*
-
What I don't get is how utterly ignorant whoever made that decision has to be. The community made it clear that
- they don't want LTO skins (having LTO BUNDLES is a different topic)
- they are very willing to pay money for skins, but these skins still haven't hit the store (various rift skins, the mobile outfits etc)
Several people have suggested great mutually beneficial solutions to the topic, but bhvr seems to stubbornly ignore it.
Seriously, whoever makes these decisions ought to pack their desk and leave
-
@HugTheHag said:
No devs on our hellsite (affectionate) !
Look, if crabs can be exchanged for QoL and bugfixes and some nice outfits for Adam and Jeff...
-
Outside of adept, forget STBFL to begin with, it's a useless perk on him unless you plan on playing scummy
As for adept, it's a bit the addon combo here. I'd rec any of the 'smaller tr when aiming + faster movement when aiming' combos. It takes a little practice and map knowledge (and good judgement of survivors) but it's pretty good to sneak up with the 'faked' TR, which can be a great help.
good luck
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3287442#Comment_3287442
Oh, I'm certain someone did the maths before proposing it and looked at market conditions and usual spending. There's no way they authorised this on a whim of just thinking it might make more money.
someone with no experience in the community, as usual, I'd say.
Cause like: Community makes it pretty clear they don't want limited time cosmetics. Someone decides that this community will absolutely fall for fomo #########
-
Also, let's address the elephant in the room:
They are prolly gonna mess up the coding of this nonsense, ending with people LOSING their already bought skins one way or the other.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
I do think of it as kind of a shifty business tactic, but at the same time.. you've got a month to buy anything you want. And outside of the Christmas season I rarely even see anyone using the festive skins. I doubt there are a ton of people buying Christmas sweaters to wear them in August.
There's also about 10 million skins and they are just skins after all.
I think people should be more focused on hiding perks behind a paywall. And no, maybe appearing in the shrine 1-2 years later is not enough.
here's the thing: we can stop this now, or potentially end up with the nonsensical 'everything is cells, everything is limited' sooner than later...
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3287422#Comment_3287422
Most people will probably buy one or two skins. They're after the people who'll still do that sort of limited purchase, but also particularly the types who'll now buy... what, the 30+ they're going to remove? And who will consequently buy every set they put out in full going forward.
I never thought I'd use 'In this economy' without a pinch of salt, but here I am...
This is a horrible business model, and they ought to know that. Cause good heavens, those people are not going to please the investors, especially seeing how many content creators are PISSED. (I don't wanna imagine the fallout if bhvr does even more wrong and removes those that rightfully criticise them as Content Creators... what is this? twitter?)
-
I'm still trying to understand the logic of bhvr here:
'hey, we are making the most money with cosmetics, so instead of making sure rift cosmetics get put into the store asap and at a steady pace, and the new non-rift cosmetics are worth it, and generally make sure cosmetics are exciting, let's make sure to piss people off even more than usual by randomly taking away cosmetics from the store and declare them 'limited edition' because verily our players are stupid enough to buy them deeming them superspecial them'
like... what? c'mon, bhvr, it's one thing to make the game as frustrating as possible on purpose through bugs and badly planned out chapters, but this is a new low as so many people now pointed out.
-
Do we already know for certain that the 'they do X to killer's powers' will return?
(I know, i know, it's bhvr, so the answer's prolly 'yeah', but one can hope) -
@OrangeBear said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3287116#Comment_3287116
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/UNQEKICTEA4C/image.png
Well this is what the halloween shop looked like in overwatch 2
Both are available but it's often the skins in bundles are not available for purchase standalone.
100 coins is roughly = 1$
The discount is always different/whatever price they wanna try and sell it for
The difference between the witch bundle with a skin, potg intro, weapon charm, player icon and name card compared to other legendary skins is 700 coins/7$ The discount is artificial because those items were never for sale individually in the first place.
The defenders in the castle bundle in this screenshot is not actually 85% off it's because the player already had 3/4 of of those skins but full price that bundle was 4400 coins IIRC. So it was 1100 per skin
I haven't played apex in 2 years so i am not up to date with that game.
When bundles offer exclusive skins then they are usually just a way to make more money rather than give the consumer value. They are designed to look like they give a lot of value but in reality they don't.
I see, thanks for the explanation.
I edited the initial post to make it clear that holiday stuff would still be in the store all year round, but that the bundles would hit on holidays. it is a more consumer-friendly kind of 'fomo' in lack of better terms, leaving the decision with the player without artificial pressure
-
@BarnesFlam said:
I agree with the entirety of those demands.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3287107#Comment_3287107
I assume OP means without removing the possibility to buy each cosmetic separately from the bundle.
Yep (I'll edit the post to make the wording clearer).
It'd be like
'you can buy these single holiday cosmetics throughout the year, or wait for the holiday for a bundle with several/all of them'
-
@OrangeBear said:
Sorry but bundles are an even worse idea. They are a way to force people to buy other stuff that they didn't want to buy in the first place to get people to make a larger purchase. Apex and Overwatch 2 the communities have a lot of issues with them.
Alright, just to make sure as I don't play either of those:
Do they ONLY have bundles or are there bundles and standalone cosmetics? and if it's the latter, what's the pricing difference between them?
-
so, not only did characters that already get the short end of the stick in terms of cosmetics, they are also FOMO again
-
The reaction to FOMO tactics should always be
'I have a set time when I spent my money on this stuff, if you don't have the stuff I want available then, you're not getting my money'
-
It has gotten worse, though, so something in the last hotfix is affecting it.
-
@Decutor said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3281917#Comment_3281917
Read above. Your PC has the "fast boot" feature enabled.
thank you, that -did- help.
Still, this is something that shouldn't happen to begin with. HOW does that even happen, wth.
(and now i'm scared to even start dbd, because even though I know the solution, I'm not in the mood to go through that again)
-
Same here. Stuck in there for 12 hours now... while the comp was OFF. restarting OR shutting off does not solve the issue
#########
-
Shouldn't the game automatically end with them getting gobbled up by the entity after an hour? Grats, you didn't find the surv, but you found another bug
-
You get something else than tunneling clowns?
-
@hastarkis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3278589#Comment_3278589
Do you really mean nowhere to hide there? Because it looks like you are taking about Hex: Face the Darkness.
yeah, my mistake. it all starts to blend together if you got a chapter in which pretty much every new perk on either side has you wonder 'how did they NOT check for the synergy here? HOW'
-
The real issue is it's synergy with everything that causes haemorrhage (e.g. sloppy). easiest fix would be to NOT have the screams interuppt healing.
-
@Terion said:
i would have no issiue with it, as long as there are actually cool things in it besides only recolor stuff.
it could be, like, themed packs (for example 'swinging 60s') for all characters (maybe two packs separating survivors and killers), plus smaller packs with recolours for the newest rift cosmetics (as in, you'd for example get a pink jeansjacket for claudette in the rift, and the pack would have it in other colours.)
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3277743#Comment_3277743
Thats exactly why the longer they keep throwing bandaid fixes on top of pieces of much bigger problems, the harder fixing core issues gets. This game has needed a health project for years, it outgrew its scope back in like 2019 or so.
For that they need to clean up the code (and said it before this seems to be what they are doing, even though it's in a rather erratic way?)
But I'd argue that making repairing healing etc faster if someone DCs would already have brought these issues long before the Doctor's chapter even.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3277686#Comment_3277686
The efficiency shift would be basekit: 4 survivors would be less efficient than they are now, while 3 would be more efficient than they curently are, with that effect increasing at 2 and 1. Perks that rely on other players specifically would be unaffected and not gain their bonus when people are missing, as the prorated value should be set to a level that makes them redundant and/or obsolete, especially when concerning action speeds.
Clarification edit: This means that a perk like Prove thyself would be primarily for when there are still 4 survivors left, as the bonus given when 1 dies would likely be roughly equal to its bonus provided. Allowing things like that to stack would have to require a lot of testing to see if it would(n't) be reasonable.
I just prefer resolutions that attack problems as close to their cause as possible, while giving equal consideration to both sides. Even with my recommendation it would be very easy for someone to purposely skew the idea to favor one side or the other, but the intention is to honestly strike a middle ground as best as possible to affect the subsequent issues on both sides. I get called biased for this all the time btw :)
Alright. Though the problem I'm seeing with this is the potential with swfs having one or two people disconnect on purpose then and take the penalty.
Especially with perks now like potential energy this could go very wrong
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3277658#Comment_3277658
No worries, mistakes happen.
Tried to requote the updated post, but it wouldn't update with the edit, so just assume this is responding to that:
Your synopsis of the consequences of each option aren't necessarily wrong, but the options don't need to be limited to those. The crux of the problem is that an overwhelming number of players refuse to play out matches that they do not want to, and due to the 4v1 nature of the game (both in terms of shared agency and raw population) it is generally going to be more common on the survivor side. The issue then becomes each 1 ragequit having a massive impact on the potential of the remaining 1-3, which is why the problem expands in scope from there. For every one person that ragequits, they are basically forcing a loss on the other 3 people. This is also part of why survivor RQs are more of a problem than killer ones, since those force 4 wins by comparison (even though they're still obviously an issue in terms of being able to have adequate games.)
All of that said, the proper solution in my eyes is to address the efficiency cap of survivors at any given point in the game, something that I feel I end up bringing often due to how many issues it affects. I was just discussing it in another topic, so in trying to copy over my explanation:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3277439#Comment_3277439
In regards to how it would affect DCs, it would both reduce their impact on the overall match, while still giving the victims of the DC a chance at having a fair match from then on. This in turn will lessen the cascading nature of DCs, especially sinc ethe frustration of a game ruined by a DC is often internalized and makes that player less patient in subsequent matches (and thus, more likely to quit themselves.)
DC penalties are necessary, but they can also have more creative ways to approach them as well. Many gaves have a "quitter hell" aspect to their matchmaking where people who have a higher frequency of quitting have a higher liklihood of getting each other as teammates. I don't know how well a system like that would work with this game, but having measures in place like the one i mentioned would help cover the obvious flaws of a system like that in a game like this. Hope that makes sense.
I'd say it makes sense. Though correct me if I got this wrong:
You mean to have perks like Prove Thyself or Overzealous or botany increase their bonus if someone dcs?
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3277643#Comment_3277643
Can you please quote where I said, or even implied, it should be increased? All I stated is that removing it is both a terrible idea, and has had multiple tests verify that hypothesis.
I misread, my apologies. See edited post
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3277573#Comment_3277573
Slugging is not inherently bad behavior, much like tapping the crouch button isn't either. You demand the ability to rule out certain killers but say nothing about being able to opt out of matching with SWFs, the two of which are one of the only reasons the game is balanced by averages at higher levels. As we have learned since Legion's PTB, ragequitting as a form of protest never stops at the claimed original reason.
The only way to cut back on ragequits and DCs is to cut back on the behavior behind them. And every time the penalty is removed or reduced temporarily, we are reminded that said behavior isn't going to go anywhere anytime soon in the community.
increasing the dc penalty would only make things worseedit: alright, mighta misread something, so let's go about this pragmatically and by experience:
Scenario 1: We keep everything as is and increase the DC penalty.
- By experience this all too commonly results in people (on survivor side) purposefully BMing (hookiside, sabotaging teammates etc) or killers simply blairwitching the survivors (standing in a corner facing the wall to make blinds and pseudo-chases impossible)
- So, this isn't a good solution.
Scenario 2: We let people set what they don't want to play against (killers and swfs by size)
- This would likely (massively) increase the Q time, which also has a high frustration factor, but I'd say overall this would lower the DCs.
Scenario 3: Scenario 2 + the game punishing bad behavior.
- This would potentially lower the number of DCs, but have a small risk of people trying to abuse the system to unfairly punish the other side. This would need a LOT of finetuning.
In all 3 scenarios we could potentially have a handful of free DCs, before it would increase again as usual.
-
@Sava18 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3277326#Comment_3277326
You clearly have never played another multiplayer game if you think DC's should be less punishing than this game already is. In any other big multiplayer game they do not allow the kind of behavior some players get away with in dbd, they don't care about your internet that's your fault.
nice assumption and so amazingly wrong.
If the game would punish bad behavior like slugging etc AND allow to rule out certain killers, there'd be fewer dcs, you know that. It's called curating, and the only argument I have seen people try to put against it is 'oh but then people would just put ALL killers on a 'don't wanna play against them' list' as if that argument would have any logic or realism behind it.
-
This has little to do with the changes now, and more something with the game rewards and punishes all the wrong things.
DCs shouldn't be punished as hard/at all unless it's a genuine ragequit DC (as in you dced cause you overestimated your looping skills etc, not necessarily quitting against killers you just utterly utterly utterly despise. it's a fine line)
Camping, tunneling slugging etc however should be actively punished, and the mechanics are present, all while the same mechanics could reward exciting behavior (lets be honest, we all had survivors genuinely thank us (and some of us did the same as survivors) for a good/great/fun match, even though it ended in a 4k at 3-4 gens left. all because there was no slugging, camping or tunneling)
It just needs better coding and a lot of finetuning
-
might just be a glitch. I don't assume you checked your emblems to see how many points you got for hooks/sacrifices? I had it before that the scoreboard displayed people still in a match, died or morid when they escaped or were sacrificed.
-
@EvilSerje said:
You, my good sir or mam, are definetely not a developer :)
How they accidentally broke folliage, how they accidentally spawn 7 pallets near each other, that the only things I understand easily. It's something everyone does, like dropping production database on release day. Every programmer baptised by this.
What is obvious (and not good) is that it looks they were in a rush and past all deadlines. And that hotfixes are not here past few days. That both are questions to management.
Also, people ought to look up the story of the dead/not dead companions in Outer Worlds.
-
Thinking a bit more about it, I'm kinda certain it has something to do with the user based tile creation
-
@AnneBonny said:
3 month content release schedule
Honest question (this isn't meant as snark) but do you think people would be favourable of a six months release schedule interspliced by big cosmetic packs? Like that you'd get a chapter and then a themed cosmetic pack for all characters at that point for a chapter price, and then a chapter etc?
-
@Jago said:
Tight timing, pressure because of working on other characters / licensed stuff that require more attention.
Or... The Knight is a crash test concept for Lady Dimitrescu & daughters.
all jokes aside, I think if they bring in lady D it'll rather be as a legendary skin for artist
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3277001#Comment_3277001
You have to wonder what bizarre spaghetti mess they possibly had that anything else caused random scenery to splurge everywhere.
well, judging by what I know about how they structure killer ability... I'd not be surprised if it's similar here.
As far as I know they have/had it that ability effects and their animations/sounds etc are not sorted by killer, but in their own parts of the code. which would make sense, too, however atm it seems that there's a dormant collision check (the old version) still being active to call effects, which leads to the situations where e.g. plague's vomit hits a survivor, sound and animation for a hit plays on both ends, but nothing comes of it. Because collision check A said there is a hit, called the effects, but new check B said no and didn't call a status change...
EDIT: as for the tiles, didn't they recently add/experiment with user generated tiles? I'd say there's the main-culprit
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3276990#Comment_3276990
I'm really confused, because if you can accidentally DO it, then it's clearly controlled by some variable somewhere, so it should be easy enough to trace back and bloody fix. <_>
you'd think so. You'd really think so *screams in someone with only basic coding skills who still knows the pain*
My best guess is this:
There's various things that impact spawns, not just the RNG for the generation and hook offerings. scourgehook perks, totem perks, etc influence the RNG as well. and all it needs is ONE SINGLE TYPO to have the code set all spawns to TRUE. And tracking that down is a mess.
Add to that that they apparently are restructuring and reorganizing the code in the background, and it gets even worse. The faulty code might very well come from a much much earlier code version (given how new updates are likely created parallel) so... best we can do is wish them Good luck, and thanks for all the fish.
-
@SMitchell8 said:
Well it's not a horror game like it claims to be. Its more like fortnite than something scary.
out of curiosity, how would you make dbd 'scary'
EDIT: There have been suggestions for a 'nightmare' mode in customs, aka no TR/silent TR, no buff/debuff info, no other auditory warnings other than sounds the characters would make, no red stain, etc.
While 'scarier' would this be in any way enjoyable to play for more than 5 matches were that the standard for all matches?
-
Killer has the shell and survivor pudidng for all categories, plus the wreaths.
Survivors have the flowers and the envelope.
-
@BillsHere101 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3275502#Comment_3275502
😂 They have a very good reason to add a bread charm now.
but it has to be plain bread. either a loaf or a slice of bread. no worms, goo, claws or anything. just bread
-
It'd be decently easy to make the game reward skilled and varied playstyles and punish BMing. The mechanics are there. And I'd say that'd be extremely good for the overall QoL of the game and community.
-
For most issues with DbD it does boil down to spaghetti-code. They seem to be smoothing things out bit by bit, restructuring the code, which leads to new issues.
The rest boils down to how people play, or more precisely what the game rewards and what is punished.
I'd say the fixes are easy, but very time consuming, and might/will likely piss off a decent chunk of players.