MrPenguin
MrPenguin
About
- Username
- MrPenguin
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,543
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Mistikus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2468347#Comment_2468347
no they have stated some time ago that they will not do that just so players wond abuse the system
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2468785#Comment_2468785
They will not give specifics because they do not want people manipulating their mmr.
I don't really understand that point.
Lets assume I wanna derank on purpose, I'll just throw super hard. I don't need to know what it measures, I just won't do much of anything so no matter what it measures I'll go down.
Not knowing won't really help the issue and just crates a lot of unknowns for no benefit. We don't even see what our own MMR is, at the very least that should be visible.
-
@Huge_Bush said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2467276#Comment_2467276
Cleansing a lit totem after the gens pop isn't an enormous task. 4 survivors cleansing totems as they traverse the map on their way to gens isn't an enormous task.
This isn't whataboutisim. This is a specific topic about forcing players to play around things that their opponents may or may not have. Why does this community hate it for one side but think it is fine for the other? It's rather hypocritical.
"It's rather hypocritical."
There's your answer, especially when dealing with a survivor sided complaint like NoED. I wish it wasn't a thing in the community, but it is.
If killers have to play around the assumption of DH, DS, UB, and BT (potentially on each survivor) I think survivors can survive NoED. Cleansing 1 totem after the last gen isn't much to ask and a single survivor can do that on their own, they don't need the whole team, so solo que isn't really in the way either. Not even going into that they have multiple perks and maps (the item) to help find totems.
Survivors only need to do all 5 totems if they want to stop the perk before it even actually does anything, which is pretty fair considering its endgame only and does literally nothing for the rest of the match. With current gen speeds, they usually have more than enough time to do so if they choose to as well (assuming decent players).
-
@meatisadelicacy said:
I'm still waiting for any of the people who make these posts to tell me why they still play a game they don't like. They literally never answer me. I guess I'll just ask the next person who makes this identical post, saying it's so stressful and unfun to play killer.
I mean I didn't make this post nor one like it, but I eventually just stopped playing killer and started playing a lot more survivor. I would recommend they do the same.
I used to be a 50/50 player, now I'm like 95/5. I'd rather wait in the 10 minuet que than have unfun games on the weaker side.
More on point with your question, some of the reasons I have gathered from others would include: they just find survivor boring, the reason they got the game was to play as iconic killers or just as a killer in general not to run away, they don't like relying on teammates, most (if not) all of their progress is on killer side, their favorite character is one of the killers, or some combination of those reasons. I'm sure there's other reasons but that's what I've heard personally.
-
@thefallenloser said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2458529#Comment_2458529
Wouldn’t not having enough killers imply that more survivors are getting higher ranked killers due to not having enough in their own rank?
There are a ton of low rank survivors. Low rank killers should have enough. Either the newbies are in a SWF or the matchmaking system makes no sense.
No because most of the higher rank killers have already quit because the problems get worse the higher you go, so all that's left is the lower rank ones who are too new to know any better or haven't gone through enough to quit yet. There's way more high rank survivors than killers, so the extras get thrown to lower ranks.
The matchmaking doesn't really care about rank after a certain amount of time, so the matchmaking is something like this:
(caution, made up numbers to get an idea across)
Red rank survivors:
Just started: "Searching for similar rank..."
Bit later: "Sorry the 5 red rank killers are already in a match or offline, expanding to purple..."
Bit later: "Sorry the 10 purple rank killers are in a match or offline expanding to green..."
Bit later: "Here you go red ranks, a green rank killer because you've been in que for 10+ minuets :)"
Meanwhile the lower rank killer:
Just started: "Ok there's 20 high rank lobbies that have been in que for 10 minuets because the killers are quitting so here you go :)"
High rank killer:
Just started: "Ok there's 25 high rank lobbies that have been looking for 1 high rank killer so here you go."
Compared to the 5 killers in red ranks there's 100 survivors, so the remaining 80 survivors go to other ranks. There's 5 killer lobbies when we need 25. Oh and a red rank just quit killer btw because of killer problems, so its 84 survivors to 4 killers now. Oh that person didn't just quit they switched sides? 85 survivors to 4 killers.
There's just so many survivors compared to killers because the killer role sucks to play for the majority of people. For whatever reason they believe, unfun, stressful, weaker role, all 3, or whatever.
-
yup
-
Is it possible? Yes but you'd need to make their power really oppressive in other ways, as others have said.
The big thing with mobility is being able to pressure survivors. Remember, all that time where you're slowly waddling to a gen or anywhere really, the survivors are getting free gen time and free travel time to something such as an unhook.
You'd have to either make up for that time in chases, which would be something dumb like 10-15 second downs, or have something that slows/pressures all the survivors on a near constant basis.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2452267#Comment_2452267
A) Because there IS no gameplay. You have no choices. You either do nothing and get removed from the game, or you remove yourself from the game earlier.
Even on a normal hook, you have more gameplay, because you can take stock of your surroundings, track the killer so you know where to go or if you have time to get healed. A facecamper makes that pointless, since you can't get rescued. Thus: no gameplay.
Even sitting on gens has gameplay, since you constantly have to make decisions. Should I move to a different side? Which way is the killer coming from? Should I help a hooked/injured teammate? Is this a safe gen?
A lot of those do fall away if the killer camps, but it's still got more agency than getting facecamped.
B) The problem is that that tactic benefits the killer compared to normal play. Because the alternative is that the killer has to find the survivors to then play out the exact same scene, but this time they're not able to block a rescue at the same time.
If a killer is looped around the hook long enough for this tactic to be a problem, then the killer just isn't good enough and would suffer the same consequences no matter where he gets looped.
A) You have things you can do though: attempt to escape, look around, and hit/miss the struggle skill checks. You just don't have the choices you want. Getting help is also part of the "team based game" aspect.
Its a team based pvp game, your choices are not the only ones that matter and sometimes you're not going to be in control. If you only want your choices to matter and to be in control all the time, play a single player or potentially a 1v1 game.
On a side note, choice does not always equal gameplay. If I give you a game that's just a bunch of QTE, you don't have a choice, but that's still gameplay. Any game with a chase scene, you don't have a choice but to run, but that's still gameplay. Its just low interaction gameplay.
If your problem is low interaction then the hook mechanic as a whole needs to change. But denying its part of the gameplay is just not correct.
B) Something benefitting the killer is not a problem just because you don't like it. Defending hooks is also a part of "normal play", camping isn't ideal but I wouldn't say its not normal, especially with how common it is.
That second part honestly doesn't matter, whether the killer is bad at the game is irrelevant. The old problems are still there whether the killer is bad or not since in either case the survivors have extended the hook time to get gen time, which is one of the main problems.
If the survivors can loop near to hook for extra gen time they will abuse it. It doesn't matter if its more or less because the killer is better or worse, the problem is still there.
If the killer is bad in this scenario now the person is getting camped even longer than today because the killer is getting looped around them longer so their timer is paused and the other survivors are on gens, the same problem we had before. So the killer can still camp and the survivor gets camped for longer because it benefits the survivor team more.
Then the second person also gets camped and we're back in the same situation we are now except the first person sat on hook even longer.
If a killer is bad in todays game, does that stop them from camping? No. Do you think its not a problem with a bad killer because "oh its ok, the down took longer because he was bad"? I would assume the answer to that is also no.
If the concern is a camping killer means the survivor is on hook and they don't like it, you have now created a situation where that survivor is on hook for even longer and can't even reque for longer.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2452224#Comment_2452224
A) It's part of the game, but it's not gameplay. It's the functional equivalent of waiting for energy in a mobile game.
Genrushing against a camper IS gameplay, just really boring. But being on the hook against a camper isn't gameplay.
B) The old system had survivors stay near the hook. But that was back when windows didn't lock, when there was no bloodlust, when survivors could always fast vault. If you restrict yourself to one map tile now, you -will- go down, no matter what. So if you try to abuse this by looping under hook now, you just trade hooks, -at best-.
A) Why is it not gameplay? If waiting on a gen is gameplay why is waiting on a hook not? Its part of playing the game and the match interaction loop between players, I think by definition that is gameplay.
If its something you do during a match, its part of the games gameplay.
B) If the camp detector is only 1 tile the killer can just camp from right outside the tile. This is one of the fundamental problems with this system. If its small then killers can just camp outside it, if its larger survivors can just loop inside it.
You'll trade hooks eventually but this still leaves the problems of survivors abusing it to get more time on gens with less pressure, the person on hooked getting camped for longer, and the killer getting punished for "camping" because the survivor forced them into that situation.
The problem didn't exist because survivors could loop longer, it existed because survivors could extend the hook timer to get gens done with less pressure and the killer had no good option to work against it. All those problems are still there as far as I see.
I honestly don't think there's a way to get this particular system to work fairly.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2450890#Comment_2450890
I'll make a proper reply later, when I'm not on my phone, but
A) I can't take 'waiting for the game to end is part of the gameplay' as a good-faith argument.
And
B) You're content to discredit moderately recent statistics out of hand but declare a five year old experiment's results to hold to this day, even though the game underwent gargantuan changes, most of which benefited the killers.
A) I don't see why not. it is. I don't like it, but it is. I understand its boring and uninteractive. But the devs put it in the game, they keep it in the game and have stated they're fine with it, its part of the game. Its not for you or me to say its not. If you want to decide what counts as part of the game you'll need to make your own game or be a dev for one.
Its like gens, I don't like the mechanic, its boring and all you do is sit there and look around while a bar fills up, but its part of the game. I don't like the on hook mechanic, all you do is sit there and look around while a bar goes down, but its part of the game.
Saying you're not playing the game just because you're on a gen doesn't make sense imo, as is a hook. DBD is a game that has moments where you just sit around waiting for something to happen. Just because you don't like the situation doesn't mean that changes, its still part of the game.
B) Because nothing has changed that would effect the way it was abused. Other things have been changed absolutely, but nothing has changed that would somehow make the system less abusive now than before. All survivors did was be near the hook to keep the killer there and by extension the timer paused. You put it in today, they do the same thing because nothing has changed in regards to that situation.
Keep in mind this entire time that survivor on hook is camped even longer than the current system since their timer pauses. It was worse for both the killer and the person getting camped because of their teammate. If you put that in today, what would be different about it?
Other things have changed around that problem, but the problem itself would still be there. What has changed that would make this situation not happen? AFAIK nothing.
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2451279#Comment_2451279
It's just exhausting to argue when any time I try to be open about survivors having it bad, someone doesn't even acknowledges my points and just makes it a penius measuring contest about who has it worse.
I kinda blew a fuse about why is it always the survivor's fault? because whenever I make a statement about survivors having it bad, people instantly jump on me saying killers have it worse. This doesn't happen when I say killers have it bad, oddly enough. In my first comment, did I say survivors have it worse? Not in the slightest. Both sides have their flaws, but I'm just focusing on why I feel like camping / tunneling can be frustrating, that's it. If you want to have the measuring contest, take it to someone else.
"If you want to have the measuring contest, take it to someone else."
I'm going to assume this is the general you and not directed at me since you brought up x side having it worse to me.
I can understand being frustrated, it happens on both sides and it should stop. On this forum alone is common to see someone say anything about killer problems and someone soon after will say something along the lines of "killer is easier now than its ever been stop complaining" for example, or a survivor problem and like you said "doesn't matter, killers have it worse"
I understand camping and tunneling can be frustrating, and that's coming from someone who isn't bothered by either when it happens to them. I'm saying both sides need to compromise for each other if we want the game to be more fun overall.
However, one of the biggest hurdles and something that has been around for a long time is the amount of survivors that do not understand that and only want the other side to make changes for them. I'm not saying its only and all survivors, but its the majority of them and more of them % wise than killers. This is why I and other have either never or extremely rarely seen a "nice" survivor, but bump into "nice" killers on a not rare basis.
It's going to be much harder to get the survivor community on board because they are (generally) much more entitled and encourage each other to continue being so. We already have a chunk of killers playing the nice game. We need survivors to at least match that amount before we can make it better. But right now virtually none of them do.
If you keep being nice and all you get in return is genrush, gg ez, t-bag at gate, and most importantly, no return of kindness, you're going to stop.
Don't get me wrong, entitled killers are definitely there, but its just nowhere near the same quantity as the survivors. It still should be reduced though.
I just wish both side could agree:
S: "Hey X gets in the way of our fun"
K: "Ok well Y gets in the way of ours and also is the reason why we do X"
S: "Ok lets both not do either"
For something like tunneling and camping for example, instead it's more like:
S: "Hey tunneling and camping gets in the way of out fun"
K: "Ok ,well gens going too fast get in the way of ours and is also the reason why we tunnel and camp"
S: "That's not the same we don't stop you from playing the game stop tunneling or you're bad at the game and playing scummy. Gen speeds aren't a problem your toxic playstyle is."
K: "But tunneling is doing the objective optimally same as focusing gens"
S: "If you were good you wouldn't need to tunnel or camp. Just apply pressure and git gud."
K: "Entitled survivor main detected. Its always the killers fault."
S: "Killer has never been easier, stop complaining."
Its exhausting.
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2448517#Comment_2448517
It's worse for the survivor because they didn't get to play the game at all, they are forced to hang there doing nothing. At least the killer gets to hunt down some survivors and try some things out. They get to play the game. And they have strong endgame perks to catch up last second, hooks don't mean anything, sacrifices do.
And you're being a bit unfair, in my scenario, a survivor DC'd and the killer is still acting like we can slam 5 generators in minutes. However, it's always the survivor's fault, right? They still must suffer even more one because their teammates DC'd.
Also, fun fact, I'm one of the survivors who give baby killers a sacrifice if they didn't do good.
So because one is worse the other is fine? That's not right in my book.
DC is worse than AFK killer, so I guess AFK is fine. Thats silly.
Its unfair to say that its on both sides to makes the game fun. So your mindset is so survivor sided even when I'm saying its both sides responsibilities its acting like survivors are the victim and must get their way.
"However, it's always the survivor's fault, right?"
I literally said its on both sides to change it.
This is exactly what I'm talking about.
Someone: Work with the killer to make it better.
Survivor: But survivors have it worse and you have perks, so your problems don't matter.
Someone: ok well then no I'm not going to throw for you to have fun if you can't do the same for me.
"Also, fun fact, I'm one of the survivors who give baby killers a sacrifice if they didn't do good."
I've seen people say that on here a few times, never in my 3 years of playing have I seen it happen in game and I'm not the only one either. I've had plenty of killers play "nice"
Supposing you're telling the truth, way more survivors need to do this.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2450654#Comment_2450654
Like I said before sometimes you have to take a hit for the team, this is part of the game and survivors need to realize that you can't have all 4 active at the same time. Its not "unplayable", you're playing the game, you're just dealing with something you don't like: waiting for help from your teammates in a team based game or helping your team by distracting the killer because he's camping you. Part of playing the game is the waiting/distraction game.
You're acting like this is a discussion about being put on the hook. It's not. It's about tunnelling and camping, neither scenario offering much in the way of counterplay or 'help' from your teammates. Especially camping. And no, hanging on a hook while a killer is staring at you isn't 'playing the game'.
A normal hook is fine. Tunnelling is questionable. Camping is a complete game design failure and must be rectified.
It doesn't need to "blooming fix it", there's already a base kit fix like I said if you read the full post. You have a gameplay fix already, you don't need another one in a perk. It helps you be more effective, that's it. That's fine, you can do it base kit, its effective, and this helps it.
Right, the mythical 'genrush', where you hope you can clear the gens and open the gates faster than the killer can stare at the first hook. Great counter, fantastic gameplay, 10/10.
The chase will last long enough (generally) against a good survivor that the gens will pop during the chase. this is what happens at the beginning of the game.
Then let me quote every single killer main on this forum when faced with any gameplay critique: Git gud.
OR
Accept that camping is a problem and both sides of the game can make a trade to solve both issues at the same time.
Being secondary is true. Although I don't see it as a "concern". You have an answer to the playstyle, what's the concern?
The concern is that you, and about half of these killer-main infested forums are adamant that this counter should be removed. (And NOED exists, whose counter is mutually exclusive with that of camping)
And in addition, it's not fun. One person not playing, the other three just holding M1 on gens without any threat from the killer, and the killer himself just watching a screensaver. I keep saying it: If every killer started facecamping tomorrow, the game would be dead before the end of the week. No one wants to play this. The only reason the game hasn't been crippled is because the majority of killers either prefer fun over victory or are actually good enough to not need to camp. But we shouldn't need to hang by on a thread of sheer goodwill.
This is not true. You can fix the genrush when a killer is not camping by increasing gen times. You can leave genrushing as a counter to camping by making the sacrifice timer take longer so with the new gen times the same result happens.
Except the increase in sacrifice timer means survivors aren't under as much pressure to get unhooks, meaning they can more effectively genrush, even on killers that -aren't- camping. And just flat-out slowing gen speeds isn't healthy for game balance either, since, again, killers average around 60% kill rate or higher on red ranks.
'But we balance for the high skill levels!'
NO. Because that makes games unplayable on a regular level. DBD has a very steep learning curve and the lower tiers are already skewed heavily in favour of the killer. You said it yourself, there's plenty of potatoes in red ranks, and those already screw over their entire team, now imagine how bad it gets when gen speeds are slowed down and the killer gets a whole extra minute or two. Average kill rates would probably creep up towards 80%, and do you think we'll have any survivors down below purple ranks at that point?
Top 1% balancing works (debatable) for e-Sports. DBD is a game, not a spectator sport.
My proposal is to have gen times be increased from 80 to 110 seconds, but to change the co-op bonus from -15%/-30%/-45% to +15% flat (This translates to slower solo speed, no change in duo speed, slight increase in triple speed). This way, the fastest way of clearing gens is NOT also the safest, and survivors have to choose between splitting up for safety or grouping up for speed. Additionally, the killer getting a hook takes away a potential +15% boost, allowing them extra pressure.
BUT
In exchange, the killer MUST lose the ability to camp effectively, otherwise camping would pretty much guarantee a victory. So hook progression is slowed when the killer is under the hook and not in a chase: -80% at 5 gens left, -60% at 4 gens left, -40% at 3 gens left, -20% at 2 gens left, no change at 1 or 0 gens left.
This might still favour the killer too much, but it gives the killer more grip on the game without just flat-out nerfing survivors and extending the time they have to M1. It might also push other perks to the foreground, too.
"hanging on a hook while a killer is staring at you isn't 'playing the game'."
You're in the game and its part of playing it, so again just because you don't like it doesn't mean its not part of the game. Its similar to hiding in hide n' go, are you actively doing anything? No. Are you playing the game. Yes.
Its not for you or me to decide what is and is not part of the game, thats the devs. To my understanding, according to them its part of playing the game/is allowed.
"Camping is a complete game design failure and must be rectified."
Not really, you just don't agree with the playstyle. The most I can give you is that its subjective and that's your opinion.
"Right, the mythical 'genrush', where you hope you can clear the gens and open the gates faster than the killer can stare at the first hook. Great counter, fantastic gameplay, 10/10."
If I can do it, and other people say to do it because it works, and it has been shown to work, its not "mythical". It is a counter. If more survivors did it camping would go down, but they don't. Oh well. They're playing a large part in their own campy misery as far as I'm concerned and can see.
"Then let me quote every single killer main on this forum when faced with any gameplay critique: Git gud.
OR
Accept that camping is a problem and both sides of the game can make a trade to solve both issues at the same time.'
But when the players "git gud" is exactly where the problem arises. Because (usually) theres not much the killer can do with the current game balance against a good team, even if the killer is also good.
gitting gud is exactly the reason why the problem exist. So thats already happened.
Unless you're just trying to use it as a cop out for your lack of an argument, in which case: you struggle against camping? Git gud skrub.
Camping is not a problem to me. I don't believe its a problem in general as its not causing a balance issue as well as it has a base kit counter. It is to you for whatever reason. If people like you want it gone you have 2 options in your direct control that you can start working on right now:
1) Counter it with the base kit counter you already have so killers can't climb with it and stop doing it because it makes them lose
2) Come to a compromise with the killer community and the survivor community to play for fun and not to win
"The concern is that you, and about half of these killer-main infested forums are adamant that this counter should be removed. (And NOED exists, whose counter is mutually exclusive with that of camping)"
I don't want gen rushing removed so please do not assume, but at least put on par with tunneling in terms of speed, which its not. Both of these are optimal strats for either side, they should be equivalent. I also want an actual adequate counter to gen rushing because as of right now there isn't one. Survivors will still win if you tunnel since in 3-5 hooks at most thats a 1k, so a survivor victory.
Thats a survivor victory just because they held m1 and the devs decided thats going to be way faster than the killer actively chasing and downing for their objective.
If survivors want to play to win by focusing gens then fine. If killers want to play to win by tunneling then fine. But these should be equal in power. Right now its survivor skewed.
What I really want is for both gen rushing and tunneling to be designed out the game.
As for NoED, if they camping when they got time to NoED anyone? If you did it right you guys will be out well before the 2nd person dies, the the killer isn't chasing anyone they're camping. If you didn't your team did something wrong.
"And in addition, it's not fun. One person not playing, the other three just holding M1 on gens without any threat from the killer, and the killer himself just watching a screensaver. I keep saying it: If every killer started facecamping tomorrow, the game would be dead before the end of the week. No one wants to play this. The only reason the game hasn't been crippled is because the majority of killers either prefer fun over victory or are actually good enough to not need to camp. But we shouldn't need to hang by on a thread of sheer goodwill."
On this I can agree with. Its boring on both sides. I can't stand camping as a killer because I don't just want to stand around. I am one of those players who prefers fun over victory. However, thats my decision and my opinion. If people think their win is more important then their fun, then so be it. Some people have fun by playing to win. Might not be fun for me, but to them it might be. People can play to win, thats fine. However these same people will stop camping if survivors used the counter against it and stopped giving them wins since the only reason why they are camping is because it gets them wins.
I have a friend who camps every game, when I asked why they said "because why am I going to go and look for survivors when they're going to come to me and give me the win themselves."
"Except the increase in sacrifice timer means survivors aren't under as much pressure to get unhooks,"
Imo, the pressure to unhook should be because the killer is downing your team and making you weaker, if all 4 of you are hooked at once the game is over for you. Not because of some arbitrary timer. The timer can be 5 years, but the gens just have to take long enough where its reasonable for the killer to down your entire team before you can finish them if you don't get a good number of saves and for the killer to get however many hooks we want killer's to aim to get, popular number seems to be 12. I don't consider ~4 saves and they survivors escape because the gens were done in 5 minuets or less a "good number".
If the sacrifice timer took 1 hour, but the killer can get 12 hooks if they play well/better because gens don't fly, camping evaporates and you have more interactive games.
As long as the survivors feel pressured to get an unhook because of some timer, the killer can camp because they don't have to put the pressure on, the timer will. The pressure needs to be shifted away from the timer and onto the killers own actions, but that cant happen with current gen times as the killer cannot put out enough pressure on their own in the gen timeframe.
"again, killers average around 60% kill rate or higher on red ranks."
Again, those killrates are unreliable to draw any concrete conclusion as stated by the people who released them themselves.
"Top 1% balancing"
I do NOT want top 1% balancing, I really dislike top 1% balancing, I want good player balancing. We don't even have that much. With good players survivors stomp and outside of 3-5 killers (depending on who you ask), the killer roster isn't viable.
Heck, a lot of my friends are just decent and that's enough to roll over a lot of killers if we play together. Right now killers need a bad player on the survivor team to stand a chance. Its frustrating for both sides. Killer's feel like they can't win because they survivors just aren't bad, and the survivors feel like they lose just because they had a bad teammate.
"You said it yourself, there's plenty of potatoes in red ranks"
Fix matchmaking/ranks, balance killers accordingly.
"So hook progression is slowed when the killer is under the hook and not in a chase"
They tried this before and survivors abused it. So you can blame them for that not being a thing anymore.
As for your suggestion, again you'll need a better anti-camp measure as that won't work as it'll favor the survivors way too much. But otherwise I can see it maybe working, but my concern is "ok killers in chase 3 way a gen. Oh he's here someone lead him away. Ok duo the gen now since he can only chase one person."
Wouldn't hurt to test with a better camp system, but honestly just increasing gen and hook times to be to where way more of the match plays out would be much simpler imo. Make the killer have to apply pressure but give them the time to do so and you don't even need to make a whole new system behind it, just slam up some numbers. Camping solved the killer needs to make pressure themselves, gen rush solved if you give the killer enough time to do so, all that's left is tunneling.
The problem with tunneling is that its optimal. So we'd need to make it not optimal. Possible solution could be something like: survivors no longer have individual hooks, once the killer fills up the 12 hook gauge to 8, the next hook for each survivor will sacrifice them. Just spitballing so that probably has some kinks, but you should get the idea.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2450476#Comment_2450476
But yeah you can't have a perk for every scenario the same way killers can't have a perk for every scenario.
That's not the point.
The point is that any killer can, at a whim, make the game unplayable unless the survivor is decked out with DS + BT + UB. That's three perk slots sacrificed to make the game -playable- (Not winnable, playable) in case of a killer with a foul mood. That leaves us ONE perk slot to choose for build diversity, and this is gonna be SG/DetHunch for NOED, Kindred against camping or Spine Chill for stealthers.
There's tons of survivor perks that are okay-ish or fun and they just don't get picked up because without the holy trinity of the oft-complained about survivor meta, the game can quickly become unplayable.
Survivors either don't get to choose their perks, or a killer can simply opt to make the game miserable for them. This isn't healthy design. This is a perk tax.
I'm not saying it solves camping because it doesn't it just helps in the info department.
And then it doesn't even blooming fix it!
The survivors have 66% of their work speed only until that survivor is unhooked and maybe healed. Lets be even more generous and say 50%. Ok. 3 gens with 1 hook, 4 1/2 with 2, gens done gate opened by 3.
No, they don't -have- 66% speed. They LOSE 66% speed. They go down to 33% and that's assuming your chase doesn't carry you past a gen that's being worked on, which temporarily sets it to zero.
And ideally, you'll be cycling survivors. Which means that the person on the gen will at one point be stuck in one of the other roles, leaving their gen behind, and there's no guarantee that another survivor will find it. Slap on a gen regression perk, and you can slow the game down to a crawl. That's why Pop is considered so powerful: It won't crash the genrush, but once the first hook is done, it can massively diminish what survivors can do.
But all of that is secondary to the big concern that genrushing is -required- against camping. So either we fix both issues, or we fix neither. If it's up to the forums, survivors just have to give up their gen speeds and allow a facecamper to always, unconditionally, get a 2K at worst. If that catches on, the game dies within a month. No one wants to play a camping match.
As I said, there's ways to fix genrushing, but not as long as camping is a thing.
Like I said before sometimes you have to take a hit for the team, this is part of the game and survivors need to realize that you can't have all 4 active at the same time. Its not "unplayable", you're playing the game, you're just dealing with something you don't like: waiting for help from your teammates in a team based game or helping your team by distracting the killer because he's camping you. Part of playing the game is the waiting/distraction game.
Its not a 1v1 its a 1v4. One survivor can't make progress, but the others can and should. One individual survivor will have literal down time.
It doesn't need to "blooming fix it", there's already a base kit fix like I said if you read the full post. You have a gameplay fix already, you don't need another one in a perk. It helps you be more effective, that's it. That's fine, you can do it base kit, its effective, and this helps it.
I did misread the 66% part a bit and thats on me, but like I outlined later if you read the full post, with 1 survivor on a gen a.k.a. the amount you're left with after you lose the 66%, the killer still should generally only get 3-5 hooks in a decent team.
The chase will last long enough (generally) against a good survivor that the gens will pop during the chase. this is what happens at the beginning of the game. 1 chase last long enough for 3 single survivors to do their gens. If you leave a chase to start another and that new survivor is also good, great now you just wasted more time and the gen the previous survivor jumps on will pop during the new chase, even assuming they get on a new one. A survivor getting on a new gen isn't really a big deal because gen speeds are so fast compared to chase speeds with a good survivor team. A gen should not pop in 1 chase with 1 survivor on it, 3 gens should not pop in 1 chase with 1 survivor on each. There's 5 gens that need to be done and 12 hooks. There is a large fundamental speed imbalance.
"But all of that is secondary to the big concern that genrushing is -required- against camping."
Being secondary is true. Although I don't see it as a "concern". You have an answer to the playstyle, what's the concern? That its specifically genrushing? Why is genrushing being the required counter a concern? Its a base kit ability of the survivor to focus gens, what's the issue with it being a counter to camping, another base kit thing killers can do?
"So either we fix both issues, or we fix neither."
This is not true. You can fix the genrush when a killer is not camping by increasing gen times. You can leave genrushing as a counter to camping by making the sacrifice timer take longer so with the new gen times the same result happens. I said this earlier I believe. If you want you can make the sacrifice take long enough to where the killer only gets 1 kill camp with survivors focusing gens.
But one does not need to be fixed for the other. Camping and genrushing are not the equivalents for both sides, that'd be genrushing and tunneling.
You already have a solution to camping, it doesn't need a "fix" because there already is one that any decent team can do. More survivors just need to do it. Instead of complaining for the devs to fix something that you already have the base kit fix for, maybe we should encourage more people to use said fix. So we can actually focus on things that actually do not have a sufficient current fix in the game.
Why are we saying "we cant fix gen rush in a normal match till we remove camping" when camping already has a base kit solution and these two are not equivalents. Oh gens take longer? Whats the thing that already kept camping in check? Gen speeds + sacrifice speeds. Ok so just increase the sacrifice speeds as well to match.
-
Perks, maps, gen speeds, teammates, some add-ons, RNG in general, Spirit, ect. there's a lot in this game that matters more than anyone's skill.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2449592#Comment_2449592
No, but in solo play, if I don't see a rescue happening, I'm going to assume that whoever went for the rescue is in chase, and I'll check it myself. I can end up crossing the map to find the killer sitting under hook, at which point I need to get back to a gen ASAP if I don't want to risk a second person getting locked out of the game for two minutes.
'Just slap on Kindred'
There seems to be literally not a single piece of feedback that can be given from survivor perspectives that won't be met with 'Just equip [bandaid perk]'. There's four perk slots and way more gameplay holes. Use that approach for your own problems: trouble with genrushing? Just slap on Corrupt, Surge, Eruption AND Pop. If you don't do that, don't complain.
What killers fail to realise about the 'three gens in one hook' thing is that, from there, survivors are at halfway, but the common scenario is that they lose 66% of their work speed from that point. One on hook, one in chase, one rescuing/healing, and only one on gens. The reason gens go fast early is because they go slow late. Killers shouldn't -always- have the upper hand.
I only recommended kindred because it actually solves the "not knowing what teammates are doing or where the killer is" problem, these other perks don't solve the gen rush issue, they just help alleviate it.
But yeah you can't have a perk for every scenario the same way killers can't have a perk for every scenario. But if you're personally so concerned with camping as your number 1 priority then fit it in a build is all I'm saying. You don't need it to counter camping either, it just helps.
I'm not saying it solves camping because it doesn't it just helps in the info department. You don't need the perk to counter camping as you can do that at base, it'll just help you waste a little less time, but you have extra time to burn so it doesn't really matter too much.
Yeah you can rush back to the gen, whose going to stop you. Again the survivors have extra time to get those gens done in those 2 kills.
The survivors have 66% of their work speed only until that survivor is unhooked and maybe healed. Lets be even more generous and say 50%. Ok. 3 gens with 1 hook, 4 1/2 with 2, gens done gate opened by 3.
Even at 50% we're looking at 3 hooks before the game is over. Like I said before, with decent survivors focusing on gens, The majority of the killer roster get about 3-5 hooks. That's 100% of the survivors objective done while the killer is on 3/12 - 5/12.
Killer's don't "fail to realize", that's with that less efficient work included. Even with just that 1 survivor on gens, that's still just roughly 2-4 more chases/hooks as: 2nd chase -gen pop- 3rd chase -gen pop- oh look games over. The killer is not even at half of their objective done and the survivors are finished with theirs.
Its a good thing a lot of survivors at red ranks are potatoes or this would be happening even more frequently.
-
@Artemisha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2449667#Comment_2449667
If u are playing with the same guys, although there is no communication, you are more close to a SWF than solo queuers as u have experience together and created a playstyle. So that´s not a quite good example.
On the other hand, this strat indeed affects more to Solo Q players. It´s pretty obvius. If´m on Solo Q I can´t be never sure if killer is camping, proxycamping, if he has moved to another area, if my teammates are going for rescue, if they are repairing while ruin is active and what´s the percentage on the gen they are fixing....etc. A lot of information survs don´t have and in many occasions provoke bad decissions. If it wasn´t so effective killers just wouldn´t over use it.
Idk the solution to this. I think the community should insist the devs on this aspect of the game. If they are not willing to change nothing, at least they should create a new game mode for people that desires another way to play, that is a lot of people indeed.
I play with them once every 1-2 months for 1 day, and this has been happening from the first game we ever played together. The only thing I can say about their playstyle is that they are not potatoes usually. Everyone has their bad games.
I never know if anyone's on ruin or on a gen and ect. or whether the killer is camping either. I lack that same information so its essentially just queing up with other people I know aren't potatoes beforehand and that's it.
That's all it takes is not potatoes.
Besides that, the majority of my games are solo with maybe some duo games sprinkled in. If the survivors know what's up then camping is really not effective.
If you're really so concerned about it, take kindred. That's the best you can do. You can't make your teammates not potatoes like I said. But we can't do things assuming the survivors are potatoes as that'll mess up the times where they aren't even more so than currently.
Its not inherently a solo que problem, its a bad teammate problem. You can't fix people being bad. You can potentially fix matchmaking, but currently this is what's happening.
It definitely happens more in solo que, that's definitely true. But that's more because SWF can just choose to not que up with potatoes imo.
SWF will be more effective, like they are with everything, as you said they get information much quicker, but its not out of reach for solos or anything.
The current solution is just for survivors to use the counters they already have. You got kindred, you got gen rushing. You would have hook signals if survivors could agree on what means what.
A potential future solution is you could give survivors a basic quick chat function. Press the "Y" key and a little menu appears and you just click something like "killer here" could work.
Making a different que would split the playerbase, which they don't want to do because que times are generally already long, and there's nothing to stop a camper from going into the non camp que, and camping anyway or killers will just not play that que and survivors wont find matches. Unless you mean a mode that forces both sides to play for fun, but idk how survivors would react to gens going significantly slower so the killer can also have fun and the crouch button being disabled.
-
@Artemisha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2449657#Comment_2449657
"That's not even remotely fair to the killer so they just don't follow the rules. A good first step would to make something that allows both sides to have fun, not only expecting survivors to be worried about. You want killers to stop camping and tunneling, stop slamming gens and t-bagging/clicking would be a nice start. You want hatch for a rough game, give the killer a sacrifice for a rough game".
U have mentioned somethings I already do. If killer has had a bad game but focused tried chases even gens were popping, more than once I just went to loop with him till time expired or he took me down. And I´ve given the kill to a killler that, being able to tunnel, has intentionally avoided. Or the medkit, etc. It´s a way to recognise his good manners.
it´s true that survs can´t pretend killer play fair and them go full repair or unhook someone on his face. I´d encourage both sides to play more deferential to the other side. We are not playing vs bots. And survs cant play surv if there is no killer and vice versa. I think trying other players have fun is also nice and necessary on a game. I have fully enjoyed playing against a Blight that was outplaying all the team and playing fair at the same time. At the end, the most skilled guy won, and I´m happy with that.
Ok thats good and thank you for doing that, I try to do the same. Let me clarify that in that paragraph you quoted I'm not singling out you specifically, I was using the general you, you yourself are one in a large community.
I'm trying to say that survivors as a whole need to do this if they really want to see a change. Like I said I also play to have fun way more often than not, but as long as that is the minority or players, its going to stay the minority of cases where that happens.
Would I like people to play more for fun? Yes absolutely, but I can't force them to nor is it reasonable to get mad because they don't especially in the current climate of the game. I can only encourage it and really think more people should encourage it as well. As is, way more survivors are encouraging the unfair mindset I outlined, hence the "entitled survivor" stereotype.
As currently is I play for fun, but I don't expect others to play that way because I understand that's how the community is set up.
But we can't change that with in game changes, the community as a collective needs to agree to do that. On that I think the chances are extremely slim.
I'll still say that needs to happen, but I really don't think its going to. But that chance is there, especially if we can push the message. We have had those before like with the big console thread that's happening, the colorblind push, or the "no NoED" movement that happened a long time ago, so who knows.
-
@Artemisha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2449630#Comment_2449630
This tactic is just an abuse for the Solo Q where average skilled killers can easily get a 4K. Let´s be honest. Killer mains know it perfectly.
This technique is not so effective against good SWF.
The tactic doesn't work against any good survivor team, swf or not. The only thing is potatoes are in red ranks so they get mixed in with everyone.
A team of good solos still have the advantage against killers. For example I have a group I play with where one of the players is deaf and no one talks to each other or co-ordinates anything. For all intents and purposes we are on the same ground as 4 solo players. When a killer is camping we all know what to do.
I've play solo as well and when I get matched with others who know what to do the result is the same
Like I said, the only ones falling for campers are people bad at the game or those who refuse to change their playstyle. Camping is not the issue the players are. I don't like it but I can't make people play the correct way or the way I want. I can only encourage.
You can't fix unskilled or unwilling with game changes, the community has to do that. As long as survivors are unwilling to work with killers to find a common ground, not happening.
-
@Ohnoes said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2448681#Comment_2448681
You don't need to camp them 4 minutes. You only need to proxy them into second hook state then tunnel them off.
If you get them to second state then leave they can get pulled off, its not like the killer can pull the survivor off. Even then that's still 60 seconds + whatever time they needed to chase that survivor and carry them to the hook. There' not a scenario I can think of where the survivors can't just do the gens away from the hook unless they 3 gen themselves, which is still their misplay.
Either the killers camping or not, they can't camp but also be far enough for you to get a safe save. If they're far enough for you to pull, they're far enough for you to take the aggro and the unhooked to sneak away. Otherwise you borked up your unhook.
-
@Artemisha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2449605#Comment_2449605
I don´t play to win as I just said. For me as important is the victory as the way u get it. If everybody would step un in front of the killer and do nothing, I think many killers would be able to understand the situation. And eventually, stop that "bully" strat. I can accept it like a situational strat but not as the way to go since the beggining.
If my teammates wanna report me for that they are entilted too. But I think we shouldn´t just play for winning. There is a training vs IA 100% Win rate for that purpose. I also encourage survs playing with fair killers to be congrat them and rep them +. Even if we have been demolished. Recognising and encouraging that mindset.
I don't play to win either, but that doesn't mean I act like everyone else should. You don't push your playstyle on other people just because that's how you like it. It'd be like someone saying "stop playing for fun play to win."
Playing to win is completely understandable and reasonable as long as its within the confines of the rules.
I don't like it either, but I understand that's just how it is, people are allowed to be competitive against other people, not just bots (although a better bot mode wouldn't hurt just sayin).
Unless you want to split the community between casual and competitive ques, its not happening, and even then there's no way to enforce people won't try hard in the casual que or use it for practice, so really there's no real solution afaik.
"I think many killers would be able to understand the situation. And eventually, stop that "bully" strat. I can accept it like a situational strat but not as the way to go since the beggining."
Understand what? That people don't like getting camped? They already know that, but it gets them wins so they keep doing it. So stop giving them wins. Its not a bully strat just because you don't like it. Otherwise doing gens quickly is a bully strat for the survivors. I don't agree with either of those.
Furthermore on that point, its not like survivors are running around "hey guys lets not do gens too fast killers don't like it." Both sides need to agree to either play for the fun of everyone or to play to win. Right now the majority survivor mentality is "We play to win but the killer has to play for our fun."
That's not even remotely fair to the killer so they just don't follow the rules. A good first step would to make something that allows both sides to have fun, not only expecting survivors to be worried about. You want killers to stop camping and tunneling, stop slamming gens and t-bagging/clicking would be a nice start. You want hatch for a rough game, give the killer a sacrifice for a rough game.
But that's not what (most) survivors want they just want their fun catered to, and that's not right. All these post I see complaining about camping, I never see them consider "yeah maybe we should go a little easier on killers as well."
-
@Artemisha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2449569#Comment_2449569
I don´t see it that way. My way of protest is not keep playing by his bully rules. Survivors fun is not hold m1. So I pass quick to next game hoping for a better killer, and report that guy on game and on his steam page if he has. I know this strat is not reportable but I do it to show my dissagreement with this abusive and cheap strat allowed and encoouraged by developers.
So because you don't agree with someone else playstyle you call them a "bully", shame, and report them? Sorry to say, but I think the real bully here isn't the killer.
Its not abusive or cheap, its just boring for you. Understandably so, but you're not entitled for the killer to play your way the same way they're not entitled to you playing their way.
I could report you for throwing the game and working with the killer for playing into their hands, but I don't. Survivors who play into it are just bad at the game and don't know any better or don't care about anyone else's match but their own. You're making the situation worse for your entire team by throwing yourself at the camper, and you're encouraging not only the camping behavior, but other survivors doing the same.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2449541#Comment_2449541
This whole 'just genrush' attitude is entirely theoretical. From solo play experience, it is far, far more effective than people give it credit, even if survivors know its counterplay. One thing that's often overlooked, for example, is the time it takes survivors to establish that the killer is camping. That alone helps push camping more towards the 2K+ level.
Genrushing doesn't break the game. And it's evidently not a balance issue, since at red ranks, killers average around 60% kill rate. Even with genrushing, killers and survivors are on fairly even footing.
Simply increasing gen times won't be enough either. Genrushing will still be 'a thing' and continue to be used as an excuse to camp and tunnel. So the only thing that'd accomplish is a further increase to kill-rates without any likelihood of increased match quality.
It shouldn't take a minuet and a half to establish camping or not, and that's just to break even with on hook time. They not moving away they're camping. From a competent team experience its not a problem at all, and we're not going to balance around incompetent survivors.
If you want to speed it up slap on kindred. But you can't fix bad at the game without breaking good at the game, and good at the game is already survivor skewed.
I disagree with that entire second paragraph, kill rates have been repeatedly been told to not be reliable by even the devs themselves for balance at all, unless you want to mega buff Nurse and nerf pig to oblivion. Gen times have been known to be a balance issue for a long time, is clearly evident if you get any decent group together.
In a team with good survivors, the killer gets 3-5 hooks before gens are done for the majority of the killer roster, I wouldn't call that "fairly even footing". I wouldn't call 3 gens in 1 hook or 3/5 compared to 1/12 "fairly even footing". The only thing keeping killer playable is that potatoes exist in high/red ranks. Most killers need at least 1-2 weak links in the survivors to be fine, with none it gets bad really fast.
This is not news, this has been known for a long time.
Genrushing will always be "a thing" that's not a problem. The problem isn't genrushing as a practice, its that its way too strong. Genrushing will always exist and so will tunneling as those are the most optimal ways to play either side by a lot. The problem is that they're not balanced to each other. A decent team gen rushing will outperform a decent killer tunneling or camping.
Camping should be weaker then genrushing, and it already is. It doesn't need a change. A positive change wouldn't hurt, but its not a pressing issue.
-
@Artemisha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2449541#Comment_2449541
Pharaprashing you: "If more survivors didn't yolo for the save and reward the camper, we'd see a lot less of it. Camping only works if survivors play into it. If I see a camper I'm doing gens, if my team does the same, we win easy. More survivors should do the same and camping would go down or only exist in low rank/skill matches"
U have perfectly described a boring game. Not everybody plays exclusively play to win. I play for having fun. Winning is the complement. I don´t want victories where I let my teammates die so I can selfishy scape. Maybe that´s your idea of a victory, I find it very shameful and honorless instead. Like hard tunnel victories. I prefer die than "winning" like that.
The thing is though, if more survivors did that then killer camping would go way down and you'd get more interactive matches. You're encouraging the very behavior you dislike.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2448693#Comment_2448693
That I disagree with because genrushing isn't nearly as damaging to gameplay as camping. I still want to see longer and more engaging games (and less pressure for the killer), but the root problem is camping. Unless that gets resolved, camping benefits directly from any gen slowdown, making camping a more effective and likely also more popular method.
I do have an idea for anti-genrush, but it just can't be implemented without a crippling nerf to camping.
I disagree, I find gen speeds a bigger issue as that actually causes an imbalance in the game, camping just annoys some people. Game balance comes before some people being salty imo.
Honestly if you nerf gen speeds and are worried about camping becoming stronger just increase hook time by the same % and the solution we already have still exist with the same efficiency as before.
While I agree, camping isn't ideal, I wouldn't consider it a big problem. I just play around it and expect my team to do the same. Whether I'm the one on the hook or not. I get more annoyed by my team not doing the gens while I'm strung up.
Camping doesn't need a "fix" because we already have one. As is, camping is a problem that can be solved right now by more survivors just playing differently, gen speeds are not.
Survivors are choosing not to use that solution and then complaining about their misplay.
You can't fix players deciding to play poorly.
If more survivors didn't yolo for the save and reward the camper, we'd see a lot less of it. Camping only works if survivors play into it. If I see a camper I'm doing gens, if my team does the same, we win easy. More survivors should do the same and camping would go down or only exist in low rank/skill matches.
Instead they reinforce camping by playing right into it. every camper that climbs is due to survivors letting them. Ironically part of that is due to the entitlement on the survivor side such as "wow you really didn't save me". You're not entitled to a save if its a bad decision for the team overall.
Its a team game, not a single-player one, sometimes you have to take the hit.
Don't get me wrong, if there's a way to encourage (not punish) killers not to camp more, then absolutely go for it, but its not a super pressing matter because we already have a easy and reasonable way to deal with it. People are just choosing not to do it because of peer pressure, entitlement, and bad habits.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2448681#Comment_2448681
But 2 kills is not a loss, either. It doesn't really take four minutes, at least not in usable game-time. Once the two minutes of the first takedown are over, the killer grabs the next, and once that one is on the hook, the game falls flat. The other two can leave, but are unlikely to get the rescue.
Point is, camping that aggressively should never have a chance at anything more than 1 kill.
True but you're original point was that its probably a victory specifically.
True it doesn't take 4 minuets, it takes longer because its not like you find the survivor instantly and they instantly appear on hook. That's just counting on hook time.
The point about how many kills a camp deserves is your opinion, and not one I entirely disagree with. I also think a tie is fine as nothing really happened in the game to say one side won over the other. However, if you're going to assert that camping should be limited to 1 kill, then gen rushing should be limited to 1 escape as well.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2448663#Comment_2448663
Yeah, they have enough time, -if they're already genrushing by the time the killer starts camping-. Otherwise the killer gets that kill and will have time left to secure another.
And if they have NOED, they could triple slug for a 4K.
Yeah that's 2 kills, that's not a victory.
Camping 2 survivors takes 4 minuets. That's not counting time to find, chase, down, then carry to the hook.
Doing 5 gens with just 1 survivor on each (3 on the first 3, 2 on the last 2) takes 2:40 not counting great skill-checks. Let alone with any time you had to double up on gens waiting for the first person to die and the second to begin getting chased.
You have more than enough time to do the gens and get out. The killer should only ever get more than 2 kills if the survivors played into the camp. Even with NoED you should be out before the 2nd person dies, so that doesn't really factor in as no one should be downed with it as the killer is camping.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2448517#Comment_2448517
The killer can opt to start sweating, but if the killer camps before the survivors have started genrushing, the killer probably gets a victory.
I mean the proper response to camping is to gen rush so I'm not sure about getting the victory. The survivors have enough time to pump out gens in the time it takes to camp. But in either case, like I said this applies to both sides.
The survivors can opt to start sweating, but if the survivors focus gens before the killer starts tunneling/camping, the survivors probably get the victory.
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/275059/sorry-but-i-need-to-tunnel-and-proxy-camp
I'm fine with these killer tactics, but if we're at 5 generators, do you really need to tunnel / camp? By no means am I saying you can't do it, but it's frowned upon if you do it when it's not necessary at all, especially in situations where you're not even close to losing the game.
It's just frustrating when one of my teammates DC, then the killer acts like we're going to get 5 generators done in 4 minutes and needs to wet the floor with their pool of sweat. I don't care if I still get sacrificed, but can I at least play the game before you get your 4K?
If the killer is at 0-1 hooks do we really need to split/focus on gens?
Its just frustrating when the killer get 1 hook and 3 gens pop and the survivors act like they're going to get 11 hooks in 2 gens.
Both sides are responsible for this problem, not just killers. If survivors want killers to sweat less they also need to sweat less. But (most) survivors don't wanna listen. They want to be able to slam gens while the killer isn't allowed to slam kills, and somehow they think that's fine.
Both sides need to choose optimal or not optimal, not optimal for me but not for thee.
I've seen killers choose to play nice. I have never heard/seen a survivor go "oh I'm going to stop working on this gen because the killer is behind. Oh they got no kills, here I'll sacrifice myself."
The double standards are strong unfortunately.
-
PH is just ok, against any competent survivor team he gets destroyed like most of the roster. If you really want a killer "worth learning" and if by that you mean strong against good teams, you're looking at like 3-4 killers: Nurse, Spirit, Blight, and maybe 1 or 2 others depending on who you ask.
"I never camp or tunnel I try to avoid that at all costs because I know first hand how annoying it is, so I'm unsure what I'm doing wrong."
Well if you care about winning that'll need to change unfortunately, at least on the tunneling part. Getting a player out the game ASAP is what the killer should be aiming to do. I know the feeling of not wanting to do it but you have to choose between being nice and really playing to win. I usually opt for the nicer rout myself, so ultimately whatever brings you the most satisfaction is what you should go for.
Camping is hit or miss depending on the team you're against, so its too risky (and boring) for my taste personally.
He is harder to play than most killers, even so he's not particularly strong. But he's fun once you get good at him. Biggest single piece of advice I could give is to try and mostly use your power when a survivor has no choice but to be in a certain place, like when they're stuck in an animation, or there's not really any room to move around. Otherwise its pretty easy to dodge and they have a audio warning you're ready to use it even if they can't see you. Although if you want to have more fun you can try for more risky shots.
-
@Terra92 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2444382#Comment_2444382
While I agree keys should be fixed sooner rather than later, I have to agree with that last sentiment. I often get the impression that the killers on this forum think they deserve a 4k every game, or there's something inherently wrong with the game balance.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2444451#Comment_2444451
With the hatch offering, you know where(likely) the hatch will be, though. AND you see its aura when available. If you haven't already killed anyone and you suspect there's a play for hatch afoot, you can stand by it and deny most of them the opportunity.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2444497#Comment_2444497
This forum is a horrible survey pool, you shouldn't take updoots on the forums with any grain of serious opinion. At best this is a very biased poll of people who can sometimes get around theor biases. But more often than not it's a bunch of kids whinging about what's fair and unfair in a video game designed around taking advantage of various circumstances.
Tell me you never played killer without telling me you never played killer
" AND you see its aura when available"
AFAIK killers have never had anything that lets them see the hatch aura. Playing killer in one game where hatch spawned would teach you this.
Survivors have maps and left behind though.
-
@Wedeguy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2445064#Comment_2445064
If they play to ruin one survivor's expierience every time on 5 gens because they're afraid of losing, while the survivors didn't show they gen rush or they're about to win yet, yeah i'll gatekeep. tunneling shouldn't be complained about if the killer feels he's going to lose but from the start of the game? nah that's just a really disgusting behavior.
Thats not the players fault though, the game is designed in a way where getting 1 person out ASAP is the best strategy. The same way finishing gens ASAP is the best strat and unfun.
They're not playing to "ruin one survivor's experience" they're trying to win (generally). Do you think survivors finishing gens before 1-2 hooks without switching gens is also playing to "ruin one killers experience"? Of course not. Both sides are just trying to do their objective effectively.
"They're afraid of losing" yeah people generally don't play the game to lose. Are survivors also afraid to lose because they focus on gens? If that's what we're calling trying to win, yup.
All my survivor games we all intend to tunnel out gens, we don't leave at 1/3 progress and go do another 0% gen just to be nice. Every survivor team tunnels gens from the start of the game unless they're new or exceedingly bad.
Telling killers "hey you can't play to win or play well until you know the other team does" is silly. That'd be like going to a sports game and telling one side "hey don't try to win until it looks like the other team is trying". That's asinine.
Both sides should be assumed to be trying from the start.
Trying to win is "disgusting behavior"? Then I guess everyone is disgusting on both sides.
Tl;dr If you view tunneling as a problem, its a game design problem not a player problem. So unless they rework the core hook/death system of the game, its unfortunately here to stay, and they're not doing that.
I don't like it, I generally don't do it, but I understand why its done.
-
@SpookySZN said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2426805#Comment_2426805
To be fair Slender Man isn't really that popular anymore and certainly had his five minutes of fame awhile back. When compared to the horror icons of the 80's a lot of the newer horror characters/creepy pasta don't really hold a candle to them as well.
Definitely give Hellraiser a chance though as it isn't like most of the other horror film killers the game has. Why not give all of them a go as the 80s icons in a lot of ways was the golden era of horror.
Well I don't think any of the killers added were "popular anymore" as the game is usually the first time I hear about them and they are all pretty old. The most popular one is probably Freddy afaik. Although that can depend on what exactly you mean by "popular".
"don't really hold a candle to them as well." That's all subjective to be fair. To me for example, Myers is just "guy with knife" whose hard to kill or something. Same with Jason. Leatherface is just "Ugly guy with Chainsaw". Personally near my bottom of interesting characters. Although that's probably partially because I didn't experience these as they came out.
Every horror character had their "5 minuets of fame". I've never even heard of Hell Raiser before this chapter. Same with Halloween and Bubbas movie.
Its cool to have these relics of horror as they were important for the genres history, but some more recent editions would be nice for those of us who the old ones don't really have an impact with since we don't really know who they are or experienced it the same way as those who grew up with it did.
There's no reason to keep it exclusively killers from way back when imo. Some more things from the current/recent generation of horror would be nice. At the least things that are at least somewhat still generally known, like the Xenomorph from Alien as that franchise still gets new content and Alien Isolation made a big splash when it landed.
For example, I'm not against Hell Raiser, but when was the last time it got content? 19 years ago. The original movie is 34 years old. Something more recently relevant would be nice is all.
-
Yeah. Every licensed killer released I'm just like "oh, an old killer whose movie I've never seen, but I see in Halloween shops".
Not to say its necessarily bad, but I would really like some more recent things. As you said they have a lot to pull from like Slenderman, ect.
Would really add to the "oh I know this one" effect that the others lack for those of us who are not ~30+ years of age or just didn't watch a lot of horror in our younger years.
Like people are raving about Hellraiser and I'm just here like "who? why this man got pins in his head?".
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2409347#Comment_2409347
That is incorrect, because the moment someone is dead, they can queue into the next match.
Camping is 120 seconds of not playing the game.
Survivors now have 1 hook state, now they can que into the next match immediately after getting hooked. Camping solved and survivors can always play the game.
3 gens pop in the first chase, 2 in the next, and the last survivor gets out during the 3rd.
-
I don't play a lot of games with battle passes, but I play a little Smite.
Smites battle pass skins come out later as buyable.
So no DBD is not the "only" game.
Regardless they said when they announced the rift the skins would come to the shop later. Your exclusives so far are the charms. Even on that afaik they never said the charms were going to stay that way forever.
-
@Aneurysm said:
I'm obviously happy to have less stridor spirit in my life but-
1) This doesn't address spirit's core issues
2) IW didn't really need a buff
3) There may only be like three of us who like using stridor on other killers or using the stridor-lite addons nurse, huntress and freddy have but we are out there
I was messing around with Stridor on other killers and getting ok results. Guess that's out the window now. Well another perk in the bin I suppose.
I agree, Spirit needed changes not the perk and IW was already really strong.
-
Depends. If I'm playing survivor very rarely, if I'm playing killer all the time.
-
@tommy_n8 said:
Thanks all :) I think this last match was bad luck he must've spawned right next to us and he was literally next to me in about 5 seconds and I was in a dead zone. I was like is this game okay lol? So he got tier 2 in like 20 seconds and we were all zoned by the corrupt gens so it was a bit pants!
"He got tier 2 in 20 seconds"
Yeah the that's about the norm. Myers gets to tier 2 pretty quickly unless they really mess up. Its the tier 3 that takes a bit. So about 10-20 seconds after finding a survivor is pretty common for T2. You have to play around his tier 3. Although if you're the one he pops the 99% on there's nothing you can really do, you're going down. Assuming they do it right and wait till they're on top of you to pop it.
All he has to do is look at you after all. Unless RNG really likes the survivor and gives them a chain of LOS blockers, he's stalking them.
In term of infinite T3, in chase your best bet is to safe drop the pallets and hope your team is on gens. Although since everyone has to play extra safe because of said T3, that's not always the case. If he's coming to your area try your best to stealth and avoid him finding you.
He gets chase buffs in T3 so keep in mind the extended lunge and faster vault if you do need to run him. Myers is pretty unfun and this add-on in particular is one of the worse offenders. If he gets it early enough its going to be a very rough game. Not unbeatable, but pretty strong.
-
@Zokenay said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2366140#Comment_2366140
If you know how Among Us works, you would realize how my example practically ends the game for the Impostor with absolutely no chance of winning, thats not a skill issue, thats basically a design flaw, but people dont play like that cause its not fun.
See but in that game everyone agrees to play for fun, where as in DBD the survivors say the killer should play for fun while they play to win.
Until survivors decide "nah I'm not gonna pop this gen since its unfun. I'm gonna work on another gen" they should stop asking killers to not tunnel. That's the killer working to finish one of their already progressed kill the same way survivors work to finish their already progressed gen.
Both sides could play for fun, but survivors don't want to. Its not only the killers decision its on the survivors too.
It is absolutely a design flaw in DBD.
-
Its fine, as in its an ok perk. The main takeaway is the aura reading so you know whose getting chased and where or if you need to find someone to heal you. Shows you where not to run the killer if you see someone on a gen and gives them a heads up if you have no choice but to go that way. It also shares the info with a teammate, so they can also use it for the same things.
There's better alternatives, but its fine in my opinion. Could stand to do something rather than deactivate if you're the obsession however. Another effect of some kind just in general is also not out of the question.
Just gotta be careful with speed boost, especially one that has unlimited time if you so choose, so I don't think that should be increased.
I run it commonly if I'm playing solo. Its good, but not great. Has room for improvement but doesn't need it.
-
@CashelP14 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2365269#Comment_2365269
Oh ok I understand now. Just completely misread it. Yes survivors can do that to other survivors which is quite toxic. Either way it seems like survivor is ultimately hit worse by someone being toxic, whether that be other teammates or the killer.
In terms of the game results yeah. Survivors can get hit worse, they just don't get hit as often.
In terms of the personal effect the killer is usually hit worse as they are usually already in a state of helplessness or losing when the survivors are being toxic, which magnifies those negative feelings as well as adding on the new ones from said survivors. Mixed in with how often it happens and we have a bad combo.
So in terms of game effects yeah survivor have a higher potential to literally not be able to play or go down due to it. In terms of mental effect, damage, or whatever you want to call it killer is hit much harder. Again, this is in general.
Its part of the reason why people tend to view killer as a lot more stressful and unfun. The toxicity hits much harder on that side due to circumstance and frequency.
-
This is my experience with the game over 3+ years, so yours might vary
Survivors are much more toxic than killers as someone who plays on both sides.
Its not as little as these "well there's 4 survivors" post are trying to make it seem either. Its not 1 survivor every game and 1 out of every 4 killers on average.
The majority of my games have toxic survivor(s) whether on my team or against. I only bump into an actually toxic killer maybe once every 2-3 days.
If we're talking post game chat then I can count on one hand the number of times a killer has spazzed out at me. But survivors? I lost count.
If you're one of those people who thinks camping, tunneling, ect. are toxic then to you it'll seem like its much more common, when in fact you're viewing things that aren't toxic as toxic. Imagine if survivor mind games were viewed as toxic "omg every survivors toxic", when really its just them using a tactic to extend chase.
Take out all the killers unfairly called toxic for camping, slugging, and tunneling and the "toxic" levels go way down. How often do you bump into a killer who just stands there hitting you on the hook? Not very often. How often do you get a killer who just stands over your body nodding? Again, not very often.
How often do you have survivors waiting at the gates to crouch spam? All the time. Then if you don't show up they stomp their feet and vault spam to try and get you over so they can do it, knowing the noise notification will get spammed and trying to annoy you. To try and be toxic they do something else toxic.
Kinda funny the survivors doing the actually toxic behavior like to slap on the "toxic" label on anything they don't like because they're sensitive and feel entitled for the game to go the way they want so they have fun and can continue to bully.
You try to say anything about it and their team will defend their toxicity or excuse it.
This even extends out of the game by survivors trying to shame killers into not running perks or playing a certain way just because they don't like it. Oh you use NoED, you're "scummy". Oh you tunneled "If you were good you wouldn't tunnel". Ect.
Obviously its not all survivors but its a lot of them unfortunately. To those who aren't, keep doing what you're doing and thank you for being a decent human being.
-
@CashelP14 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2364076#Comment_2364076
You hit them once then you can go past them or hit them twice and down them.
This comparison doesn't make sense.
"Survivors can body-block me" as in survivors can block another survivor in. Afaik you can't hit or down another survivor. They also said "Killers can also do this", which wouldn't make sense if they were already talking about killers.
Survivor toxicity also extends to teammates, not just the killer.
-
Nurse.
She actually gave me a headache when I played her. Not because she's hard, but the camera slam and wobble movement during fatigue combined with how frequent it is.
I guess its a form of motion sickness or something, which I don't normally have problems with. I'd rather have the top 80% of my screen go black than the current face-in-dirt camera dunk she gets.
-
@Predated said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2361609#Comment_2361609
They already send a fix as soon as they finished it, that doesnt mean the fix is online as soon as they send it to the servers. Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo need to test that fix on their test servers to make sure their hardware is not affected before it goes live.
So it likely will benefit console players, they are just waiting for the greenlight from all console companies to update the game on all platforms at the same time for crossplay. If there wasnt any crossplay, those updates would have been recieved slightly faster depending on which console you play on.
The fix doesn't come out until the 27th, the extended event ends on the 22nd. How does the extended event help console when the console base isn't getting their fix to make the game playable until after the event ends?
Even assuming this fix does work, its still after the event. So they have a point as the extension is only helping PC users and those who already didn't have problems.
"Hey we extended the event for you guys and have a fix coming!"
"Oh cool when's the fix?"
"After the event ends :)"
The games still unplayable for a lot for console players for the whole event, even extended. If the point of the extension was for the players who can't play the game right now to actually be able to join and not wait another year, then it failed.
-
@Boss said:
👏Empty👏gaps👏deserve👏BP!
That's a good idea. Could give out shards as well.
-
@Munqaxus said:
Not everything needs counterplay per se that's just one of the balancing points, it depends on the strength of the effect and what is needed to get it as well. Some perks have enough restrictions or their use case is specific enough where its not needed. Also this is more whataboutism, js.
"Counter Play" is not a balancing point for DBD, otherwise every perk would have counterplay. As I just pointed out, not every perk has counterplay.
How do you counterplay Open Handed as a Killer.
How do you counterplay Kindred as a Killer.
How do you counterplay Plunder's Instinct as a Killer.
This isn't what-aboutisms, these are direct examples of perks without counterplay.
It is a balancing point, its just not a balancing point for everything. As I stated, counterplay is one route we could fix with the perk, we could also change the conditions for its use requirement or rework the perk altogether.
It is whataboutism, "what about these other perks". The perk in question is Dead Hard not open handed.
Again, what do you do about DH for distance? Why is it fine in its current state? What about the perk makes it balanced? People have given multiple reasons why its not, what are some reasons that it is?
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2349031#Comment_2349031
Does Tinkerer have counterplay. Does Open Handed have counterplay. Does Plunders Instinct have counterplay.
"Lacking Counterplay" is obviously not an argument.
Monstrous Shrine is too strong. See how just saying something doesn't necessarily make it true.
Not everything needs counterplay per se that's just one of the balancing points, it depends on the strength of the effect and what is needed to get it as well. Some perks have enough restrictions or their use case is specific enough where its not needed. Also this is more whataboutism, js.
Is DH strong enough that counterplay can be a valid requirement? Yes as it directly effects the chase and can lead to a huge increase in chase time.
Is DH difficult enough to achieve its requirements such that equals its benefits and/or is it hard enough to make use out of to make it balanced? No as its requirement is basically "play the game" and it usage case is "press E".
Tinkerer requires the gen to be almost done and for the killer to leave whatever they're doing to make use out of it. Open handed requires other perks to be of any use and does nothing on its own. Plunders requires you to take time out of your match to find a chest and roll the RNG that you get something you want.
Additionally, for tinkerer you can use it against the killer once you know they have it. Ok gens at 70% leave it, make the killer waste their time and go back once they leave.
What do you do if you know the survivor has Dead Hard? You need to injure them and you need to chase them, both of which work right into the perks favor.
These are some of the reasons the perk is unbalanced. "Lacking counterplay" is an argument as that's one of the balancing points and its not meeting the other ones either. See how saying something "isn't an argument" just because you disagree doesn't make it true?
I didn't just say "lacking counterplay" I also said its too easy to use for how strong it is and its lacking any real requirement as well..
I guess Spirit is fine to you since no counterplay isn't an issue apparently?
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2348949#Comment_2348949
So you obviously feel Dead Hard should be nerfed. What makes Dead Hard need a nerf?
In short, its too strong for how easy and readily available it is to use and while lacking counterplay.
-
@Munqaxus said:
It amazes me that all of these players wanting a nerf to a perk yet can't give a valid reason why it should be nerfed.
Here are the arguments..
- Can't counter Dead Hard for distance - The other exhaustion perks give 2 to 3 extra seconds of distance without being counterable. Plus there are so many perks that don't have counters anyway, so it's just a bad argument.
- Dead Hard doesn't require skill - The people who say this haven't ever play survivor. Dead Hard is probably 1 of the top 10 survivor perks that do require skill. Blast Mine anyone? Plunder's Instinct, Ace in the Hole, Open Handed, Kindred, the list goes on forever.
- Its a second life stage - This is just straight out dumb. That would make everything that makes a killer miss a "Second life Stage". Drop a pallet and the killer swings, 2nd life stage. Jump through a window and the killer swings, 2nd life stage. Sprint Burst away right when the killer swings, 2nd life stage.
- I-Frames - Well different perks are different. Dead Hard has I-Frames but has 2 less seconds of speed, it's a trade-off.
- Dead Hard has no downside - You have to be injured to use it. You can't use it against one-hit downs when healthy. Another really bad argument.
- Press 'E' to Win - Everything is a Press "So-and-So" to win. Sprint Burst is press "shift" to win. Lithe is press "spacebar" to win. This is just another absolutely bat-sh*t crazy argument. They are using this argument because they actually don't have an argument.
- Those perks have restrictions and conditions and we're not talking about those perks so they don't excuse this one
- Every perk requires some degree of skill to get use out of. NoED needs you to hit the survivor. However DH is down there with the low skill perks if you're using it for distance. DH to dodge? Yeah thats a little skillful. DH for distance? not at all. In either case, skill is not really a main point to nerf something imo. Is it too strong is the question. The skill isn't really the problem, its how easy it is to meet the requirement and how strong it is, which leads to it requiring low kill.
- Again, DH for distance is the problem not DH to dodge. So the killer wouldn't swing so all these "and the killer swings" points are moot which is all of them. Also yeah everything you mentioned is essentially a second chance for the survivors. The problem is this one requires no resource nor risk as its a poorly designed perk and its contributing to the over abundance of second chances survivors have.
- The I-frames are probably fine.
- "being injured to use it" isn't really a downside. You're going to be injured in the match no matter what happens. Even if you get 1 shot when you get pulled off the hook or picked up you'll be injured. The requirement is basically "play the game", which isn't a requirement. 1 hit down killers are also very few and the 1 hit down perks have restrictions. In the vast majority of your games DH is essentially free.
- Yes but other perks have restrictions and requirements. SB requires you to walk or risk not having it and if the killer leaves and just comes back after you wont have it. Lithe needs a vault nearby and on certain maps that's not an easy thing to come by, as well as restricting your pallet plays because if you fast vault a pallet it'll activate regardless if you want it to or not. Sure every perk has a situation you can be it to get use out of it, but as stated earlier DH is essentially just "play the game" and its very strong for such an easy to meet condition as well as being completely on demand.