MrPenguin
MrPenguin
About
- Username
- MrPenguin
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,543
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Jallybwan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2280915#Comment_2280915
This whole "punished for spamming" thing seems to miss something - we want Billies to be constantly using their saw. It's a lot more interactive than W+M1, so we want to push newer Billies toward sawing more than M1-ing. Billy was most definitely one of the most balanced killers in the game before the nerfs, so there's no real reason not to.
Well, if you want the saw to be constantly used it can't be as strong as it is. You can't say "yeah we constantly want to one-shot, flick round corners, break pallets, and cross the map all the time with no limits." Blight has a lot of limitations and he's very strong, and his power doesn't even one shot. So would you be ok losing something else? Like ok the saw can't break pallets now or hit through windows or something? It just does too much to be unlimited.
"Billy was most definitely one of the most balanced killers in the game before the nerf"
That depends on how strong you consider "balanced".
IIRC, I constantly saw him toted as the 2nd-3rd best killer (or at the very least top tier after Spirit got added) and one who could deal with very co-ordinated teams. So if that's what you want the killers to be than sure. I think that's just a little bit much. I would like killers around the Huntress Level.
To me, he was just a little over the top and needed to be toned down.
I understand that it probably went a little too far, so I'm not opposed to improving him a bit. Its the how that's a problem. Completely removing overheat and that's it would be too much. He's still good/decent, he just needs some help to deal with the better teams.
@Jallybwan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2280945#Comment_2280945
I think the thing is, against a good survivor in a decent setup, his chainsaw requires an incredible amount of timing and mechanical finesse to land a hit. It's incredibly likely that you'll need multiple attempts to land a hit like that - and that is the significant downside. There hasn't ever been a Billy in existence that can just perfectly line up a flick every single time they try, especially since there's the added survivor counterplay of moving away from the loop/outside your general pathing to make the Billy whiff. Billy was already punished enough for missing, even with how theoretically strong his power could be.
Same reason most people hate Spirit more than Nurse, even though Nurse's power is to ignore pathfinding entirely. The amount of skill it takes with Nurse to get to the point of having exactly zero counterplay is more than the skill of any Nurse main I've ever seen. Even SupaAlf, a 5k hour Nurse main who used to play on console, gets juked quite frequently.
Billy is the same. His power is ridiculously strong on theory, but in practice, there exists no Billy skilled enough to justify Overheat being a mechanic.
"Billy was already punished enough for missing"
I mean, kind of but not really. The problem is if he missed he could just try again and again. Since his chainsaw one-shots, unless he tried like 8+ times or something he would down you ages faster than most killers. If you're trying that much you're probably not a good Hillbilly or got screwed by map RNG/design (which is a whole other issue). Then on top of that you had his map mobility.
From what I understand, most people aren't ok with Nurse because she's hard, they're ok with her because you rarely see one, let alone a good one. I believe most people agree Nurse is fundamentally broken and uncounterable, but since it only one every so often its not a priority. A good Nurse will win. Not even a perfect one, just good. If Nurse was getting played all over the place like Spirit, people would be complaining. If every killer was Nurse/Spirit levels we would have a problem, that should not be our balance point, Nurse and Spirit are not ok balance wise.
@Jallybwan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2281009#Comment_2281009
Okay, then don't change the debris at all and just remove Overheat. While all you said is technically true, I disagree that any of it should be true. Billy's chainsaw had enough limitations before Overheat, apart from maybe being able to facecamp too well. (And if that's the issue, then Overheat should build up quickly by revving, but dissipate completely once you start a sprint. Wouldn't this solve the problem of facecamping? Also, Bubba.)
"Okay, then don't change the debris at all and just remove Overheat" Ok so all the problems I lined out before still exist.
I don't know what you consider "enough limitations", I felt like it didn't really have any besides "don't miss too much", and I didn't feel like it was particularly hard to land, especially compared to the payoff.
For the record, I don't see camping as a balance issue. No its not fun, but its not unbalanced. I was just saying it helped with the camping concern that was brought up.
-
@Jallybwan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2280709#Comment_2280709
Here's the thing. It's less about compromise and more about what ends up with Billy being objectively balanced, and fun to as many people as possible. Everyone has different conceptions of fun, so the approach is to appeal to the largest amount of people - something old Billy did very well, provided they weren't a shitter Billy with no one escapes instasawboozlefury. Which says more about the player than the killer. That's not to say the minority opinion should be completely discarded; it's healthy to listen to people who didn't like playing Billy and try to find out why. But if there's a conflict that can't be resolved through reasoned discussion, then on something subjective like fun, it's just logical to follow the majority. Especially when the alternative is nerfing a killer almost everyone considered balanced, even if they didn't personally enjoy going against him.
The current Overheat doesn't really punish your map mobility. If you overheat during a sprint, you keep going anyway - there is nothing about overheat that hurts his map mobility, only stuff that hurts his flick potential. So I think we should revert the Overheat mechanic entirely, then add some more debris to make navigating the map harder with his limited steering. Hell, they already did that not long ago - there is way more stuff in the way on most maps, like trees and random rocks or tiles, that limit you to maybe getting across half the map in a single sprint. Do you think that'd be fair?
While not directly effecting his mobility, it does so indirectly because the player has to make a choice of "do I sprint or save this for the next chase." Its the same reason why Legions power is bad for map mobility, you won't have it when you get to the survivors and need it.
The problem with the debris issue without the overheat is he can just stop, take a few steps to the side, and sprint again. You'd have to make sure theres so much debris that he needs to spend a significant enough time to get around it all. At which point whats the point of even having it outside of chase.
While in a vacuum and on paper, sure I don't see a problem with this, you'd have to do this one every map and then you have to worry about how this effects every killer that needs LOS. Like Huntress would become a nightmare to play and all the stealth killers would be buffed a lot (which tbf honestly they could probably use). Its the much better option to limit/change him directly someway than to change the whole game around him imo.
Fair to him? Maybe. Fair to other killers? No.
-
@glitchboi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2280915#Comment_2280915
Punished for spamming.
Soooo you're saying Billies should be punished for using their power the way they want to? I understand camping but not this.
Also, if that's the case, try it! Play Flickbilly!
I'm saying he shouldn't have no significant downside or cooldown to his power considering all it does. I think a cooldown so you can't spam it when it one-shots and has great mobility is fine. Also on the camping note, yeah it helps with Billies who used to camp with their chainsaw revved all the time.
If you can land your chainsaws and flicks its not really a problem, as you wont need to spam it.
I could go play flickbilly, or I guess more specifically Doom Engravings sure, but I'm not sure what that would accomplish. I already know what it does and I'm fundamentally not against the overheat even after using it. That's not going to change because I charge up .3 seconds slower in return for 20% more speed.
-
@glitchboi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2280853#Comment_2280853
RIP a fun part of Billy.
Not just that anyways.
I wouldn't say RIP, its not like you instantly overheat. You just get punished a little harder, so you have to be a little more careful. Again, punished for spamming.
Doom engravings just changes your charge time from 2.5 to 2.8, or 12%, its not like it makes him overheat twice as fast or something.
I'm just saying if you don't like playing with doom engravings, then don't use doom engravings.
-
@glitchboi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2280791#Comment_2280791
Try playing Flickbilly with engravings.
Then don't play flickbilly with engravings. If its only with that add-on that its a problem, that sounds like an add-on problem.
-
@M1MASTER said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2275730#Comment_2275730
The overheat doesn't punish you for "spamming" the chainsaw, it punishes you for even trying to use it in the first place. What you're describing really had to do with the add-on stacking which was very easy to do considering that even his low rarity ones were pretty good. Having a fast charge while also recover almost instantly was the problem, not the fact that the chainsaw didn't have any cooldown mechanic.
I don't understand, how does it punish you for just using the chainsaw in general? it only matters if you max the meter, its not like your chainsaw progressively gets worse as you heat it up. You only overheat if you're spamming the chainsaw. So doesn't it punish you for spamming?
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2276543#Comment_2276543
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2276408#Comment_2276408
A mori has the power to shape the game, which is something a key cannot do.
An old mori could come into play very soon, usually due to tunneling someone of the hook. That turned a game, designed to be 4v1, into a 3v1 before it would normaly happen, often before more than one or maybe two gens were done, thus changing the game dynamic in favor of the killer. From the moment of its use, the mori itself determined the outcome of the game in most cases, turning a game into a 3 or 4kill that without it might not have been happening.
Now look at the 2 extreme cases of a key, a 1 and a 4 key escape.
For a 1 escape to happen, all other survivors have been dead already, so up to the point the key actually comes into play, it was a normal play, and afterwards, its just over.
the same is true for a 4 escape (outside of a few rare cases where killers have and endgame build around blood warden and such), the key only comes into play after a normal game, when all gens are done, and the game is close to its end anyway.
Unlike a mori, the key didnt change the games here in any way.
The only part where a key can change the game is a 2 and 3 people escape. But again, the key doesnt shape these games, because gens still need to be done, so even in those cases (at least 4 gens done and one player dead or at least 3 gens done and 2 survivors dead) the game is further progessed normaly than it would be when an old mori was involved. Also, keys dont have the power to turn a lost game into a win, they just allow you to escape while still losing.
Thats why i dont think they are comparable. Old mori would best be compared with old brand new part, where (at least so i have heard, i didnt play back then) you could basicly skip doing gens and derailing it the same way.
Also, we know keys only account for about 3% of escapes, but i would bet that old moris accounted for a higher kill rate than that.
So summit: Old moris shaped games early on by forcing it into a state it didnt belong to, while keys only do something in the end when most of the game is already done.
"often before more than one or maybe two gens were done"
I disagree, the first chase usually results in 3 gens done unless you got potatoes.
"Now look at the 2 extreme cases of a key"
Lets look at a middle example since that's more realistic than extremes. Lets say you want a 3 man key escape, you just need to do 1 more. Hell you could 3 gen yourself and get out with your 2 teammates. 3 man escape is a win.
"keys dont have the power to turn a lost game into a win"
Again, 3 people out is a win, when it could have otherwise not been. So I disagree with this as well. Even if it doesn't force a win it can force a tie at 3 gens done, which are pretty much guaranteed to the survivors. Again, unless they're potatoes.
"the game is further progessed normaly than it would be when an old mori was involved."
Involved maybe, but the problem isn't necessarily when the item/offering started effecting the game, its the "ok I'm doing well, I killed a survivor, I got a 3 gen, 2 of the others are on death hook -screen fades to black, results screen pops up- annnnd I lost." the same way before it was "ok we're doing well, thats just second hook, aaaaaand there's a mori."
"the key doesnt shape these games, because gens still need to be done"
And chases still need to be won by the killer twice for each mori, one to hook, one to mori. Keys can definitely shape the game, your priority becomes to kill the key holder, not just go after any survivor because if you let the key holder live they'll just get 3 man win early before the killer gets much use out of their main power point of 1-2 gens. Even then it doesn't do much because someone else can just pick it up.
"you could basicly skip doing gens and derailing it the same way."
Yeah like skipping the last 1-2 gens to force a win or tie, like a key does.
"while keys only do something in the end when most of the game is already done."
In any game with competent survivors, most of the game takes place around 1-2 gens. When can you use a key to force an outcome that's not the killer winning when they could have? At 1-2 gens. Again, the problem is it can just change what could have easily been a win into a loss or a tie.
Keys don't really have any counter the same way mori's didn't. Except now Mori's are trash and keys are still strong as ever, scratch that, stronger with the Franklins and Mori nerf as there's nothing to do about them. Was a mori nerf needed? Yes! But we also needed a key nerf that we never got.
-
@Jallybwan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2275730#Comment_2275730
Getting good results by holding a button? Hmmm, that sounds familiar!
Flickbilly is definitely more than holding a button, and his chainsaw isn't exactly helpful in a chase if you don't flick with it - unless the survivor gets caught WAY out of position, in which case Bubba does the job better anyway.
If you want to bring "I also didn't find Billy fun nor did anyone I knew personally" into it, then I raise you pretty much most of the rest of the DBD community. We miss him, man. I'm sorry you didn't have fun playing against him, but a lot of us loved a good flickbilly match.
"Getting good results by holding a button? Hmmm, that sounds familiar!"
Are you talking about survivors on gens? Because if so yeah, that's also dumb imo.
Yeah Bubba will down a survivor easier in the open, but he doesn't have the map mobility Billy has. Honestly that was my biggest gripe with him, just being all over the map as soon as the survivors did anything, especially if you had tracking perks like Tinkerer or something. If you want the chase potential back then sure, but I don't want him all over the map all the time like before. As for how you'll do that, I don't really know.
I just disagree with him being fun before, and with no one I know or meet having any fun with him either it was always so strange to me to hear these people on the forums that supposedly had fun against him and makes it hard for me to understand that viewpoint. I understand that's subjective though, I'm just sharing my experience.
Ideally a middle ground would be reached that both sides are at least ok with, both those that liked and disliked him. If one side wants flicks back then alright, but we don't want him all over the map all the time, just as an example. Again, as for how you'll do that, I don't really know without some form of cooldown (which is what overheat basically is).
Its all about compromise imo.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2275739#Comment_2275739
Yes, they are seen as equivalent because a lot of people dont understand the fundamental difference between the two.
What don't they understand exactly that leads to them being incomparable? They both ends games early and skip part of their sides objectives.
One lets you kill survivors since thats the killers objective, one lets you escape because thats the survivors objective, both end the objective prematurely.
What's this fundamental difference?
-
@fr0sty1223 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2275200#Comment_2275200
Moris aren’t what I’m talking about
Well no one was talking about camping, tunneling, or NoED until you decided to.
The response was fair to your "You don’t nerf one sides toxic mechanic without nerfing the other sides too", especially since we're talking about keys, and Keys and Mori's were/are seen as equivalent for their respective sides.
You know what isn't seen as having much of anything to do with keys by the vast majority? Tunneling, camping, and NoED.
-
@Zokenay said:
I remember going against Billy pre rework and it was just a nightmare, the guy had good map pressure on top of having an insta kill he could spam over and over, it simply was too much.
While the rework clearly weakened him, you cant deny it was needed, maybe tweak his addons, but allowing him to go back to being able to use his chainsaw how much has he wanted shouldnt return
This. I also didn't find Billy fun nor did anyone I knew personally.
He was just everywhere. Doing a gen? brrrrrrr. Got a save? brrrrrrrr. on the gate? brrrrrrr. Trying to heal? brrrrrr. In chase brrrrrrr. Spamming one shots all the time.
I don't want "haha chainsaw go brrrrrr" back again. He's still a very strong killer (imo), he just can't spam the entire match anymore. With a power that one-shots, breaks pallets, and lets you zoom at the same speed as Blight for strong map pressure with no requirement besides holding a button, I think that's fair.
Old Billy wasn't balanced. His current add-ons might need touching up, but don't bring back spam Billy.
-
@IronKnight55 said:
It's best to just upgrade to the newest consoles or buy a very good PC (that's what I did). Optimization probably isn't going to happen on toaster
computers or old consoles.
I have a good PC, but I'm not grinding years of work again and losing exclusives with no way to get them back, nor am I gonna pay hundreds of dollars to play a game that should run perfectly fine, and was said to be getting improved, on the consoles it was launched on.
DBD is not graphically intensive nor complicated and big. There's no reason it shouldn't run great on the consoles we have right now.
If they're not gonna optimize, give us cross progression at least. We should get it anyway, but c'mon.
That's also assuming switching will fix the issue as well, people are reporting issues on PS5 and Mid-high PCs as well. The optimization needs to be improved.
-
Yeah I'm not grinding all over again, that's way too much time investment to do over. Not to mention all the exclusive cosmetics and stuff that I couldn't get again even if I wanted to.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2265839#Comment_2265839
I see a lot of tier lists have him with characters like nurse and huntress, low tier
Yeah same here. I was honestly surprised when I saw how many people don't like him as well the first time I saw it. I guess the ones that do are just more vocal/popular or something. There seems to be a healthy amount on both sides and in-between.
I can't stand Myers either, neither can my entire friend group lol.
-
Billy is still strong
Myers is underrated and stronger than GF (although both are aren't strong killers)
Good Nurses being essentially unbeatable (outside of tournament squads) just because she's "hard to play" isn't fine. Just tolerable since its infrequent.
Lucky break is strong.
Pyramid Head is fun to go against.
-
Yes. Giving her better/any counter-play when she currently has little to none is a nerf, but she needs it.
-
@Marik13 said:
Imo, entitled survivors are the ones who think along the lines of "I've just been unhooked, and I'm gonna run in the direction that the killer is in, and he's not allowed to touch and re-hook me cus then he'd be tunneling. He should just let me heal in front of him and get away." That, is an entitled survivor. Someone who thinks that I should give them a free pass because they played stupid.
Now as for entitled killers. They're the ones who think that they're always entitled to getting 4Ks. "Survivors are not allowed to run DH and DS. That's too many second chance perks that allow them to get away. If they didn't run those then I'd have gotten the 4K! Wow this survivor looped me for three minutes. If it wasn't for all these god pallets in my way I would have downed them already."
Basically you're entitled if you think that the other side should go easy on you and not capitalize off of your mistakes to win. If you play bad and play dumb, then you deserve to lose. The other side shouldn't coddle you. It's a killer's job to kill, and a survivor's job to survive. Both sides have cheap tactics that they can use, and all of those tactics are valid and can be countered in game if played correctly.
Pretty much this.
For me personally I also include those who don't change how they play or their build, they expect the devs or other players to change things to fit their playstyle or preference. Like, they don even try to see if its actually too much.
Shamers can fall into this category. Like use one of the many base-kit, perks, or item counters to something? Nah lets shame the killer for a it and not change our playstyle at all because obviously it can't be our fault. Things like BBQ or totems (NoED) are some common examples.
There's a difference between criticizing something because its too much/strong and being upset because its not what you want or you don't like it and trying to push that on others.
They only care about their own fun and expect others to conform and if they don't they try to make them, shaming or otherwise. How dare anyone ask them to change anything, everyone/everything else must change for them. That type of attitude.
Its a bit of a case by case thing, because if something is too much (like Spirit) it should be called out. But complaining because you can't be bothered to find totems or use anything to help is another story.
-
"it reveals just how little agency most killers in this game"
This is why I want it to stay. Maybe they'll actually do something about it if it shows strong enough. Until then I'm mostly playing survivor.
-
I'm assuming the survivors are playing well, which means they're all spreading out. Legions power becomes just short of useless in this situation and basically is just an M1 killer who stuns himself.
I'm also considering with add-on since that's the vast majority of games, and the other killers add-ons will at least help while spreading out just shut down legion regardless of add-ons.
-
@Adeloo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2255682#Comment_2255682
i guess it could be visible if they reveal him ? If they reveal him they already know he is there ^^ Could be like showing only for 3-4 seconds like a benefit for actually counter him ? Because when you say it like that you are actually right ;)
That or revealing him remove all the stalking he had on you ? or 50% of it ?
Yeah that would solve the stealth issue.
Although idk about removing his stalk, he's already one of the weaker killers, we don't need to make him weaker.
-
@SOMENINJANAME said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2253061#Comment_2253061
I like this. It would make him even more stealth reliant, but would give him a faster-paced playstyle.
"[NERF] Let the survivor see their own stalk bar"
How are you going to stealth if everyone knows the moment you start stalking them? That'd kill his stealth aspect. Unless you just want to get a basic M1 and that's it.
-
@Adeloo said:
honestly the change i would make to him :
[NERF] Make it easier to reveal him
[NERF] Let the survivor see their own stalk bar
[BUFF] Increase power recovery base + instant recovery upon downing an exposed survivor
"[NERF] Let the survivor see their own stalk bar"
That'd just let people know he's on them immediately and make it impossible to stalk anyone without them booking it if they pay any attention.
-
@NoOneKnowsNova said:
She needs a nerf to her power. As much as I wish the "solution" of giving more info to survivors would fix everything, I think it would do barely anything so instead she should have less info.
I agree. Even if you know she's phasing, that alone wont do much. It'd only stop the standing still mind games. She's still really fast and the guessing would be the same on the rest of her power usage.
Kinda like when people thought giving her collision would fix everything and it barely mattered.
Her power has too many upsides. Fast, true invis, lingering speed + lunge, strong add-ons, no fatigue, no tell, low cooldown, lethal, easy tracking, and decent startup. Its just too much when put together.
-
I don't have problems breaking him out at all. I wonder why so many people are having issues.
-
I don't like any of these lol. I would say nurse but the only time she's fun is if the person isn't that good with her, but not horrible.
-
"Is it because Survivor side is too easy? Are they trying to show off?"
Both, among other things like survivor being boring a lot of the time, so they try to find ways to entertain themselves, usually at the expense of the killer. Holding M1 and run in circles to win gets pretty boring after all. A new objective or something to add to their gameplay should really be added. Its not like the killers who all have different powers and such to spice things up.
Its influenced by certain content creators and of course people want to especially show off in front of their friends as well. The survivor culture is just very cocky and toxic unfortunately.
I don't get it personally, I can't really have fun being a jerk just for the sake of it.
-
The problem isn't the doors, its the EGC timing. It would be better if it triggered on the last gen being powered if gate regression isn't going to be a thing.
As is now survivors are effectively in complete control of when the timer starts with no real risk to them.
Outside of fringe cases like the killer giving up or going for a blood warden EGC strat, but I those are so far removed from the normal gameplay its not a significant consideration.
So in a way, yeah 99% doors is a problem since it lets them choose whenever they want the EGC to start.
-
As a survivor it really doesn't bother me. I understand that it is the most efficient tactic in the game due to the games design, and that's not the killers fault.
I see it on the same level as survivors focusing gens, which is done in every match unless you get immersed/potato survivors. Both are annoying for the other side, but both are the optimal way to win. I blame the game design/balance more than the players.
As for camping, I don't get bothered by the camp, I get bothered by my teammates not taking the free win and doing the gens while I'm camped. Like if I'm going to hang here and do nothing at least make it worth my time.
-
I play both sides and in my experience, definitely survivor.
-
Idk about "numerically" but they should be on the stronger side, so I picked this one.
They should change up the killer power/gameplay in some way and also be worth running, especially with how expensive they are. An iridescent should have a big impact on the match, but not make the killer OP.
Strong and interesting is the way to go imo.
-
Console doesn't impact survivor too much. The main thing that can cause and issue is frame drops.
Turning your camera in chase also takes longer to look back and turn back around which can lead to running into things or losing the killer sometimes, but not usually in my experience.
I think is mainly a culture thing, console players are generally more casual from what I've seen.
-
@Karao_Ke said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2224808#Comment_2224808
There is no advantage as the killer just de-pips from doing that anyway. The only reason why someone would do that is to ruin somebody else's day, and if you don't see a problem with that then I don't know what to say.
Hey that rhymed.
"There is no advantage as the killer just de-pips from doing that anyway."
You're assuming that killer counts a pip as a win or de-pip as a loss.
Although now that you mention piping, would getting camped also lower your MMR whenever that comes out? If yes ouch.
A possible solution would be to rate the survivors as a team rather than the individual since, you know, they're a team lol. Then even if you're camped you can safety or whatever with the time you buy your teammates. If that applies to BP as well as it would help in that department. Might also help with those that just try to sacrifice themselves if they even think they might be getting camped.
-
"Bond is a great to get healed by teammates"
See that's what you would expect, but I've had so many teammates just refuse to heal me even though I'm right next to them and they're not doing anything productive. Too many potatoes to bring a perk to rely on them healing you.
That Claudette was just a potato, as others have said the perk itself is fine if not on the more efficient side when used correctly.
-
Both sides should stop hating on the other. Thank you for being one of the non-toxic ones.
I think part of the problem is that toxic survivors feel safe, if not encouraged, to act the way they do by the community. The other survivors either join in or support the other toxic player. Hell, even the devs said "don't worry, you can still T-bag" when they did the animation rework. Toxic streamers (even some fog whisperers so I hear) are also a large source of toxicity as their followers monkey see monkey do and just spread it more. If the fog whisperer thing is true, we really shouldn't have toxic players basically endorsed by the team behind the game.
If we want the game to change on the toxicity regard we really need to start viewing toxic behavior as not ok as a community and call out people when they're being toxic including on our own teams. On both sides.
I really don't understand why survivors are just allowed to be toxic the majority of the time and for the most part no one really steps up and says "yeah you shouldn't be doing that" besides the killer(s) on the receiving end.
Unfortunately I really doubt that's going to happen 😔 Thank you being one of the ones to speak out about it as well.
-
@Spyonme said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2220572#Comment_2220572
but they only buffed killer and nerfed surv over the years (beside the mori change)
games like darksouls attrack people because of the difficulty and thats honestly the same with surv
since SWF actually only make up 5% of the survivor player base and thats stats you can actually proove with real reasoning
"also ive made a poll that showed there are more killers on dbd than there are survs" the last time i checked it was nearly 50% 50% considering the comments with and slight head start on killer about a year ago
things change remember that was a year ago before surv got even more difficult to play
One of the devs mentioned that survivor players make up around 80% of the player base on DBD aka the majority. We'd realistically need ~1 killer for every 3 survivors because survivors can re-queue the moment they are are out of the game but the killer has to stay until the very end
your not stronk at maths are ya? If out of 5 people one person is the killer how much killers are there in percentages?
5 = 100%
1 = 20%
4 = 80%
this means there might be even more killers but the stats aren't able to show based on how the game works
polls are not actual evidence there are too many factors that manipulate the outcome as i already explained
but yeah no the killer queues took around 20min in comparison to waiting 5 min max as surv so thats not true what you said
"I think it'd be much more likely that more killers would be on the forum to complain about a big survivor buff than survivors"
quite a negative view on things and contradicting to the part u said killers stopped playing and wouldnt that be even more so if there was a huge survivor buff? put that together with killers being buffed so they come back and survs getting nerfed all the time but you still nearly only see killers complaining and your answer would be a clear no you are wrong about nearly all you said.
- "but they only buffed killer and nerfed surv over the years"
That's untrue. Just to throw out a few more recent examples, The Game map got buffed for survivors. Small game got a buff. Lucky Break got a buff. Freddy got Nerfed. Huntress add-ons got nerfed.
Even if survivors got nerfed more that doesn't necessarily mean they're weaker than killers now. To show this in a simple way, if surv was 50 and killer was 5 and surv got nerfed 15 but killer got buffed 15, well now surv is 35 and killer is 20. Did survivor get nerfed? Yes. Did killer get buffed? Yes. Are Survivors lower? No.
Whether thats actually the case or not is up to the individual, I'm not trying to convince you survivors are stronger right now (even if I believe they are), I'm just pointing out saying "but survivors got nerfed" even if true, doesn't mean much unless you can prove they got weaker than killers. Yeah Spirit got nerfed and got collision, did she get weaker? Yes. Did she become weak? No. She's still unbalanced. Survivors can still be unbalanced.
- "since SWF actually only make up 5% of the survivor player base and thats stats you can actually proove with real reasoning"
I didn't argue how many SWF groups there are, but I would like to see this supposed proof out of curiosity.
- "One of the devs mentioned that survivor players make up around 80% of the player base"
I haven't seen/heard said claim, but afaik we also don't know what the devs consider a "player" of either category in their data. If I play killer once am I now a killer player? If I play killer 1/10 games am I still counted as a killer player? I honestly almost never trust the dev stats because they make them so vague or broad that they don't mean much most of the time.
- "your not stronk at maths are ya? If out of 5 people one person is the killer how much killers are there in percentages?"
I never brought up percentage except in the one case talking about your poll because it was clearly shown and was a point of contention. I'm just fine at math imo. I didn't make an argument based on math in my post so there's no reason to conclude anything regarding my ability on that matter. It seems to me you're just lashing out with insults with no solid basis for doing so as far as I can see.
Polls are not perfect as you and I have said, but when the majority of polls taken from different groups in different factors all have the same trend, that supports said trend. Trends being survivor bloat and long survivor ques. Prove? No. Support? Yes.
I pointed out that most factors lean towards way too many survivor players at most times, but there's no way to really know, its just the most likely scenario dues to all the factors at play and experiences in the game.
- "this means there might be even more killers but the stats aren't able to show based on how the game works"
And there can't be even more survivors than the stats show? Most peoples experience is long survivor ques short killer ques. I would lean towards more survivors than shown. I'm unsure what you're trying to say with the "how the game works" portion. Just because there's 1 killer for every 5 survivors in a match doesn't mean that reflects the actual number of people playing/queuing the role in the game at large.
You just listed out the ideal numbers, but that doesn't reflect the actual numbers.
- "things change remember that was a year ago"
Yeah I touched on that. For sake of argument lets say the opposite of what I said and there are more killer players now than then, judging by the que times and ect. there's still not enough in most cases/areas/times. Your experience differs from the majority in both cases it would seem.
Your poll was 50/50 when you remember it but its not like it stuck around for a whole year. Most polls are gone in about a few days to week or so and you can't change your answer once you vote. The last post on that poll was 3 days after it was made. The result we can see on it now are extremely likely to be what the results were then and my guess is you just didn't check up on it and only went off the initial results.
Your poll was also flawed to begin with if you wanted to get the general population of the 2 sides at any given time as you only asked for mains of one side. If I play 80-90% survivor and 10-20% killer I wouldn't be a "main" but I'd still contribute to the longer ques in the majority of my time. We saw in said poll that a lot of people who said "both" also didn't vote on a side or specify how much they play each side. They could be 90% survivor 10% killer. So we can deduce that the likely scenario is more people only play survivor in the group that answered. That doesn't prove anything on its own but it is evidence to support the killer shortage/survivor bloat theory, as is every other poll I've seen personally and most peoples experience including my own.
Again, Prove? No. Support? Yes.
- "but yeah no the killer queues took around 20min in comparison to waiting 5 min max as surv so thats not true what you said"
It sounds to me that your just in one of the few areas/times that don't follow the norm, like I said. My killer ques were almost instant and my survivor ques were 10+ minuets and that's still true today. That also seems to be what most people experience. It might not be true for you but for most people it appears to be.
- "quite a negative view on things and contradicting to the part u said killers stopped playing"
I don't see it as negative, its just that people react more strongly/vocally to things they dislike rather than things they like as they want to change what they dislike. Its just human nature.
I also don't see how this contradicts my point, the remaining killer population will come to complain. Those that switched to survivor might complain or tell others to switch too. There's also people who stopped playing who still come to the forums.
Why does it matter if a lot of them left or switched? The remaining ones and those who care will speak up.
- "but you still nearly only see killers complaining"
I still see plenty of survivor complaints. In fact one of the reoccurring complaints I see from survivors are from the long que times and there's always people complaining about camping and tunneling.
Again, if you're experiencing long killer ques your experience is not the norm. Believe me or don't, where this stated was me just pointing out a flaw in what you said that was blatantly obvious about a poll you made. This is way off base from "hey your poll actually says this clear as day" to things like SWF percent, dev data, how many nerfs survivors got, and ect.
-
Jill personally.
Other characters as skins would be nice a well like Ada or Jake and the others. Honestly there's a lot of potential for the fans in this chapter.
-
@NemesisOnNemesis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2216108#Comment_2216108
it doesn't.
Some addons are just one of their kind.
Some addons on one killer give 1% increase by "slightly", others give 4,5 (9% previously) by "slightly'
Not even talking about 'moderately' or tremendously, these are so vague that it's pointless.
Just adding on (hah), "slightly" on one of Pig's add-ons is 50%, meanwhile one of Legion's "tremendously" is 15%.
Yup, the words are pretty much meaningless.
-
I haven't had a problem with it personally. If I see him I can break him out.
My friend had a big problem with it, and I would look over at his screen and he'd be staring at the killers knees and be like "I'm looking right at him, why isn't he breaking out? Buggy power."
I aim for the chest/neck/face, idk if that has anything to do with it. Like if "looking" at him is different for people as for where they look at him. Just my guess but I wouldn't be surprised if its just buggy and I'm just not affected for some reason.
-
Well I can say for those I know personally its because killer is too hard for them. They would like to play killer more but can't do well past like, yellow or green. As well as the stress that comes with playing killer.
They much rather just play the easier, more forgiving mode where they have 3 other teammates as well as the advantage of communication if we're playing together. Even if they themselves aren't great survivors, they can hold M1 on gens and get them done at the same speed as anyone else while the better players distract the killer.
For me personally, I started playing survivor much more (exclusively on most days) because I'm tired of the power gap if I'm not playing Spirit or something. I also like to have a decent say in how the match goes, something killers lack as the majority of the roster rely on survivor mistakes too much such as survivors playing inefficiently.
TL;DR survivor is easier, less stressful, and the stronger role
-
@n00binati said:
hello everyone, i am a new player i got dbd about 3 weeks ago and i am just wondering how people think this game is survivor sided? killer seems way easier and way stronger than survivors
As others have said its just because you're new. If you get good at the game as survivor it shifts to the survivor side pretty hard (as long as your teammates aren't bad).
Your best bet if you want better games is to get a group together to play with. But if your randoms are good you'll still do well.
I'd say in general it goes:
bad solos < bad swf < most killers < good solos < top tier killers like Nurse and Spirit < Good SWF
Obviously there's more details/factors and in-betweens but that's a rough overview of what to expect most of the time.
-
@Spyonme said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2219158#Comment_2219158
One of the devs mentioned that survivor players make up around 80% of the player base on DBD aka the majority. We'd realistically need ~1 killer for every 3 survivors because survivors can re-queue the moment they are are out of the game but the killer has to stay until the very end
yeah last time i checked it was basically 50% 50% and alot commented they play both and withdraw
also if maybe you didnt read my comment from before "never trust statistics you haven't faked yourself"
for example imagine making the poll on a day where there was a huge survivor buff and ofcourse there will be more survivors on the forum resulting in more survivors seeing and interacting with the poll
I was mainly talking about when you said "also ive made a poll that showed there are more killers on dbd than there are survs" and then accused someone of twisting the results of the poll you made when everyone can see it. But I'll respond to the other points you brought into the conversation as well so this is going to be a post on the longer side.
Idk why you brought up how many killers we ideally need. Yes that's true, but I didn't say anything about that. On that subject the ideal is not what's happening to most players. Its more than ~3 to each killer or whatever the number should ideally be.
I did read your comment on fake data, I just didn't say anything on the matter because it was irrelevant to the point I was making previously. On that subject, I understand what you're trying to say because anyone can make anything up. However when:
- Most people are claiming to experience the problems that would arise from too many survivors playing
- All polls (at least that I've seen) also support that theory, including your own
- The devs support that theory (when it would be in their best interest not to)
- Most people agree killer is the much less desirable role to play and to a lesser majority that its the weaker role
I think its safe to say that survivors are the majority and too much so and we need more killer players. Most peoples personal experience and stats are lining up in that direction. Can we ever really know with 100% certainty? No, probably not. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try or talk about it and get to a "95% most likely" or something.
My survivor ques for example were long before and they have only gotten longer as of late. It appears that's the majority of players. I've also seen other polls over the years and everything I have seen has always had/has survivor players in the majority.
Add to that as well that over the past year or so a lot of killers have either stop playing the game completely or those that played both sides (like me) have either shifted to survivor much more (also like me) or just switched entirely. So the percentages are probably even more survivors compared to killers now than before.
Also in the example you gave at the bottom, I think it'd be much more likely that more killers would be on the forum to complain about a big survivor buff than survivors. I understand what you were getting at, just commenting on it I guess.
In any case, if your experience is different than you may just be in one of those areas that don't follow the norm or play at non-peak times, or your opinion/perception is just different for whatever reasons.
-
@Spyonme said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2218742#Comment_2218742
yeah nice try guys I made it a year ago and I still remember the outcome
but indeed a nice try I give u that
Your poll is still there, they even linked it for you. Anyone can check the results, its 75% survivor. Wdym "I still remember the outcome" we can see the outcome, its not what you said lol.
But the year ago part checks out.
-
Playing her I'm just constantly thinking "wow, this is really dumb".
Playing against her I'm constantly thinking "wow, this is really dumb".
Playing as her I have much easier games with way less effort. It's a nice break from the rest of the killer roster being generally weak, but its too far.
-
"devs should be jailed"
That's a bit much, but I do think they should put more resources into getting the game in a good spot.
-
If BHVR abandoned PS4 I at least want cross progression so I can abandon it too, I'm not paying $400+ on a next gen just to play DBD no sir.
We already have to deal with controller limitations, at least let the performance be fine or let me take my junk and move.
Ideally optimization and KB&M support would come through.
-
They can release Clair as a skin set like they did with Cheryl.
-
@Gnarly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2205173#Comment_2205173
What is wrong with Michael? He is the most fun and balanced killers considered by most.
He might not be on the stronger side but he really lacks counterplay to his power, which is just him looking at you and you hoping the map RNG gave you LOS blockers while he's 2 feet away from you because of his non-existent TR. That's just to slow him down as well, he'll still get out of tier 1 in 10 seconds or less unless its a potato killer. Then if you get into certain loops its either feed him or leave the loop and get hit. Then there's the "I snuck up on you since you have no warning I'm coming and I have 99% from someone else so instadown you go". His EW last ages and a good EW will just end the game or at the very least guarantees a stage 2 on hook if you stick around the area (again since it last so long). Scott explains some of these in more detail than I could in a forum post in one of his recentish videos about Myers. I'll link it at the bottom if you're interested (although the topic for that video was power not fun, it does go over some of these points if not all of them). For me he's just boring and annoying with a lack of meaningful interaction.
Idk about "most" people finding him fun, it might just be the vocal minority or something similar. I was in another thread (link below) about killer fun and he wasn't in most peoples top tier. He was mostly on the unfun or average side. So idk how many people it is but its definitely not everyone and potentially not the majority. It wouldn't be the first time that what seemed like the majority really isn't in terms of opinions. But it can be hard to tell with what we have access too. All my SWF friends (which admittedly is like 5 people lol) also don't like him and we all sigh whenever we realize he's the killer, and one of them is a big fan of the Halloween movies. At the least I think its safe to say a decent chunk of the community don't like playing against him. He might not be the most unfun, but he's not on the fun side for me and others.
links to the two external things I brought up if you're interested:
killer fun levels (don't necro it please, just for viewing): https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/240672/tier-list-of-how-fun-killers-are-to-go-up-against/p1
Scotts video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7wp7RrzRfw
-
Spirit because Spirit lol. We all know why.
"we know everyone loves Michael."
I don't like Michael at all and I know there's others that don't as well.
-
@CoalTower said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2202756#Comment_2202756
The order was actually the hardest part of this. I couldn't decide where to place them all.
That's understandable. Everyone is going to have a different opinion on what is more important than what. Your 6 and 7 are my 2 and 3 for example. But as long as we can agree that these are problems that need to be addressed than that's something.
Its usually the how and what that get dicey. For example aftercare became a hot topic in this thread. imo whether aftercare is good or not, the problem in that case is it's overshadowed by perks that fill the same need but are much more consistent and don't need tokens that you have to compete with your team over. Aftercare might be good if you can get it to work, but this other perk is more reliable and fills the same need. Which isn't bad per se, a perk that's stronger but has conditions is a good idea, but having to compete with your team and it losing all progress for a normal game occurrence is really rough.
-
I see Myers roughly once-twice a day when I play, I wish I didn't see him in months. But some things I also see as problems include:
- As for #7 I wouldn't even say "top tier" its just "good" level play that things like Nurse and Survivors/gen speeds start to become overbearing for the other side without much they can do about it (in most cases) because of how the game is designed.
- idk if it would go along with #1 but a big problem in the game is people maining one side and not understanding at all the frustrations of the other while also accumulating a lot of misconceptions/misinformation due to their lack of a viewpoint of how it really is to play against something or how something works and its weaknesses. Then we got the ones who switch to the other side for 3 games and use their rank 20 experience to justify their previous stance. Common example: "lol killer is so easy I played for the first time and won 5 games in a row, nerf killers". Also the animosity the mains of either side usually has for the other is insane.
- This is more a factor on the survivor side of things, but in terms of perks another issues is perks that should be changed don't leading to players using the same build for eons and never changing it even if another perk gets buffed. For example new Lucky Break is great, but people aren't even going to try it out because they can just use the same old build they've been using for years and be fine or they "can't find room" in their build since they've grown dependent on the perks that have been meta for years.
Overall the OP has good points. I might not agree with the order and some of the details but the main points are solid imo.