NekoTorvic
NekoTorvic
About
- Username
- NekoTorvic
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,919
- Last Active
Comments
-
@dallasmedicbag said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2557678#Comment_2557678
aw damn. he's seriously the most fun i've had in dbd and knowing that is a bit discouraging since i haven't had a chance to play around shack yet (just bought blight yesterday). fingers crossed for the fix 🤞
Im sure you'll get used to him as he is currently even if they don't fix him. He is still fun, and he is still a powerhouse if you know what youre doing.
Thing is, I spent several dozens if not hundreds of hours playing that killer. I knew what he felt like and what he could do and what I could slide on and what I couldn't. Now it feels like I have to relearn him, and it's infuriating to be stopped on your tracks when trying to do something that was totally fine before, but now doesn't work because BHVR.
-
@dallasmedicbag said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2557649#Comment_2557649
Is it a lot harder to hug tech right now or has it been the same? Looking down at a certain angle of the wall allows you to slide along, but for me it's inconsistent.. i hope it's my lack of skill and not actually blight having terrible bugs
They messed up his collisions with the Pinhead patch. You can still hug tech, but it's finnicky. The problem is that say you wanna hug tech shack, so you hug the door frame, then you slide past the doorframe, as you'd expect, BUT you then collide with some random piece of detritus along the wall itself. That's where Blight has been feeling the worst for me. I try to slide past an object. I prepare for a pre-turn and then BAM, i hit the wall I was trying to slide along and my camera spins 58 times because I use 4k dpi.
They also added collision to a lot of small objects that protrude from certain walls. For instance farm's butter shack used to be buttery smooth and glorious. But now, the cloth that hangs from the ceiling and a few other things like wood planks have enough collision, that Blight will bump on them.
It feels horrendous for me, and I have avoided playing Blight like the plague because it's infuriating. I heard that apparently they made his primary collision way more sensitive that it should be. I heard this from a Blight main waaay better than me, that tries to talk to devs as much as he can. He said, we should treat this as a bug since it wasn't in the patch notes. I am praying that he is right and that it gets fixed. I cannot be bothered relearning Blight for like the 4rth time.
-
Use your ability as much as possible. The more you get comfortable with it, the more you'll realize that his power can do a lot on a lot of loops. If you're getting frustrated though, play some M1 and use your ability to catch up. You don't wanna potentially burn yourself out on a killer that can be very fun and very powerful.
Don't use addons that mess with your muscle memory. Speed addons, slam duration addons or turn rate addons should be left for when you have a better grasp on how his core power functions. (I personally use Blighted rat and canker thorn when I wanna use filler addons, but rat is a speed addon so be careful).
Blight's collisions were changed AGAIN when pinhead was released. He is very very sticky. He collides very easily with things you would easily slide on before. This has made him extremely frustrating for me to play him because I was used to using his slidyness to my advantage. This is just to let you know that 1: Blight might change again, because BHVR seemingly cannot decide how they want him to function, and 2: You should be weary of hugging things too tightly cuz you might bump into them and if you're turning, you might spin in place and disorient yourself.
Swamp has terrible collisions for him, they seem very inconsistent. In general you will have to take note of what you collide with and how, and you'll slowly build up a repertoire of how to use your ability more effectively.
Whenever you're locked on to a survivor, catching up for that hit and the survivor tries to wiggle or spin, you should wait until your character is physically touching the survivor and very quickly react and swing in the direction of the survivor. Your hitbox is super wide at the beginning of your rush swing, so the survivor won't be able to juke you. This is called a "Shoulder Flick"
Also, if you flick 45 degrees as you're gonna slam onto something you can basically slam with your shoulder while looking in a different direction. This can help you keep track of survivors in a chase instead of having to look into the object you wanna collide with and then move the camera to see the survivor again. This is called a "Shoulder bump"
You have 1.25 seconds of slam duration at base. Use that time to observe what the survivor is doing. Don't be too quick to rush or you'll open yourself up to make mistakes.
Since, you're playing on a controller, it might be useful to raise the sensitivity to max and get used to it. Obviously this is more personal, though, so if you try it and get frustrated because you can't control the higher sens, it's fine. But going for turns and flicks is a lot harder with lower sensitivity.
The best build on him seems to be Ruin, Tinkerer, Undying, Pop, maybe swap one of them for BBQ. My personal favorite build is Enduring, Infectious, BBQ, Tinkerer + Blighted Crow and Alchemist ring. But I hate gen perks, I use tinkerer for the info so I can get into chases.
-
I think the problem is we have a plethora of things in the game designed to correct your mistakes or prevent/delete you being outplayed by the opposing team without much effort on your part at all.
DS, is a necessary evil, but it's basically that. You get a chance to escape the killer, even though you got chased, downed, hooked, chased and downed again.
UB: undo the fact you were downed by holding M1
DH: undo the fact you were outplayed or made a mistake in positioning by pressing E at the low cost of being injured
SB: never worry about positioning anymore, you can just run and have the killer waste 20 seconds before the chase even starts
Lucky Break: Get a chance to escape a chase for free, at the low low cost of being outplayed and hit.
NOED: Get a boost at the low cost of letting survivors do their objective and failing to stop them.
Spirit Fury: Get pallet stunned? Who cares.
And the devs are showcasing that they don't care about this when they design the game, since a bunch of the addons they reworked for spirit now give her her full charges back when either stunned by a pallet (meaning the survivor outplayed her), or breaking a pallet (a minuscule investment to get your power back).
Now, there's nothing wrong with having some safeguards here and there. I think Enduring is probably the best example of a safeguard that is useful but doesn't break the game the way Dead Hard does. The problem is that the game is riddled with safeguards or "mistake undoers" that are massively impactful and require no effort, no investment, absolutely nothing other than: you equipped a jpeg. It's very annoying to me.
-
Worst thing are the cheaters that are subtle, that you'd never catch if it you you're not at the right place, right time, using the right perks, etc.
It's ridiculous that you can just get people who up their speed a tiny, bit so the killer doesn't catch up, they speed up gens, so the game ends faster but the killer doesn't notice unless they have tinkerer, etc.
-
@Ragemage102 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2556601#Comment_2556601
Why not lol. That is how skilled a player is? A red rank survivor is better than an ashe rank survivor
this just feels like a way to make survivors games easier tbh. Place them with low level killers to make them win more. Smh. Classic survivor biased behaviour
next thinf youll be telling me is they give survivors an aoe team-wide self care that doubles the speed 😂 oh wait
The game no longer matches you based on grades or ranks. Those are really just there for you to think "ok cool, I'm getting a BP bonus this month".
SBMM is a hidden rating that actually matches you with people with similar rating...As to whether or not it's people of similar "skill levels", I would say that's a fat no, because the devs couldn't be bothered trying to assess skill in this game in 2 years that they've been trying to implement this system
-
I mean...I couldn't care less if I found out that my rating was reset to 0 today. I couldn't give a rat's fart about my rank or whether or not the game gives me a gold star cuz it thinks i have skillz. In fact it could be fun for a change to have a chance to spook survivors, go on several chases, not tunnel anyone, not be ruthless and bring 67 gen slowdown perks just to try and get a game that lasts more than 3 minutes.
Thing is, I go into a match trying to 3k or 4k. If I 2k it means I got a tie. If I 1k or 0k it means I lost. It's a Team vs Team game (team killer 1 person, team survivor 4 people). Which means that when I hop into a match I try to win to the best of my ability, and I preferably don't want that match to end in 3 minutes whether I win or I lose.
The problem is that this game is imbalanced as all hell, we all have known this forever. It's always been this way and people complaining about it are not saying anything new. Before SBMM, people who were decent at killer only went against survivors who really knew how to abuse how much bullshit this game has occasionally. With SBMM, if you're decent, you're gonna go against survivors who rarely actually outplay you, but use all of the game's poorly designed bullshit to their advantage, every . single . game. Or at least 50% of your games. Whether you win or lose, it's a draining experience. And I'm sure for survivors, it's killers tunneling and camping to try and scrape a 2k more frequently than ever.
That's not even talking about the increased amount of hackers at high MMR and the 10 minute queues for killer, where you literally spend more time staring at the lobby than playing the game.
It's not that people care too much or get stressed about being the very best, like no one ever was (although, those people do exist), it's that this SBMM has made the quality of the games horrendous for anyone at a decent level and mildly cares about trying to win. Unless you're one of those people who goes into a match not really wanting to even try to win, where you get one chase, and you get your fill of fun.
-
They could make a cool Ishimura themed map, since poor Hawkins is going away forever.
What would be the Slasher's power though? Maybe it'd be able to go through Vents that spawn in the map? Like a super teleporty killer?
Maybe they could add a spitter, which would be a ranged character that works a bit like a slasher, but then would be too similar to Plague.
Perhaps they could add two different types of necromorphs which have different abilities and you could switch between them on a cooldown?
Who knows. It'd be interesting though.
-
@apathyinc said:
This is the same way I feel about playing as killer lately and my matches are exactly as you described. There is quite a bit of bullshit in the game that remains patch after patch while nerfs and buffs are applied around it.
Just now, I got a match where a Cheryl fell for every, single mindgame except for ONE, yet she was able to stall me for minutes, just because she had second chance Jpegs equipped, and because her teammates bodyblocked me several times once they realized I was tunneling her (which I was doing precisely because she used UB into SG to escape a hook state and it annoyed the ######### out of me). They all died though, because sometimes, just sometimes, the fact they can't outplay you actually matters in your favor.
This is what I mean. That survivor had absolutely no right stalling me for as long as she did. She made ONE good read. Everything else was bullshit.
That is how the majority of games in DBD play out, and it's so tiring. I wish DBD focused on player skill vs player skill, not who managed to equip the shiniest, bullshittiest Jpegs.
-
@Clowning said:
This is the reason why I can't really enjoy M1 Killers anymore. I rarely get frustrated, but there's just something absolutely infuriating about being matched with equally skilled Survivors and you both know that "Okay, now we will loop this object three times at which point the Survivor has to give me the pallet and then they'll move towards the more unsafe loop that they can run once before I can force a 50/50."
Aye, there's a lot of structures in this game that have no business being as safe as they are. The i loop in Mcmillan and Farm is an example. My personal most hated structure is the long wall jungle gym. I don't think that variant of jungle gym should exist full stop. It is, indeed another example of a structure where survivors don't really have to outplay you, they don't make any reads, they don't really show their skill in any meaningful way. M1 killers have it rough against that. The W meta is the main reason I don't play M1 killers too much.
-
In my case, it's maybe a combination of the two? I understand that my skill doesn't really translate to better results, it just translates to me being frustrated when I find myself facing the game's bullshit. So whenever I find that bullshit, I shut my brain off, open a youtube video and proceed to play like a bot. I tunnel the first survivor I hook, then I proceed to run circles around the nearest obstacle. They either all die trying to protect that survivor, or they all escape, at that point it doesn't' matter to me.
This isn't fun to me. I'd prefer a game that was engaging where it was a proper, my skill vs their skill type of thing. But that's not what we have. Occasionally though, I do get more chill matches where gens don't fly instantly, I do my best to give these survivors more chances and more chases, at least I get to use my power, try fancy stuff and actually play the videogame.
-
Indeed. My matches usually go as follows:
I go for one chase, if the chase takes a bit long and 3 gens pop, i pick a nice little rock around the hooked survivor to circle around and watch a youtube video on the side. If they escape, then good on them. More often than not they kill themselves trying to be altruistic.
Now, if the game goes at a decent pace, survivors are doing gens, but not 3 of them at once while stacking up on second chances, then I'll be nice and I'll go for multiple people, I'll deliberately give them more of a chance, etc.
Now, that isn't really their choice to be fair. The game is designed so gens go fast and it's all survivors realistically have to do. I don't begrudge them for it, and they should extend that same courtesy to the opposition.
-
So I started playing again to see how i find the game after a while with MMR. (Note I don't use gen perks at all. Except for Surge on pinhead, cuz I hate gen perks. But even if I used them it wouldn't matter) I basically have two types of games:
-Survivors split up on gens so I just go after one survivor, camp and tunnel them to see if i get one kill. They either die or they don't and most of the match I play like a zombie, not really caring about anything.
-Gens don't fly, I can actually use my power, give everyone chases and even give hatch at the end. This is where I find some semblance of fun.
MMR is atrocious.
-
Either balance this game with people who play it well in mind or drop the idea of a skill based matchmaking.
That's what I asked for, and I stand by it.
-
Survivors should have an objective that requires them to interact more with the killer.
It's ridiculous how their objective is just, go as far away from the killer as possible and hold m1 for a bit.
-
Balancing is just as atrocious as it has always been. It's just that you find it more often instead of once every 6 or so matches as it used to be without mmr. And you notice it much more because queue times are like 10 minutes long.
-
@D3spair said:
Title.
I am sick of 5 Gens in 5 Minutes games. In regard to that though, I try to not run any Gen regression perks but i don't want to have quick games...
What would happen then if we just balance the game on not needing Gen Regression Perks.
Let's say we give survivors another set of objectives to another way of escaping/winning ie. "Collect of all Shotgun Parts to blow the Killer's Head off". I'm a Killer main btw but please I just want games that last more than 8 minutes please
Honestly I'd be happy with any objective that actually necessitates survivors interacting with and outplaying the killer.
Even if it is that. Do all gens, gather weapon parts and destroy the killer or banish him or something I dont know. Whatever forces them away from their M1 holding routine and actually has them try something against the killer.
-
@Elena said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2554666#Comment_2554666
I experienced a hacker right after the Silent Hill chapter released, I had a Nea flying through the walls and repeatedly body-blocking so the other survivors couldn't get hooked.
I did report them in-game but I don't know if they got banned, chances are they didn't because of the amount of hackers there are today.
I reported hackers in like 3 different matches in the last SBMM test. In fact out of 23 ish matches, 7 of them had hackers that I know of.
Hackers are a problem, the ones that are explicit are a big nuisance and very annoying. Subtle hackers are, in my opinion, the worst thing for the health of this game.
-
I didn't know they could actually damage your hardware. I guess that's just another thing to add to the pile.
The type of hacker that got ingrained into my memory, and the reason i've pretty much lost most of my interest in playing this game was one that I encountered during the previous SBMM test.
The game went by as usual. Gens went fast, I tried my best. I killed one survivor. 3 left on the last gen that was less than 50%. I slugged, one and was chasing the other, so only 1 survivor was on that gen.
The second just before I downed the survivor I was chasing, tinkerer activated, meaning the gen got to 70%, and then the gen instantly popped.
I managed to get a 3k and that hacker left.
Thing is, I had to rewatch the match to realize what happened and I came to understand that if i had not been using Tinkerer, I would have had no idea that a cheater was in the match. I would have thought that the game just went fast, as usual.
There is no way of knowing if your games go by fast because of hackers, because the game is imbalanced or because you were genuinely outplayed. If there are subtle hackers in your lobby and you don't catch them, you'll be none the wiser.
-
You can have two ways of looking at this:
You can say, the game is imbalanced, your opponents don't even need to outplay you to win and while you're sweating to outplay them and mindgame them and manage all 4 of them and mechanically master your killer, they are quite literally holding a singular button on an inanimate object to win the game. You can then decide that the effort is not worth your time, either play the game like a zombie and not care, or just stop engaging with it at all.
Or you can embrace the fact the game is imbalanced, worry about your own growth regardless of what your opponents do or how easy or hard it is for them. Eventually you might get good enough that even though you will still need to put in a lot of effort compared to them, you'll still be able to give most teams a run for their money at the very least.
(There's also the option that some people go with where they don't care and they just have fun somehow while not looking forward to anything at all) I don't understand those people, but they're valid too.
All options are valid, and you'd be right to do any of them. It's all up to you and how you wish to engage with the game. I cannot bring myself to do number 2, so I just do number 1 until i stop playing, but that's on me.
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2552954#Comment_2552954
Yes and if we change it to 4.8 that 15m gap is closed in 18.75 seconds. that's like 25% faster. It is really interresting how the smallest changes in movement speed in this game have such a high impact
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2552947#Comment_2552947
Yeah, and i'm not saying they shouldn't be faster or if it would or wouldn't be too strong. I agree these kind of killers should get some help.
Mostly just making clear to whoever reads it that this small increase in movement speed would be a really big deal
Gotta admit though, holding W for 18.7 seconds instead of 25 sounds sweeeeeeet XD Since to be fair, holding W shouldn't be nearly as effective as it is.
But yea, movement speed is one of those things. It could really break the game in a very bad way if not done properly. It's better to address issues with the game in a different way, imo.
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
A quick thing about movement speeds.
Survivors run at 4 m/s
Standert killers at 4.6 m/s
Which means that you close the distance between you and the survivor at 0.6 m/s
Changing it to 4.8 m/s means you close the distance between you and the survivor at 0.8 m/s
From 0.6 to 0.8 is a 33% increase. That is huge. Not going to comment on the balance of things, just want to show this isn't a small thing you are suggesting here
Speaking about movement speeds though:
Since a killer closes in at 0.6 m/s, it takes an m1 killer 25 seconds to close a 15m gap if a survivor just holds W in a straight line.
That is 37.5 for 4.4m/s killers (so for instance slinger, from 32m to max harpoon range (14m gap to close) it takes him 35 seconds of holding W).
Obviously killers have some powers that can alleviate that, and in most maps you can cut off survivors a little bit. But consider that 25 seconds is half a generator with 2 people, and this is not even counting loops, it's just holding W.
This is not to say I think killers should be faster though. That would probably break most loops in the game and ultimately it wouldn't help too much with map pressure, i don't think. It's just a curious thing to consider about movement speeds.
-
Neither one is toxic.
Perks aren't toxic, addon's aren't either, bodyblocking, flashlight saving, etc aren't either.
You could even argue that flashlight clicking or teabagging are a valid strategy, because it if the survivor managed to distract you by making you focus on them, they're doing good by their team.
-
If they're gonna keep it simple because taking into consideration all the factors that make a good survivor player would be too complex, then that at least would promote them playing as a team. I like it.
-
@HighVelocityTicTac said:
I don't run Ruin, Undying, and Pop because it gives me the best chances of winning, its because it gives me a *chance of winning.* They feel very mandatory. Nerf gens in some way (that isn't increasing repair times) and nerf gen regression perks.
I would actually go one step further.
Gen regression is not to have a "chance of winning", it's to have a chance of a game not ending in 3 minutes regardless of your chases, even if you lose.
I know how it is. I don't like the game being balanced around gen regression.
But you know what, whatever. I firmly believe that this game will never change. And even if it does the changes are too slow, and there's life beyond DBD.
-
What about games where survivors don't DC, but they just kill themselves on first hook leaving their team to die? This is super common and it pretty much dooms the entire team if done early enough. I would bet that these are counted.
-
He is a high skill, medium to low reward killer and he's another killer in the pile of killers weak to W. His chase is mediocre at best.
However, I am glad to see that his 4v1 can be powerful enough that it makes up a lil bit for his weak chase. If played at a very high level, it has some chance to do decently, which is more than you can say about many other killers.
So, if you wanna use a killer that needs a lot of mechanical skill and needs you to play almost perfectly to try and defeat a quartet of rambunctious teens holding M1, then he's a decent choice.
-
I stopped playing since SBMM dropped. Im hoping the game get's better balanced, and that the devs decide how they want Blight to function, cuz they change his collision or some other thing about him every other patch and I'm done having to relearn him every goddamn time.
-
i stopped playing because of it. It was 10 minute queues for 3 minute matches against people who held m1 and stalled with bullshit. Not worth my time at all.
At least with random matches, you'd only go against this game's bullshit 1 out of 10 matches or so. With MMR it's every.single.match.
-
I used to do the same as you. Whenever this has happened more recently, I just try to end the game as quickly as possible, just kill everyone, afk when the last one has to look for the hatch, more on to the next game, they'll move on too. Turn off chat or just ignore anything they say because there is no way of pleasing the people you go against no matter how saintly you are.
-
@DorkianBae said:
The problem you have here is you are asking EVERYTHING from killer without even giving almost anything back. This isn't how you balance a game, you think of the whole picture with changes like this and not just the half the screws over one side.
Make maps smaller to make the game more fair for non-mobile killers then nerf top tier killers like Nurse so they don't completely ######### on the new much smaller maps.
Oh yeah no, believe me, if I were to write what I think of the whole picture, I would have written an encyclopedia XD i didn't wanna make the post gigantic, I wanted to focus on a compromise to the power of gen perks from the killer side. Obviously there would need to be changes to survivor and the core game to compensate for this. I just wanted to propose possible compromises in gen regression, because too often I see both sides unwilling to give up anything and "whatabouting" each other.
Smaller maps would be one of the first things I'd do to compensate for this nerf to gen regression. Together with loops that are less safe and promote mindgames, get rid of god pallets. Severely reduce the amount of impact of second chance or safeguard perks, because there's no good reason for perks to stall for survivors as much as they currently do. Among other changes.
-
@vacaman said:
I'm sorry but most of the changes you propose are just... terrible. This would make gen regression perks still mandatory just that even worse than they are now. You do realize that this 1% of gen speed that is supposed to make for all those insane nerfs to gen regression perks is not even 1 second of regression right?
The nerfs are to change their synergies with each other and to make them all around the same level of strength....ish.
Also, the idea would be 1% + 1% extra per survivor hooked. With 4 survivors alive, you'd do 5% instant damage to gens without any perks if you hook all 4 survivors.
But, I must clarify. The intention of this post is not: Kill killers and barely give them anything to compensate lol. The intention was to say "hey, if we compromise on gen regression and make them not stackable and not as strong, can we compromise on other aspects of the game so that killers don't have to stack up on gen perks, and games can be more of a back and forth that doesn't end in 3 minutes?" However, i messed up communicating that, severely so.
Obviously, I would never suggest these nerfs if the rest of the game stays the same, and there would need to be severe changes to survivor and the core game to compensate for them.
-
@Dino7281 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536533#Comment_2536533
Problem is that you talked only about how to nerf gen regression perks, but they are needed, if you want to have chance against good survivors.
It might be different, if you come up with idea how to nerf survivors, so this would not become issue. But of course just let's nerf killers will not meet good feedback.
Game would be in even worse state than now with your changes imo. This is not something you can just do and let's see how it goes and cya in 5 months. You would lose a lot of killers for this. High MMR would become unplayable for most killers.
Pop 10 seconds is really bad. You said you don't like plan A, plan B, but problem is that 10 seconds is not enough for it to be plan A even close.
You hook survivor, you see someone working on gen across the map, but you can't use your regression perk for it even if you will have time to get there before they finish it.
Interesting idea would be too sort perks into categories and both survivors and killers could use only limited amount of perks.
But that would not work in practice, because some perks fit in multiple catagories and this would probably screw balance even more and game would be less fun with less freedom to do what you want.
Aye. The post is already long as it is, but I guess it was a massive blunder of mine to not post at least a few ways in which the game could change to alleviate how stressful it would be with my proposed nerfs.
Obviously, I don't want to nerf killers without changes to the game and survivors. And I don't want survivors to just hold m1 for longer either. I'm right there with you. But hey! I'm glad you think that if there were changes to survivors and the game in general, these changes would be a lil more reasonable! 😅 I guess that sort of was my intention with the post but i messed up by not making it clearer. I might see if I can edit it to make it a lil more obvious.
To be fair high MMR is already pretty unplayable for so many people. It's the reason I thought of this. i constantly see neither side coming forward saying they'd give up something, so I wanted to try it cuz this game is not at a good state at higher skill levels, and I genuinely think gen perks are part of it, but maybe I'm wrong.
That's fair enough, the pop thing is a pretty bad idea, it was all I could come up with to kill it's synergy.
Maybe having a category for gen perks separate from everything would be the solution, some perks would need to be changed to specialize on that, but then we don't need to nerf them to kill their synergies. Although, we would be trusting the devs to decide what is and isn't a gen defense/gen regression perk, but maybe with that kind of focus they'd do a pretty good job at it.
-
@RaSavage42 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2535991#Comment_2535991
Having a bonus regression doesn't do what you think.... Just up the base regression to .50 and see what happens was all I'm saying
I do agree that something does need to be done about our complaints but the changes you have proposed won't do what you think
Why do you think Killers stack on Gen regression perks in the first place? It's due to the fact that base regression sucks so bad
And what about Huntress Lullaby and Overcharge? Those 2 are gen regression perks but they work based on skillchecks
What do you think I think regression does? Maybe I'm just not making myself clear.
Also I completely forgot about Huntress Lullaby and Overcharge. I didn't think about them so I'm not sure what I'd do about them. This post was already long as it is so my bad for forgetting about those 😅
Upping base regression still means that a survivor can tap the gen and negate it. Immediately damaging a gen with a kick would prevent that, since a gen tap results in an extra x% damage to it if you kick it again. However increasing base regression to 0.5 instead of 0.25 could alleviate the problem with the base game too, I don't disagree with this idea.
Killers stack gen regression or gen protection perks, unfortunately, because time is too much in favor of survivors if they're efficient on gens. 3 gens can pop in a single chase, without much effort from the survivors at all and most maps give enough resources combined with the myriad second chances survivors have so that survivors can easily finish their objective and mostly making having to outplay the killer optional. I don't like this, and I'm fully aware of it. My idea with this post is: If we're willing to compromise on gen regression (then I threw some ideas on how. i'm sure smarter people could come up with better ones), would you be willing to compromise on second chances, map sizes, loop safety, etc etc.
-
@Dino7281 said:
Oh boy, well first. Try to play other killers without gen regression. Yeah, it's not hard to do with Blight. Try to do it with clown, wraith, myers etc. Good luck
about changes:
- Gens cannot regress or be damaged while blocked, and they cannot be damaged while regressing.
They already don't...
Base-kit regression that scales based on how you perform might be good.
about perk changes, oh boy...
So Corrupt, Ruin, Pop Goes the Weasel would be useless.
Corrupt is not that good, when survivors can spawn next to open gen, not worth your nerf.
Pop -> 10 seconds really? Yeah we know, you are blight main you are everywhere, but some killers would not be able even walk to nearest gen to kick it....
Ruin -> is not that good alone, you can finish gens ignoring it and it is not hard to find on most maps. Yeah, we know you are Blight main and can pressure everyone everywhere.
Your changes would do nothing just destroyed few perks. You could still stack regression perks, just different then now.
Build I would use, which would be way stronger than any current = Eruption + Oppression + Surge.
Eruption and Oppression might be enough.
This also with your base-kit buff would be super strong.
Your changes would just make some perks useless.
It's hidden, but it would actually buff killers with that base-kit 5% regression and using perk that stacks with it.
I have played other killers without gen regression. Before Blight I was a Slinger main, I like playing Demo, I have played and enjoyed playing Wraith even before his buff. Ghostface was one of the first killers I really liked to play. Clown before his buff was another one I gravitated towards at some point. Just because I became a Blight main, since Blight is the most fun thing in this game for me, doesn't mean I don't know or understand the plight of killers without mobility. In fact, the first thing I always say when talking about how strong x killer is, is whether or not it's weak to W.
Gens can be damaged by surge while regressing, and I think they can be damaged by eruption too. They can also be damaged by surge while blocked, i think, I might be wrong on that one. I know that gens do not regress while blocked. This was mainly my way of killing the synergy between something like surge and ruin.
They would be useless in our current meta, they would be about as useful as the other gen perks if the meta were to change, which is the presumption in this post, which unfortunately is not made clear. I think the game is balanced poorly, and this was me attempting to say: "Hey, would we be willing compromises like this so gen regression isn't ridiculous when stacked if we agreed to get rid of survivor bs"
I don't think Corrupt is the best thing ever. I was trying to kill how it can work as a plan A, then Pop or Ruin Undying as a plan B.
Pop 10 seconds is admittedly (i literally said it in the post), just there so it doesnt' synergize with surge, Again Plan A, Plan B. Surge for gens close by, Pop for gens far away. I wanted to kill that. In my mind I was thinking maybe pop, in this scenario, could be a perk to control a 3 or 4 gen, meaning you'd always be within that walking distance with regular movement speed killers. I dont like gen perks, I don't know why you'd assume I'd want it trashed so that only my precious Blight could use it, that's not my intention.
Blight is not the only one that gets value of ruin undying. Nemesis, Pinhead, Pyramid head, and other killers can make use of it pretty effectively. Again, my point was to kill it's plan A, Plan B thing with Pop.
Eruption would not stack with Oppression, I specifically said they would override and cancel each other. I guess surge should do a similar thing.
I don't think the base kit kick buff would be super strong. Get's to 5% only if you manage to hook everyone and otherwise gens regress at basic speed, and goes down as survivors die, so as to not create scenarios where survivors feel the game is unwinnable because of the pressure the killer is building. Although to be fair, surge and eruption would probably be too strong cuz they'd do 10% and 12% respectively. Oppression would just do 5% at most. Seems fine to me.
But it's fair enough. I wanted to see what people thought of these ideas, but I am 100% aware that the current meta is : mash gens in 3 minutes and stall with second chances. I fully expected this to be very unpopular, but the feedback I've gotten does give me good insight into how people think. I am grateful to anyone who interacted with this post.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
I kind of like the idea, but I feel it would be better to buff the perks because you more or less need regression if you want the game to last longer than 5 minutes against competent survivors. Maybe they should make one perk slot a "Regression" slot and one an "Exhaustion" slot just to be consistent. You cannot pick more than one, but you are not forced to pick one. That would probably be easier to balance.
Thats a good option too. But we'd trust the devs with saying what a gen perk is or isn't.
-
@RampagingRice said:
You seem like a nice guy in your replies so I will try to keep this civil but - have you played a killer at a moderately high rank? I play both roles so I certainly feel the pain of "Holy #########, ruin is KILLING my fun in this game" and then when it's cleansed, it's either revived by ruin or the killer has pop to cover the rest of the game. So I DO agree that the over reliance on gen regression and/or blocking perks may be an issue. However, I think it's that the killers are REQUIRED to bring these perks with a reasonable expectation to win. I also agree that we shouldn't simply just make gens take longer, as M1 for 80 seconds give or take with a couple of great skill checks is boring as all hell.
However. These perk nerfs are ludicrous. It would make killers at even a mid-rank miserable. We CANNOT nerf these perks BEFORE introducing a solution to gen speeds. A big part of this problem is stupidly big maps and overly safe loops. Now I don't want every loop to be like Hawkins, God no, but the fact that there is not one but TWO maps that have the house of pain (Badham and Haddonfield) is quite atrocious.
I'm all for changing up the meta and making it so that killers feel like they can run a bigger selection of perks than just ruin undying, ruin pop, jolt and pop, or whatever. But doing it by making the perks useless instead of fixing the fundamental problem with gen speeds and regression (because normal regression is a joke) is not the way about it.
I am a 1600 hour killer main, and have twice that amount in watch time of good killer content creators. A blight main, who before sbmm spent 6 months or more where i lost at most 6 total games. I played against swfs with and without gen regression. I know that this game is imbalanced as hell towards survivors at high level. i know games end in 5 minutes or less at high level because gens go so quickly. I know killer is stupid complex with massive mechanical requirements. i know killers have too much on their plate every match. I know that gen regression is a requirement.
The thing is, I am tired of killers and survivors talking past each other. Every time you hear killers complain about gen rush and second chances, you'll hear survivors retort that killers stack up on gen regression, when it's the other way around, what's happening in this post is what you find. Killers not wanting to give up their stuff, because gen rush, and survivor second chances and everything else, I am fully aware they have.
And i am tired of neither side being willing to say "ok, get rid of my bullshit, i agree to compromise if you fix the game". Obviously this is just a forum post, completely inconsequential. But if we don't stop bickering at each other, if no one is willing to give up their poorly designed garbage because it's a bandaid on a bad foundation, until said foundation is fixed, then we're just gonna make each other miserable and resentful, forever talking past each other with whataboutisms.
None of these perks would be useless, they would be mildly useful. In the current meta they'll get destroyed, but i genuinely believe that stacking ######### on top of this bad foundation will only make it a ######### pile to the point where we can't even see the foundation anymore. We remove the #########, we can see the foundation for what it is, then we fix it.
@ReikoMori said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2536064#Comment_2536064
You're going to receive very little support for this as you're thought process is out of touch with the what the reality of the game is.
Gen regression isn't the problem you think it is considering most gen regression perks don't synergize with each other to begin. Ruin's the only perk that generates passive regression and only has synergy with surveillance really. Pop requires killers to kick gens which if something is blowing like Thrilling tremors or repressed alliance then you can't kick it. Surge is fairly weak doesn't synergize with much of anything other than surveillance which doesn't add to regression just tracks its progress. Corrupt just prevents work from happening for a set amount time at the start of the trial and only on a handful of far away gens. Dead Man's Switch blocks, but doesn't harm progress and any time the entity's blocking a gen killers can't interact with it.
Eruption requires a kick and doesn't really regress the gen much at all. The danger is just getting shoved off when a killer comes back to check the explosion notice. Oppression and Overcharge can be prevented outright, but can be tough for new players.
All this is to say that the issue of gens needs to be addressed with the gen times and universal gameplay before taking a hatchet to a selection of perks that are already not doing their job that well. We've already had many changes to the way regression perks function which only served to highly how stilt the generator gameplay is. It's very difficult to keep have longer games even if you run a built with nothing but gen regression and blocking perks. Though most killers don't want to block gens because it actually hurts you more than it helps. Fixing this issue shouldn't require touching perks before addressing the universal gameplay around gens first.
I kinda knew i was going to recieve little positivity for this post, which is why I'm trying to be as friendly and receptive as possible when I reply to people. My ideas are bonkers, I know, but they do come from an honest place of "i think this could be part of the problem, how about if we look at it this way".
The thing is, I know that ruin pop dont directly synergyse, but i know for a fact they're excessively used to have a plan A and then a plan B. Ruin, Pop, Corrupt, and Tinkerer to boot. There, you have a bs build that focuses only on gens to give your self a chance of winning. I believe I address the plan A-plan B thing in my post. I was trying to address that, as well as any direct synergies these perks could have, as well as making them all of a standard strength so none of them are stupid broken compared to the others, and increasing the power of basic kicks, to make the difference between using gen perks and not using them, less impactful.
I don't know what the solution is, and even if I did it probably wouldn't matter. I'm not a dev, I'm just another person in the forums.
Either way tho. I am glad you engaged with the post in a cordial manner, and you were willing to give your feedback. I am happy for the discourse : )
-
@Bran said:
a lot of the perks are not very strong as is.
most can be negated within a few seconds and will require time to give any affect. which would mean stopping survivors from doing gens in general.
True. I tried to get them all to around the level of my changed surge. Some are a bit stronger, but i tried to make them more consistent, instead of what we have where Ruin and pop are king and oppression is non existent.
-
@Artemisha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2535487#Comment_2535487
I neither care about win or lose condition. Well.... I like to scape from time to time, but I think win condition is totally subjective and arbitrary. On tournamena, win condition can be established by bloodpoints diff, or by hooks and gens system.
But regarding to average players, it's subjective. Some killers only consider win a 4 k, or 3 k and a surv scaping through hatch. Personally, I like playing hard at the beginning and eventually play friendly and let 2, 3 or all of them scape. First war and then chill. I have fun, they have fun = win win.
But as u mention, this game is supposed to be a 4 vs 1. We can agree SWF is a team game, but, what about solo? As u said, many survs think this is a individual game and stablish their win condition on their own scape.
Many survs won't bodyblock u or take the chase although u are on you'd be on your 2nd hook. Many survs won't even try a risky unhook or won't even try find a noed. If they scape letting you down it means they have won? Apparently.
And keep in mind that 90% of the people of this forum will tell you that if one fellow surv is being camped tunneled what u have to do is repair and let him die. So u can "win", as individual.
For me, " Win" = enjoy the game. Scape not necessarily. If I can sacrifice to let somebody out I also will be pleased.
These design problems of the game are very big and core of the game. Best thing devs could do is release a new game mode where they can experiment new rules and mechanics that they could add to the main game once propperly tested.
The thing is that ultimately making a game so people "have fun" or "have a good time" or "enjoying the game" is kind of a nebulous, almost useless goal when you're designing something. You need to have a more concrete vision of what you want or else you find yourself in DBD's position where you have casual stuff and hardcore stuff clashing in frustrating ways, and dissonant objectives, and mechanics that don't work with each other, and you end up making people's experience kind of miserable in general.
Like, Imagine another type of game. Say Overwatch. If I play healer, and I die 50 times, and kill 1 person, but my team won, and I healed them, I still did my job and we still won and I still feel that victory, because the game told me what winning is, it set a specific goal, and I would either get it or I wouldn't, and the opposing team would either outplay us or they wouldn't. DBD doesn't offer that particularly well considering the type of game it is.
You can get 0 kills and a pip, which is odd. you can get 4 kills and a depip which is even weirder, cuz you clearly outplayed your opponets. As survivors you can all escape, and you can have a lengthy chase with the killer but black pip, because somehow the game thinks you didn't do enough? And individuals in both teams can pip at the same time. It's just very obtuse.
And yeah I agree with everything you said about teamwork, and that's the issue. DBD does a piss poor job at making survivors feel like they're working as a team for a common goal. So then survivors think about themselves, and survivors disregard the 1v4, and then we have problems of devs balancing for the 1v1, not the 1v4, or vice versa, and we have people constantly talking past each other, because nobody knows what DBD wants from them.
A clear example of this is when survivors complain about killers with difficult counterplay and they say "eventually he'll get me", and like yeah, they'll get you because counterplaying them is hard, and your function as a survivor is not to get chased for 5 gens and escape tbagging the killer at the exit gates. Your function is to outplay the killer as much as you can to stall for your team, if you held the killer for 30 seconds, that's good, if you held them for longer, that could be game winning. But they cant see that, because all they're thinking about is "dam this inconsistent counterplay, I got downed".
Like you said, we have issues with SWFs working as teams but solos not even considering the fact they're in a team, so then we find a bunch of people complaining about how lenient the game should be for each individual survivor, but that leniency would destroy the 1v4 balance, etc.
Honestly if they released a PTB with a new mode that they could experiment with, or maybe even if they had a new experimental mode every weekend or something, just so they could test out new ideas that could eventually make it into the base game, i'd ######### love it.
-
@Wiitab360 said:
This is bait. I refuse to believe it's anything else. 10 seconds and 20% for Pop? Ruin permanently making it so gens can't be damaged? Pretty much all of your suggested changes would make everything absolutely useless. You don't even suggest something to balance the deficiency of gen stopping perks with your changes.
These are all horrible ideas. At that point it'd be better to just run all chase perks and hope that survivors forget what a generator looks like.
Not bait. My thesis statement is right at the start. Kill gen perk synergy so they don't work with each other. Make base kicks more useful to bridge the gap between having gen regression and not having it. Balance the game around gen perks not being stackable.
Obviously, in our current meta these ideas would be kinda miserable. This is a proposed compromise. Like, hey, if survivors had more objectives, or less second chances, or maps were smaller, loops less safe, etc, can we compromise on gen protection perks and their synergies.
Also, I gave pop a 10 second timer so it didn't stack with surge, but if you have a better idea for that, i'd like to hear it. I don't like the idea too much tbh. Also, I gave it 20% because, you can stack it with base kick damage, which in my proposal is 1% + 1% per every new survivor hooked. It would end up being 25%.
Like I said, these changes would have to come with some severe changes to how fast survivors can end games. I am fully aware of that.
-
@RaSavage42 said:
Leave the Gen Regression perks alone (for now) but raise the base regression to .50
Doing that will increase the use for base kicking and Oppression
Blocked gens don't regress... Corrupt, Thrilling Tremors and Dead Man's Switch aren't gen regression they block progression for limited time
Ruin already blocks gen kicking... but it's a hex so it is removable
Having two gen regression perks seem to be needed for high ranks or one gen blocking and gen regression
I know that this is how the game is balanced, but in the same way that killers can say "leave gen regression alone for now, high mmr needs it" survivors can say "leave second chances alone high mmr needs it" and then nobody does anything and everyone just bickers at each other forever, nobody willing to think "ok what if the game were like this, could we take a step in that direction by giving up something we currently use".
I know blocked gens don't regress. But i believe they do explode by surge, and so do regressing gens. Everything I proposed was specifically to kill gen perk synergy so they would never be paired. At the same time, i proposed a better base kick, to level the field between using gen perks and not using them.
Dead man's switch, corrupt and thrilling can all be gen protection perks, so since the idea is to nerf gen perks to make the game healthier overal, i decided to consider them as a means to defend gens and thus change them accordingly.
I know that having two or more gen perks is necessary for high MMR, and I hate it.
-
@WTBacon said:
I understand the logic behind nerfing gen regression perks, but the specific changes you mentioned are all awful.
Fair enough. Care to tell me how? Maybe you have better ideas : ) Like, why do you think they're awful and what would you do to limit synergy between these perks.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2535733#Comment_2535733
This change kills high-ranked play where you need gen regression.
Any change implemented on the Survivor-side would make the game exceedingly boring for them or it wouldn't do enough to slow down the game.
Even with Ruin and PGTW, a good team can push out 3 gens in under two minutes.
Oh yeah, currently the game is balanced so gen regression is needed which is why I think gen regression is awful. It kinda obscures the real fact of the matter. If you make them not stack with each other, you get rid of killer's abilities to protect themselves against real fast gens sure, but you also make it so that survivors don't ever find themselves in the opposite scenario which can be hilariously oppressive.
Now, I will never suggest that the devs should make gens take longer to complete. That would be boring for survivors. i have seen change ideas for secondary objectives that aren't just "hold m1 for longer". For a start survivors could have some of their second chances that stall the game removed. Maps could be made smaller, loops less safe so that it promotes interaction between each side and it requires each side to actually outplay each other instead of just stalling.
I genuinely think compromise is the only way we will get anywhere. Otherwise it will just be killers and survivors bickering at each other forever, growing ever more resentful of each other, quitting the game, etc. If killers aren't willing to give up things that can be oppressive or stale on their side, survivors will always be able to bring that stuff up when killers are the ones asking for stuff to be changed.
But, who knows. Maybe my idea is trash. I just wanted to put it out there to see what people think : P
-
@Pulsar said:
No.
Ok, that's totally valid. But why?
-
I think DBD has focus problems.
DBD seems to want to appeal to casual players, survivors need to hold M1 to win. They have a bunch of tools to negate their mistakes etc. At the same time, the devs are not shy about making killers that are ridiculously mechanically complex killers need to mind way more stuff in the game, how does that appeal to casuals?
The survivor's main objective is to do gens. The killer's main objective is to outplay the survivors repeatedly. Especially in high MMR outplaying the killer is pretty much just optional if you have a team to mash gens and stack up enough second chances. Seems unfair and contradictory.
The devs want to give survivors stuff to work as a team, but then they don't consider how those things can actually break the game when they do work as a team. When survivors actually work as a team with some of that stuff it creates frustrating and unwinnable scenarios.
And also the game is terribly designed to make survivors understand they are working as a team. Survivors have a very individualistic mentality to the point that I've literally seen survivors argue that DBD isn't a team game. Survivors getting camped get no feedback from the game that they're helping their team and they get no rewards for letting their team escape. It feels frustrating to have the killer chase you all game and then you're the only one that doesn't make it out, where in reality the game should massively reward survivors that do that because they guaranteed their team's escape.
The devs refuse to establish a clear win condition, where a team wins and the other team loses. Pips are just meh, and 2 escapes always translates to the killer struggling to hold control over the match. 3 kills or more for a win is the more obvious way to see winning. I genuinely do not give a rat's fart about the points I see and the end of the match or how many pips I get. But survivors can only see their win as them escaping because there's no incentive for them to work as a team.
DBD also has so many scenarios that make it so that the game is pretty much unwinnable at a certain point from the survivor's perspective. Depending on the killer, you can turn a 0k to a 4k during endgame if the survivors make mistakes and you outplay them enough. From a survivor's perspective, if you have 1 person dead on hook and one person out of the game at 3 gens, the game is pretty much over. This makes the game feel very frustrating and hopeless for survivors. But at the same time, survivors can do like 60% of their objective before some killers get 3 hooks, which can feel insanely frustrating and stressful for the killer.
I don't know how to fix any of this btw. Not without overhauling the entire game. Make it so that it's more of a back and forth between survivors and killers, that neither side is utterly hopeless at any point in the match, make it so that each side has to outplay the other instead of out-bullshitting the other, etc. Again, it feels like DBD kinda just lacks focus.
-
And I want a game that's worth investing time in. A game where my efforts are rewarded, where outplaying my opponents is rewarded. A game where, if I spend time learning how a killer works mechanically, I wont have to relearn everything the very next week because the devs can't decide what they want.
Instead we have a game so unfocused that it has massively complex killers that require a ton of experience and mechanical skill, while at the same time having the survivor role, where outplaying the killer is optional, filled to the brim with safeguards that make the killer outplaying them irrelevant. Where they barely have to pay attention to the game because their objective is so mindless and the game tells them everything that's going on.
This game has managed to both be unfriendly to casual players because of the bs on both sides, and unfriendly to players who wanna get better and better because of the bs on both sides.
-
Survivor is harder when you first start playing the game, and killer seems easier.
When you get better at the game you realize that this was a lie all along. Killers have a thousand things to focus on and usually they require way more mechanical precision and prediction than anything survivors have to do. On top of that survivors have a myriad safeguards that protect them from being outplayed or outright fix their mistakes to stall for time.
Play, both sides, at least for a while, so you can get a better idea of how the game plays from each side once you start getting better opponents and more experience. Playing survivor and killer is almost like playing 2 different games tbh.
-
What is directional about Slinger's power tho? I think his TR is not directional and the sharp noise when you're being aimed at isn't either.
-
@Peanits said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2524056#Comment_2524056
If you would consider the time it takes to fully aim down sights to be quick, then yes, nothing's changing there.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2524068#Comment_2524068
That remains unchanged. The warning sound is meant to alert the Survivor that they're in danger. The same happens with The Huntress, where you can hear a clear grunt when she raises a hatchet. The point is to give clear feedback to the Survivor so they're able to react and attempt to dodge the shot. You can, of course, still hit them even though they have time to react, but that bit comes down to how good your aim is.
"You can, of course, still hit them even though they have time to react, but that bit comes down to how good your aim is."
I don't think I entirely agree with this statement. If Slinger's projectile were twice as fast or hitscan, then maybe that is true. But right now a Slinger player doesn't just have to aim, he has to predict whether or not a survivor will run in a straight line, tap A or D, do a 360, press A or D for 0.1s or maybe 0.5 seconds, maybe they'll turn a lot to the right and then a bit to the left, maybe they'll do the opposite, maybe they'll just wiggle erratically, etc...
In all of those scenarios, if you make the wrong prediction you will miss your shot, because it takes time for the fired harpoon to get to the survivor. Obviously there are factors that you can pay attention to as a Slinger player that inform which prediction is the more likely to happen, but it doesn't change the fact that you are always having to predict your opponent's movements. It's always been this way, and good survivors make it really hard to hit your shots because of this.
And don't get me wrong, I don't think this is an issue. It's fine that the killer player has to predict or guess the survivor's movements. I just think it seems unfair that when survivors are asked to predict their opponent based on how the character is played, then it's an issue that needs to be addressed.
-
@Zozzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2526348#Comment_2526348
That is what survivor main counterplay is. A 100% guaranteed way to 1v1 a killer that works consistently and has no counter for the killer.
AKA full control of the chase requiring them to make a mistake instead of the killer forcing them to make the bad decision.
I swear that seems to be what some of them actually want. I've seen so many survivors asking unironically for ridiculous things that are basically just that. The survivor should see the killer's actions coming in advance, they should be able to react and counter the killer's action, and once the survivor counters the killer, the killer should not have any counter to the counter.
It's sad really.