NuclearBurrito
NuclearBurrito
About
- Username
- NuclearBurrito
- Joined
- Visits
- 5,343
- Last Active
Comments
-
@BBQnDemogorgon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/763989#Comment_763989
They are by RNG dice rolls.
Its the same with DbD when a game changing tile is there or not or if a god window is blocked.
These are not mutually exclusive statement.
Heck the same reasoning applies to Poker which actually IS a tournament geared activity.
-
@BBQnDemogorgon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/763932#Comment_763932
Its competitive in the same way UNO and as you said Mario Party is competitive.
When people say casual it means there is minimal skill and a lot of rng involved to the point where win conditions are irrelevant and blurred.
If you and i had a 1v1 on the board game candy land would the win condition be fun or getting to the end of the board?
If you choose end of the board did it matter more than the fun condition when it was rng card pulling that got you that win?
Asymmetrical games imo cannot be competitive in the same way Overwatch/CSGO/CoD/BF etc can be.
I'd like to remind you that if you play Mario Party and get the most stars you won't be happy if someone declares that they won because they got the most items or something else like that.
-
@Nikkiwhat said:
"Horror isn't even about fun anyways."
Lmao, I wish I had the "LOL" button for that statement alone... Trying to argue only a 4K is a "win" despite free escapes with hatch either open on their own or a Survivor using a Key on a closed one, despite Gens not being done and a Killer dominating but "whoops, you still ost!" Yeah,
This game is BS sometimes.
The solution is to alter the mechanics not try and upend the entire foundation for all of balance as well as the core premise of the gameplay loop.
-
@thrawn3054 said:
If this were a competitive game it say escapes and kills. But it's really not. As much as it will drive NuclearBurrito nuts this really is a game of arbitrary win cons. If I could have escaped, but decided to save a teammate instead did I lose? If I play a really great game and facilitate others escape as a result is that a lose? Not to me it isn't. This really is the kind of game where the only thing that matters is achieving your goal. Whether your goal is a 4k, a double pip, an escape, or grinding out as many points as you can.
This is a competitive game.
The opposite of competitive is cooperative, not casual. This is not a cooperative game since it is PvP. Mario party is competitive as well and that game doesn't even have a ranking system.
Saving someone and dying is still a loss. That's what makes it altruistic.
-
@Carlosylu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/763888#Comment_763888
I just made a poll about this, and actually the answers are quite clear, people think a win is a win depending on their perception, I cannot assure PIPing is a win, but neither a 4k no pip. It depends on the person, for example, if I got a 4K no pips I feel like trash cause I know I didn't give myself a challenge, but sometimes a 2k double pip let's me feel like the game was a tie. It depends on the person's perpective.
The question isn't subjective. People are wrong a lot.
-
@Carlosylu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/763883#Comment_763883
OBVIOUSLY there are lacks on every rule, a 4k early game no pips without camping or tunneling is one of them. But that ain't what normally happens. Red and Purple Ranks will practically never let you do that for example. Piping is not a "you win rule" but it's the most objective way of knowing you did what you had to.
Ok well then it's still irrelevant.
Over multiple games the best player is the one who wins the most consistently.
If the most consistent way to win includes slugging and camping then I'd expect the best player to do these things.
If it turns out that those strategies aren't the best, then someone should be able to use alternative strategies to have successful results more consistently.
That hypothetical camping Killer will lose against Survivors that recognize the strategy and rush gens instead. THAT is why camping is bad, it's difficulty or fairness is irrelevant since as a Killer you should be trying to make things as easy and unfair in your favor as possible in order to maximize your winrate.
Camping is only bad (in the strategic sense) because it won't win you the game against Survivors that know how to counter it. If countering camping was extremely difficult and left you worse off anyways then it wouldn't be a bad strategy.
This is why we can conclude that Gen rushing is an excellent strategy. If you gen rush the Killer won't have enough time to accomplish anything thus allowing you to escape without much resistance. The fact that it's an easy and lame strategy is irrelevant, we aren't asking if it's a fun strategy we are asking if it's a successful strategy.
-
@Carlosylu said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/763844#Comment_763844
You're missleading the example, in both cases the doctor would've saved the patient, but the guy with C- would've left a horrible scar and many tissue exposed damage, meanwhyle the A+ would've propperly done everything and left no damage.
Apples compared with apples dude, not apples with watermelons, lol
For DBD, a killer who got a 4k no pips was just hardcore having an easy game (camped, tunneled, moried on sight), yes, he did his job, but the killer who let the survivors actually have a chance, didn't camp, didn't tunnel, didn't mori on first chance and double piped is a god tier killer, he made himself have a hard game and still got the 4k. I just compared a 4k with a 4k, apples vs apples, I could've given you a mixed example like you did to subjectivize this argument though, a 4k double pip ain't better than a 2k no pip?
The point is that the pipping system DOESN'T track wins.
It's not that it tracks degrees of wins, but that it's an entirely different scale. You can win and pip, win and not pip, lose and pip and lose and not pip.
However its the win vs loss that allows you to determine success, not pip vs nopip.
So it's like the test looks for the scars but completely ignores if the patient lives or not.
-
@Tucking_Friggered said:
Whatever else it would be it would definitely be boring.
Tic-tac-toe is balanced to a degree most games can not be with the only imbalance being in who moves first.
Balance does not equate to fun.
Fun trumps balance.
When it comes to competitive games, all other things being equal balance is better.
For example if in Tic tac toe the player who moves first could also guarantee a win no matter what the game would be even worse than it already is.
While balance is not the sole nor even the biggest factor in fun, it is an important method of improving how enjoyable a game is.
This often doesn't apply to single player games however for a variety of reasons.
-
Addons and items as they are now are inherently unbalanced due to being consumables.
My take on this:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/91361/major-addon-item-and-overall-progression-rework
-
Gen rushing maximizes my odds of escaping. Thus I ought do it.
-
@Carlosylu said:
Good sir, it's simple, you can get a 6 in an exam (C-) and pass it, but you could've gotten a 10 (A+). Who do you think is a good doctor, the one who passed his surgery exam with C- or the one who got an A+? Who would you pick to have surgery with?
Now, lets pass those examples to DBD, who is actually a better killer? The one who got a 2k+ without piping or the one who got a 2k+ and piped or the one who got a 2k+ and double piped?
It's as simple as that. Yes, getting a 4k and no pip implies you did your job, but that was a lame C- right there, give yourself a challenge by not camping or tunneling to get that A+ man.
Except that's not true since that's not how the pipping system works.
You get pips based off arbitrary tasks that are only indirectly related to the actual wincondition (with the exception of Unbreakable for Survivors).
So it's like of that same Surgery exam was completely ignoring your ability to save the patient and only cared about how much movement you made and the number of steps you took to complete the assignment.
Sure those things are related to preforming a Surgery, but it also means that someone using a super efficient but wrong method can pass while someone doing a more complicated but more effective method would fail.
Such an examination method would not reliably judge you based off how effective you are at preforming Surgery.
This is like that, however it's worse because it's the other way around. Someone using a drawn out and inefficient strategy which thus has a higher failure rate is more likely to pip than someone who wins as efficiently as possible, even though the second player is the better player due to being more effective.
So in the case of DBD all 3 of the Killers who got those 2k's failed their job. Even if they pipped they still failed to accomplish the task they were given. The person who 4k'ed succeeded.
So someone who consistently 4k black pips is better than a Killer who consistently 2k double pips. Who cares what grade your surgeon got if all his other patients died in his care? And I wouldn't care if my surgeon got a poor grade on an arbatrary test if his patients all got through to Surgery with no issue.
Pips track your process, but it's the end result that matters.
-
To make figuring out what everything does TREMENDOUSLY more annoying
-
@TAG said:
Obviously this means we should tie pipping/winning to Kills and Escapes. ;)
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/763731#Comment_763731
I always found it weird whenever people go "I judge winning by whether or not I have fun!" To me, it's a byproduct of the game having poorly established player wincons that force people to have to decide for themselves what a win means to them. Like, sure, the tutorial says you gotta Kill and Escape respectively, but in practice, that ain't how the game sees it.
yeah, if you say something is a wincon you need to be able to actually apply it. For example:
@BlindMole said:
It's a personal thing.
As a survivor i want to pip to get out of green ranks. Just want to get decent team mates (not saying a green is bad, but once I started playing with other purples or high reds i noticed a big difference)
As killer all i want is my 4 stacks of bbq. That's a win, and try to make a good time for everyone. I can barely go higher than rank 15 so toxic teams are not an often sight
if all 4 BBQ: Stacks = win then doesn't that mean anyone who hasn't found BBQ in the shrine and hasn't purchased Leatherface automatically loses due to being unable to get stacks on a perk they don't have?
That's literally pay to win.
Also it implies that a ton of perks are completely useless, for example Devour hope requires hooking people multiple times, past the first time hooking each person is redundant since you've already gotten your stack and thus they don't push your objective. And when you eventually start moring it's negative utility since you can sometimes instantly lose if you Mori the wrong person
-
@MisterCremaster said:
It's all theoretical, and doesn't matter. Did you have fun? Congrats, you win.
If you can't have fun with out escaping or getting your 4k (your idea of winning) then I wish you the best enjoying this game long term.
I don't care about pips, I want at least 2-3k, but realistically nothing more, because the higher rank I go the more toxic survivors I find the game and the less fun I have. At a certain point it doesn't matter if I'm piping or killing, because it just want a good experience.
No No No No No No No.
Fun is not a valid wincon! Why do people keep acting like it is?
If your describing how a round of dead by daylight and someone after hearing what happened asks "ok great but did you win?" You don't say yes if the Killer absolutely wrecked you and toyed with you for 5 minutes in the form of a somewhat enjoyable psudo-roleplay ending in you dying to devour.
You can't qualify fun and having fun isn't itself an accomplishment. An outside observer watching the game cannot use that criteria to determine a win and most importantly, you can't balance around it.
A wincon is not just how you personally like to play, or even what you want to accomplish in a game*. A wincon is the task the game is presenting to you. While any game can be useful or fulfilling only a round in which you complete the wincon can truly be called a successful round. You may succeed at something other than the trial itself but in order to succeed at a trial (as opposed to succeeding at some other task inside of a trial) you MUST complete the wincon.
And as per the tutorial of the game that wincon is the sacrifice the Survivors or if you are a Survivor to escape the trial.
No one is forcing you to attempt to win. However you do need to accept that the game is designed around the assumption that you will do so, and thus not playing towards the wincon can risk a suboptimal experience.
-
Ultimately you want teammates so they can help you do generators.
They are just means to and end. The generators and eventually the gate is the end
-
Never assume that the Killer not being in a chase means that no Survivors are being chased.
-
When I say that their power must help in a chase I don't mean "be kinda helpful".
I mean "This power completely negates the normal chase dynamics".
Running from a Huntress is categorically different from running from a Ghostface in ways that running from a Clown or Billy just isn't.
-
@Shura37 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/763024#Comment_763024
Okay but look at Clown. He has probably one of the best chase ending potentials in the game, he just severely lacks in map pressure. I'm not advocating for a Clown nerf or buff, I'm just providing an counter example
What ABOUT Clown? He's 115% and his power while helpful isn't enough to end chases on it's own.
When the Clown hits you with a bottle it becomes easier for him to hit you.
When the Huntress hits you with a hatchet you've already been hit.
-
Killers are 110% when their power is enough to reliably and single-handedly win chases.
Nurse, Spirit, Huntress and Hag meet this requirement.
Hillbilly does not.
Also Legion, Freddy, Wraith and Demogorgon exist as additional examples of Killers with mobility powers that don't have sufficient reliability to qualify for 110%.
-
4k or escaping. No exceptions. Trying to make up exceptions onto the existing winconditions just inflates your winrate and even if it didn't it makes optimizing your winrate lead to very weird and problematic results.
For example:
If having fun is a "win" how do I optimize that?
First of all the question is recursive. I have fun by optimizing my winrate.
However even if I ignore that how do I even determine if I've won or not? Fun is a spectrum while winning is binary, so it only works if I draw a line somewhere specific but how do you even quantify it in order to attempt that? Either way the rules of the game don't back up this wincon. Horror isn't even about fun anyways.
Or what about having good chases?
Well how do you determine if a chase is good or not? And how many do I need? And more importantly after I have a good chase if that is itself a win then why bother continuing past that? And doesn't that mean if the other side isn't good enough at chases that I automatically lose the game no matter what?
Or what about pips?
While at the very least pips can be quantified, they still don't work as a wincon for a similar reason as chases, specifically that a sufficiently incompetent opponent will guarantee your failure, when maximizing the difference in skill ought to also maximize the more skilled players chance of success.
Thus the only wincon that truely works is, surprise surprise, the actual wincon that the game officially uses according to the wincon portion of the tutorial.
-
@WickedMilk03 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/762791#Comment_762791
Yeah I underknow and I am saying that increasing time isnt the solution. I agree with you. Gens just need a full rework
You don't NEED to change gens at all. It's a possible solution but it's far from the only one.
We can solve the problem without making a single change to generator mechanics simply by giving Killers the tools to win faster, either through better map design, power changes or both.
-
@WickedMilk03 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/762753#Comment_762753
No. Increasing gen times isnt this answer. Decreasing them and adding a mobile objective to complete them is a way.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/95676/generator-rework-concept
I know its up to the killer to apply the pressure and it hasnt happened much that a match has lasted 2 minutes. The marth88 experiment proved it was unbalanced. 100 matches of swf with no perks and I am pretty sure they hardly ever lost and made killers lose pips almost every game.
I'm not saying that gen rush isn't a problem, just that slowing down gens isn't the only solution. Speeding up Killers also solves the issue.
-
@WickedMilk03 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/759837#Comment_759837
Agreed but the main issue is generators and should have been changed a few ago. If the game didnt release so gross they wouldnt have to have balanced nearly as much. I appreciate it but I just wish... gens were fixed.
I don't disagree, but I do think that it's a bit narrow minded to say that the only possible way to solve the time pressure issue is to make gens take longer.
If you are talking about the non-balance issues with gens then sure, but the gens aren't an issue in a vacuum. 80 seconds per gen would be far more than enough time for the Killer if his attacks instantly killed you outright with no build up required.
So somewhere between being looped for 2 minutes and instantly killing them is some Killer powerlevel which is balanced given 5 gens that take 80 seconds each. And I think we already have many Killers within that margin, for example Billy is fast enough when patrolling and can make up for chase time by getting in a few instant downs such that he can Kill everyone in the short amount of time he's given.
-
Use quick and quiet as a substitute. It's pretty underrated and is good anti-spirit
-
@Dreamnomad said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/760572#Comment_760572
Okay, so let me ask you another question. If they balanced the game to the point that the average survival rate at rank 1 is 50%, what do you think the average survival rate for the other 99% of survivors would be at? Do you think the average person would even want to play survivor? What do you think the wait time for killer lobbies would be at? Do you think new players would want to play a game they would die over and over and over again and after a few hundred hours of play time they might just get to the point where they can survive half the time?
Still 50%
Rank 1 Survivors are facing Rank 1 Killers. A lesser Survivor is facing a lesser Killer.
In otherwords the players that aren't as good at looping a Killer are being put against Killers that aren't as good at running loops.
If you design the game right it'll even out to a constant winrate at all or most ranks.
This specific kind of problem can be solved with a good matchmaking system.
-
6. Stab it really hard
-
He's the OG Killer, and he's not like most other horror icons, yet he still would probably fit right in if a movie was made about him.
-
@CrowFoxy said:
Another problem with balance is apparently they aim for 2k, 2 escape. Dbd has way, WAY too many variables to make that a legit target.
The large number of variables isn't the fundumental issue with the 2k goal.
That just makes it harder to implement but it doesn't make it impossible nor does it make it any less valid of a goal.
The REAL issue is that the goals provided to the player means that for the game to have a 2k average and be balanced (because those are not the same thing) you need the game to be insanely swingy such that there are only easy victories and crushing defeats with nothing inbetween.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/760117#Comment_760117
I brought up 80% only because another person was using the same flawed stats. I do not believe 55% is more accurate.
Well it is for the reasons I just mentioned.
Just because it isn't 100% perfect doesn't mean it isn't more accurate.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/760078#Comment_760078
Well like I mentioned there are still multiple other factors excluding the DC's so even we assumed 10% I still think it would be brought higher than 55%.
Regardless though, at this point we're getting into a lot of guessing and assumptions so it won't really serve us to much of a conclusion.
My main point is just that we shouldn't really use the data for anything because of how extremely flawed it is by a multitude of factors and unknowns.
Sure but you brought up 80% as a counter argument to the 55% even though 55% was the more accurate number.
I'm not drawing any conclusions based off that number and from what I've heard neither are the devs.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/759952#Comment_759952
"But for rank 1 specifically the effect was large enough to outweight that by a HUGE margin."
What are you referencing specifically in order to come to that conclusion? In other words if this is conjecture or based on something concrete.
"55% is the number when you do the check properly."
I don't see what information we have to make this assumption
"but I'd be shocked if DC's alone were enough to account for 30% of all results,"
Heck even 10% would be massive in effecting our conclusions here. There are also multiple other factors excluding DC's as well.
if the number is deflated by 10% then it's still closer to the 55% corrected figure the devs gave rather than the 80% given with the "post game rank" check.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/759834#Comment_759834
There are also a multitude of factors that artificial deflate the numbers as well. Rank 1 should not be excluded.
In general yes. But for rank 1 specifically the effect was large enough to outweight that by a HUGE margin.
55% is the number when you do the check properly.
There are still those artificial deflation stuff like DC's ect, but I'd be shocked if DC's alone were enough to account for 30% of all results, since DC's don't even end up being the deciding factor for 100% of Survivors in games where there is a DC.
-
The game is WAY more balanced than it used to be. It still needs some work and many Killers are still very under-powered. But it cannot be overstated just how far the game has came since even just a year ago.
The majority of Killers are at least usable at red ranks ect ect ect.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/759814#Comment_759814
It's actually 70-80 on the stats they gave
Those stats were taking their rank AFTER the match, which made the number inflated.
-
Btw this poll is missing both "buffs to power, nerfs to addons" and "Nerfs to power, buffs to addons"
-
Also, this is the worst excuse to do it. Because NOED was nerfed by this patch in 2 ways:
1 - The purple instant heal now grands Endurance, which can tank an instant down such as NOED. Thus making that matchup more favorable than before.
2 - Detectives Hunch was buffed to work on all gens and last longer, thus meaning that someone running the perk will be more effective at finding totems and thus countering NOED.
Removal of the red instant heal isn't particularly relevant for NOED users in particular due to it already bypassing the extra health state anyways.
-
While annoying, this isn't how you solve these types of problems.
The only time you'd want to make something like this a rule is if breaking it literally breaks the game AND also isn't possible to mechanically prevent.
For example: posting screenshots in a social deduction game.
This does neither of those.
-
@Poochkips said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/757781#Comment_757781
Ahh, tbh I've never ran into a game with anyone running the perk. I'm around rank 8. Then again I play pig and clown...not ghostface so I guess I wouldnt know lol
Pig is getting the same buffs so this will matter to you too.
-
@Poochkips said:
I thought spinechill trumps all killer stealth or was that premonition
Both. They work against undetectable.
Object of Obsession is a different perk which doesn't have that property.
-
Head On
Literally in the name
-
@yandere777 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/95193/survivor-perk-idea-paragon
At first I thought it was too strong but I glossed over the outside of TR and not in chase condition so I take my initial impression out, but I strongly feel the wording should be changed. Just list every action besides vaulting, gen repair, self healing and mending then the perk would be balanced. having a max 20% self heal sounds a tad it too strong to me, especially considering how the perks seems more of a team player perk.
I just gotta ask one thing. How would the perk tell if a survivor finished a whole gen or only joined in at the last second? I feel until this can be consistently represented the perk should find an alternative to tracking a gen. It'll be one thing to just slowly fill up the perk icon to show your progress but then you won't be able to track all the other objectives you would need to do
My solution would be to simply track the final charge of a gen/heal, much like how detectives hunch and dark sense used to work and how buckle up works now with Survivors in the dying state.
While it's certainly not the best solution ever since it isn't foolproof like "a generators worth of repairs" is it does solve the problem of being hard to represent and since the idea isn't that any individual task is hard to complete I'm ok with them being cheesed on occasion.
-
@Irvin said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/756006#Comment_756006
A lot of perks reward for playing the game, survivor and killer.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/95193/survivor-perk-idea-paragon
Nice perk not sure how many would run it but it would offer some niche gameplay
I'd imagine it'd be used in altruism builds. Since it impacts both healing speed and shows Survivors where you are (and thus that they should go to you in order to be healed) much like a reverse empathy.
-
@WickedMilk03 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/95193/survivor-perk-idea-paragon
This perk is literally pre pubescent mettle of man. Rewarding survivors for playing the game. I dont get it
While you are fairly likely to preform those actions at some point in the game (and I have designed the perk with the assumption that they will often get all 5 tokens) unless you are going out of your way to preform them it's going to take awhile before you start getting all of the bonuses.
The idea is that you need to do a lot of different things rather than a single thing a lot of times like other token based perks are.
-
This rework doesn't have a hit count.
-
It's hard to notice a difference. I didn't play against many omega Nurses and basekit is still pretty similar to run from.
Yeah I could probably notice the differences if I tried, but if I'm not looking for them I wouldn't be able to tell.
-
I like playing the team medic. We'll make it, Second wind, ect and go for heals to keep everyone healthy.
-
@WickedKatz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/94949/mettle-of-man-rework
I think it should just be reset if you are hooked
What should be reset?
-
@Kumakx said:
Could be a little too strong in coordinated SWF groups. Specially for killers that are weak at looping (like lets say legion / doc / plague), when well-coordinated there would be 3 players on killer (4th just chillin on the gens):
- one looping,
- one ready to take a hit and take place of looping one.
- one that would heal injured guy so he can take the hit from one who is looping.
So, idea as it is could be too strong in my opinion (obviously im talking about optimal use of it, but that's what SWF could do).
Maybe make it activate once per game? But that could be too weak.
Maybe give it a long cooldown?
I don't know what to do but something should be done.
It's worth mentioning that people scream after being injured. So they'd have to run calm spirit to make that work properly.
Any case though if it's too strong there are plenty of ways to but a limit on it:
* Make it an exhaustion perk
* Just keep the existing downside (which makes it further easier to just chase the MoM user attempting this)
* Use a token system like distortion
* Give it an additional prerequisite (preferably not a protection hit due to how finicky that is)
* Something else
-
@SkeletalElite said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/753657#Comment_753657
That's an angle I'd never considered
Interesting perspective, but the one critique I have is things don't tend to be so flat. Mathematically that makes sense but the entire distribution is important as well. Things like the shape and and standard deviations of these rates should be considered. I think thinking backwards makes this easier. By asking, ideally, what do we want the distribution of kill rate to look like? Do we want the upper and lower 15% of games to be 0k/4k respectively? 10%, 20%? Do we even want them to be even? I have no idea what these numbers should be but thinking backwards rather than from the top down makes a little more sense here I think.
I know, that's exactly how I concluded that a 2.7k average is better than a 2k average or 3.2k average.
2k and 3.2k mean fixed kill distributions of either only 0k and 4k or only 3k and 4k.
I calculated 2.7k by first setting 3k = 4k and working backwards from there. So I did just this.
But regardless of what other factors you want you do need a fixed winrate which applies to all players equally in order for the game to be balanced by definition.
-
oh yeah, and there are 4 of them.