NuclearBurrito2
NuclearBurrito2
About
- Username
- NuclearBurrito2
- Joined
- Visits
- 143
- Last Active
Comments
-
Ok I literally swapped out every instance of part gen with "stick with beef" and it doesn't change my argument a bitAlwaysInAGoodShape said:I kinda already played that game by replacing parts with totem.
You said:
What have I proven here? Absolutely nothing, since the generators are still required and the totem still isn't
With sticks, the generators are no longer required.
-
I kinda already played that game by replacing parts with totem.AlwaysInAGoodShape said:Now replace the word part-generator with the word sticks with beef.
See how nothing inherently changed gameplay wise?
See how the factor of you doing "the same thing" no longe equals doing a generator? since generators can be done through different ways?That is my point. It's only semantics;
If you instead add the parts to a stick right to the gen nothing changes gameplay wise. Are we suddenly "doing different things" now?No, because doing a gen is no longer "doing the same thing". The routes are a completely different experience and both are doing the main objective;
You can open the gates with sticks (part-gens) or do them with flat gens, without ever having to do them with the other.
Semantics. Semantics; semantics.
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape
I think I see what @Paddy4583 is saying even though he isn't explaining it well.Basically your thing is collecting parts to put them on gens to make them go faster
Doing a gen with parts has a name (flat gening)
Doing a gen without parts also has a name (sticks with beef)Collectively they are simply just doing a generator.
However regardless of what you do you always eventually have to do a generator. The thing is that while if you want to do a stick with beef you have to get parts, the actual act of getting parts is not itself doing a generator any more than cleansing the ruin totem is doing a generator. It may speed things up and is important but it is not itself the objective.
I could do all sorts of variations of the same objective and say that they are distinct but that doesn't make anything more or less mandatory.
Ex:
Let the act of cleansing 1 or more totems and then going a generator be called "totem repairing"
Let the act of doing a generator before doing any totems be called "cursed repairing"
In order to win you do not have to do totem repair nor do you have to do cursed repairing. Thus they are both optional.
What have I proven here? Absolutely nothing, since the generators are still required and the totem still isn't the fact that I have defined 2 words in terms of doing the totems before hand or not has no barring on the fact that I need to do generators and I don't need to do totems
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Paddy4583 said:
AlwaysInAGoodShape said:I’ll help you see it my way by changing your definitions and the original outlined proposal and idea, while completely avoiding your actual argument.
My argument is not defeated. We only changed the word: "Part-Generator" to "Stick with beef" and flat generator to (only 1 type of) generator to make it simpler for you to understand, while keeping the gameplay the exact same.
Now, paddy? Do you see how doing generators is a side-quest when you can just do sticks? (:
Tasty
-
My issue with this (sort of. Again it probably would improve the game if implemented well but still) is that the bar you mentioned of 420 seconds is still 420 seconds after this change. The whole point of adding more objectives is so that we can increase that 420 timer without making the existing steps take more time.
-
Can you 2 just shut up about this
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
More importantly I think this suggestion misses the point of why additional required objectives are wanted.The whole reason why it would help is because we want to slow the game down, but we don't want to increase generator times further, the solution is to give things besides generators that need to be done. However if they DON'T need to be done then either you still have to increase generator time or you haven't slowed down the game at all
It doesn't miss any point. Is sets in place the structure to nerf separate routes and provides a more functional system for in the late-game, that no longer requires us to have a replacement of the game the moment it starts malfunctioning (called the hatch).
That's great and all. I'm not saying this suggestion doesn't have any merit. But at the end of the day you still are left with the fact that you have to slow down the game somehow and this part system simply doesn't do that.
There are ways we COULD do that (such as making generators require at least 1 part) but until I can say that in order to escape you must do gens, open the gates AND x the issue will still be there. 7 minutes just isn't enough time to kill everyone and that would be the amount of time for a singe person to do all of the gens AND open the gate (not counting travel time but also THAT IS JUST 1 PERSON WORKING ON GENS WHEN THERE ARE 4 SURVIVORS!)
Survivors can escape via the gate in 2 minutes without any perks or tools not counting travel time assuming they don't get chased at all. (80 seconds per gen*5 gens = 400 seconds, 400/4 survivors = 100 seconds + 20 seconds to open the gate = 120 seconds)
If you were to instead place 3 part crafting stations around the map which require 20 seconds to build and install into a generator and is required to do on every generator and then a power cell station in the basement which takes 10 seconds to acquire before opening a gate then that would be
(100 seconds per gen *5 gens = 500 seconds 500/4 = 125 seconds + 30 seconds to open the gate = 155 seconds)
Stuff like that. Having it so you could if you wanted to KEEP building parts and installing them for the mechanics you mentioned in the OP then that is no problem
-
@powerbats said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
Dev statements change nothing here. My claim is mathematical and thus if you want to refute it then you need to show that I made a mistake in my math.
If the hatch is a 50/50 then in a perfectly balanced game everyone has a 30% winrate
If the hatch is survivor sided then in a perfectly balanced game everyone has a winrate bellow 30%
If the hatch is killer sided then in a perfectly balanced game everyone has a winrate above 30%
Dev statements do not and cannot change that fact
Ok you just lost all credibility with that one saying devs statements changes nothing here since your math goes out the windows since you don't have all the data they do.
So as far as your mathematical equations goes, if it's based upon a faulty premise it's still faulty no matter how good your math is if the underlying premise is false.
The survival rate included the hatch so it being below 50% means the hatch is working just fine and thus the only change needed is hatch standoffs.
No no no.
I am calculating what should be. The dev's data shows what currently is.
You say it is based on a faulty premise? Which premise is faulty and why?
The survival rate including the hatch being <50% does not mean the hatch is fine.
If the hatch was genuinely a free win thus 100% of survivors escaped with the hatch and 100% of 3k's fail to become 4k's then that could still mean only a 25% winrate for survivors, but since that means a 0% winrate for killers it isn't ok.The absolute winrate's do not matter. What is important is making sure that they are the same
Or in otherwords, the odds of a specific survivor escaping should be the same as the odds of no survivors escaping.
A graph showing all possible winrates would be here: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/tdz5er4v0h
x = Average Kills per match
y = Winrate given that averageThe shaded area is the possible values because every game has at least 1 winner (20% winrate) and the Killer can't have a WR above 50% (thus survivor's can't either)
-
More importantly I think this suggestion misses the point of why additional required objectives are wanted.
The whole reason why it would help is because we want to slow the game down, but we don't want to increase generator times further, the solution is to give things besides generators that need to be done. However if they DON'T need to be done then either you still have to increase generator time or you haven't slowed down the game at all
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Paddy4583 said:
We weren’t talking about your idea, we were talking about the actual game as it is... COHEARANCE!!!!!No. You don't know what you are talking about;
Amazing idea definitely see everyone doing this optional side quest.
Yes please, what do you have in mind?
Id imagine it being described something like this:The objective that I'm going to create will not be mandatory..... and if it’s not mandatory it’s.......
Haha 😂
Your not very good with analogy’s either it seems.The objective that I'm going to create will not be mandatory..... and if it’s not mandatory Its???
You try to paint this as a "side-quest", while not understanding that Route A as a result also became a "side-quest" as a result of the new route B, which is the basis on which you tried to delegitimise it.
It's a very bad idea trying to say that "we weren't talking about that!" in a place where everything you type has been saved 😂
We can see what we were talking about, and you don't know what you are talking about yourself!
You definition of a flat generator is flawed. Right now if I do a generator with a toolbox then that generator will take less than 80 seconds, if the killer kicks the generator then it will take more than 80 seconds ect ect ect
-
######### is up with this community.
I play to win
-
@powerbats said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
If you want to raise the winrates for everyone then you want the Killer to be favored in a 1v1, while if you want to lower winrates you want to favour the survivor in endgame.This is incorrect since on average as the devs have said it's a 50-50 is the desired outcome which is average considering the survival rate is below 50%.
Dev statements change nothing here. My claim is mathematical and thus if you want to refute it then you need to show that I made a mistake in my math.
If the hatch is a 50/50 then in a perfectly balanced game everyone has a 30% winrate
If the hatch is survivor sided then in a perfectly balanced game everyone has a winrate bellow 30%
If the hatch is killer sided then in a perfectly balanced game everyone has a winrate above 30%
Dev statements do not and cannot change that fact
-
@powerbats said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
Btw the ACTUAL survivor WR is about 40%. So thus a 1v1 needs to be Killer sided in order to be fair with that winrateUhhhh.. wouldn't that mean the hatch should be survivor sided since they have LESS of a chance to win? If a survivor has a 40% win rate, that means killer has a 60% chance, which means killer has the advantage.
No a 40% winrate overall.
As in including 2-4 person escapes. Not just 40% hatch escapes.
4k rate is 25% in comparison. That means this game is 15% too survivor sided
No, it's not supposed to be that easy to get a 4k so 25% is just fine because otherwise why bother even playing, just load in auto sacrificed.
If the average is supposed to be 2k 2 escape that means that a 3k should be around 38%(?) and the 4k around 25% which is perfectly fine.
Actually if the average is supposed to be 2k then a 3k should be 0%.
This is because the only way for the game to be balanced with a 2k average is if every game is either a 0k or a 4k (since a 2k average means a 50% survivor winrate. SWR = KWR so that means 4k odds must be 50%, since the only way for survivors to win half the time with a 50% win rate is if they ALWAYS win when the killer loses and that means no 1,2 or 3k's what so ever.
-
out of 40% of survivor's. 14% of them escape via the hatch
That means (0.14*0.4 = 0.056) that the survivor escapes via the hatch in 5.6% of games.
Wait ######### I don't actually have all of my data as this doesn't take into account solo gate escapes cuz it is reasonable for the last to people to finish the last gen and then have one of them get caught while the other opens the gate. Still, there is the numbers I have so far
-
Wait I'm speculating again. I'ma actually calculate the exact hatch win/lose rate real quick.
I'm starting with:
40% of survivors escape
14% of escaped survivors did so with the hatch
25% of games are 4k's -
@thesuicidefox said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
Ok so again. If the survivor and Killer both haven't necessarily proven themselves then shouldn't endgame 1v1 be a 50/50? Cuz right now the hatch is in the survivors favorYou even say it should be 50/50. If you make it killer sided you just push it to 30/70 or better for killer. Also hatch is NOT survivor sided, it's pretty equal. In fact I'd argue that because killer has free rein of the map and are faster than survivors, they actually have the advantage because they are more likely to find the hatch first. What you are talking about is hatch STANDOFF which does favor the survivor, but that's an issue that is universally agreed to be bad for the game and needs a fix. The hatch itself though is just fine.
The hatch standoff is 50/50 since it is whoever preforms the arbitrary lose action first. However there are more ways for the survivor to win than for the killer to win and doing so is easier.
A: Killer patrols generators, you run into the hatch and win
B: Killer camps the hatch, you do gens are leave via the gateThe second the survivor knows where the hatch is he's basically already won even if the Killer found it first. So the only way for the Killer have a reasonable shot at winning is for him to find the Survivor before the Survivor finds the hatch (which isn't a guaranteed win as he might either survive the chase or randomly find the hatch in the middle of it)
BTW I got my stats from dev statements. So they aren't speculation
-
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
Btw the ACTUAL survivor WR is about 40%. So thus a 1v1 needs to be Killer sided in order to be fair with that winrateUhhhh.. wouldn't that mean the hatch should be survivor sided since they have LESS of a chance to win? If a survivor has a 40% win rate, that means killer has a 60% chance, which means killer has the advantage.
No a 40% winrate overall.
As in including 2-4 person escapes. Not just 40% hatch escapes.
4k rate is 25% in comparison. That means this game is 15% too survivor sided
-
Btw the ACTUAL survivor WR is about 40%. So thus a 1v1 needs to be Killer sided in order to be fair with that winrate
-
I never said anything about free. Survivor sided means his escape chance given a 1v1 is anywhere from 51-100%powerbats said:@NuclearBurrito2 said:
What are they even going to do? Say that my math was wrong?
Afterall I didn't actually make any claims around that conclusion
He's ignoring the fact that every time someone either a survivor r fellow killer main uses logic that he or they don't like they have a conniption fit.
The survivor isn't entitled to a free escape nor is it one as i've pointed out both logically and factually and they have to actually make it to the hatch and get out.
Besides which if it's ok to camp, tunnel, slug for killers and they should play how they want that survivor hiding all game is equally fine. What's good for the goose is good for the gander as they say unless it's the killer mains on here complaining about the hatch.
I don't have an issue with it, if they get it fine, if they don't fine as well, my ego isn't that big that I must get a 4k every match. If I know someone is doing nothing the entire game I'll go look for them and leave the person actually doing something alone.
Most of the time I find them and hook them and let the other person go unless they try and make a save and i'll whack em and make sure the lazy one still dies.
I'd estimate it to be around 70% but the point is that in order for it to be fair the Killer and Survivor should have exactly equal odds of winning the 1v1.
If you want to raise the winrates for everyone then you want the Killer to be favored in a 1v1, while if you want to lower winrates you want to favour the survivor in endgame.
No the killer shouldn't get a 4k every game. Instead they should get a 4k about every 3rd game on average (good killers will get more. Bad killers will get less. It just needs to even out)
-
Ok so again. If the survivor and Killer both haven't necessarily proven themselves then shouldn't endgame 1v1 be a 50/50? Cuz right now the hatch is in the survivors favorpowerbats said:@Tsulan said:
Ahh I've been expecting you.
It's undeserved because potatoes can hide during the whole match in lockers and get the hatch. I've witnessed survivors hiding and doing nothing while I was hooked. Thx to the locker buff, I don't have to watch this anymore. (Weeee)
Or survivors that escaped through the hatch with a whooping 9k points and saying gg ez.
No ######### it was easy. He didn't do anything during the whole match.As I said somewhere else. If the killer doesn't has a similar mechanic, it's not deserved.
So because a potato can hide the entire match and get the hatch the hatch should be removed, that's some really bad logic you've got there.
Yes and let's pretend that killers don't say gg ez when they destroy a bunch of potatoes or hard camp with 5-9k points.
Because heck they did nothing the entire match except camp, they didn't patol gens, they didn't damage said gens they did nothing.
Should we remove NOED then because a bad killer can get kills with it after sucking the entire match? Should we remove hook caming that reward bad killers as well then?
We could go down the list of all the things bad killers get kills with using that logic and say they're undeserved because they got those kills.
Lets just remove lockers and loops entirely, all perks, all windows, items and addons and all survivors start the game on 2nd stage hook.
Now congratulations you've got nothing left to complain about, you automatically 4k every match and your games are over in less than 30 seconds.
Oh sure survivors will stop playing so your lobbies will dry up but hey you can't complain about the hatch anymore or the insta heals nor anything else.
-
Oh and just in case someone wants to bring it up.
For every game where the last 2 people are caught at about the same time or when the last person is caught before 2 gens are done there is a game where the 2nd to last person is caught when the gates are either open or are almost open so they just escape ignoring the hatch
-
@RSB said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
Mostly Pointless Math warning!
Ok so survivors say that Killers are not entitled to the 4k just because he got a 3k on potentially potato survivors. Ok fair, however:
That 4th survivor also is not entitled to an escape just because he outlived 3 potentially tunneled survivors. And maybe hid the whole game without helping ect.
Thus given 1 survivor, 1 killer since neither of them are entitled to anything they should both have a 50% chance of winning
All roles should be just as likely to achieve their win condition as each other on average in regards to prior probability. Or in otherwords Survivor WR = Killer WR
Since the 1 survivor here only has a 1/4 chance of being the living survivor in this situation and a 1/2 chance of winning given it that means a survivor should have a 12.5% chance of winning via a 1v1
Since the Killer only wins when the survivors are dead that means the highest his winrate can be is 50%. Since that is his winrate given a 1v1 and prior to that point he had a chance of losing without getting to the 1v1. (The 12.5 odds for survivor already takes this fact into account BTW).
SWR = KWR so if the Killer wins 50% of the time then the Survivors must ALSO win 50% of the time
Without violating the 1v1 situation this is impossible. Thus survivor winrate and killer winrate are both bellow 50%.
If all winrates are below 50% then the average game cannot be a 0 - 2k as this would have >=50% of survivors winning on average or a WR above 50%.
Since a 3k needs to be just as likely as 4k due to the fact that if a 4k is a 50/50 once you get to 3k then there is a 3k at equal probability as 4k's.
SWR = KWR and SWR given a 4k is 0% 3k is 25% 2k is 50% 1k is 75% and 0k is 100%
Thus the expected WR for everyone is 30% exactly with an average of 2.8 kills per game. 2.8/4 = 0.7, 1-0.7 = 0.3 = 30%
4k and 3k being 60% of games means that the remaining 40% of games have an average of 1.7 killsIncreasing the average kills per game decreases the number of 4k's and 3k's. Since decreasing the number of 4k's causes the average to go down faster than increasing the number of 2k's ect makes it go up that means we can't have more kills on average.
Same but in reverse for a lower kill average.
Thus a fair hatch means a winrate of 30%
No analysis. You have fun with that number
Don't implement logic here, survivors will just SCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEE and throw their "omg u wunt ez 4k ;<<" arguments.
What are they even going to do? Say that my math was wrong?
Afterall I didn't actually make any claims around that conclusion
-
Oh God no.Mockingbird_X said:Paid in life: You have 4%/8%/12% chance per each other living Survivor of ignoring the hit that would put you into the dying state, instead stunning the Killer for 2 seconds. This effect can only be triggered once every 120 seconds if you are the Killer’s Obsession. Otherwise this effect can be triggered only once every 240 seconds. Increases your chance of being the Killer’s Obsession.
“You are doing everything he asks, it’s in his interests to keep you alive as long as possible.”
With the right combination of perks you would be still in play for 6 hits in a single chasr
2 normal
1 this perk
1 DS
1-2 Die Hard
1 Deliverance -
"DON'T WORRY GUYS IM JUST ANOTHER LIFE SACK OF WEAKNESS. LETS GO DO PEOPLEY THINGS AND EXIT A DOOR. DO NOT BE CONSIRNED BY THE MASK, THAT'S NORMAL"Dabrownman1812 said:If you load in and see a 5th survivor you know something is up lol. -
The important part isn't that it is used. Anyone using discord would be able to ignore the inclusion of in game chat and it wouldn't matter. The important part is that we can use an in game VC to let us balance with it in mind.vampire_toothy said:@NuclearBurrito2 said:
Honestly I consider this the lesser of 2 evils.In a perfect world we would be able to have SWF groups who never share info and the game would always be 100% balanced without the need for VC because friends weren't communicating with each other.
But that's not happening, so we can instead do the next best thing and give everyone the same tools so we can properly balance in accordance with reality.
Everyone having VC is bad sure. But only SOME people having VC is much worse.
Also perks made obsolete can be reworked to account for changes
You do have an interesting point, but it is a bit harder to sell me on the "give everyone VC". If there ever were to be one in the game I'd much rather it be a preference that anyone can have on or off - though odds are that most groups probably wouldn't bother to use the ingame chat when they already have programs like discord.
Vc isn't an unfair advantage if everyone has it -
3 survivors and 11 times a match
-
So I heard the new killer used telekinesis...
-
@The_Crusader said:
NuclearBurrito2 said:@The_Crusader said:
AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@The_Crusader Then they would just lose pressure at a later stage. It still allows all survivors on generators to stay on generators. Yes, but for 1 if-statement added to the perk, you'd only have to avoid getting DS'ed 1 single time. If you managed to get anyone dead without getting DS'ed, further DS's will be significantly less impactful when there's only 3 people alive. Yeah but that's a bif "IF". It would still be possible to use it with 4 survivors alive. I think if non-obsessions can use an obsession perk, then obsession perks like Dying light and rancor should apply to the non-obsession too if they are using an obsession perk. Dying light - 25% if the obsession dies, 10-15% if a non-obsession dies. Rancor - exposed + kill on the obsession, exposed only on non-obsession. Sure it would cripple STBFL but these 2 perks get massive buffs so it's worth it.
It's only fair..
Rancor = NOED+ now
Only on people using obsession perks.
Exposed on non-obsesion = NOED
The location reveal and Obsesion Mori make it +
-
@ShyN3ko said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
@ShyN3ko said:
This game is still survivor side, but ok.
I still think, DbD need a game rework.
Generators are boring and killer are underpowered.
Both sides doesnt have much fun.I have fun, because i do stupid killer builds.
Something like this?: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/319092
Yep, something like this.
Help me brainstorm details on that thread then please. What map specific objectives? What would the parts look like anyways? What non-objective objects would be intractable and what would they do? How long should everything take? Total? Individually? Ect ect ect
-
Mostly Pointless Math warning!
Ok so survivors say that Killers are not entitled to the 4k just because he got a 3k on potentially potato survivors. Ok fair, however:
That 4th survivor also is not entitled to an escape just because he outlived 3 potentially tunneled survivors. And maybe hid the whole game without helping ect.
Thus given 1 survivor, 1 killer since neither of them are entitled to anything they should both have a 50% chance of winning
All roles should be just as likely to achieve their win condition as each other on average in regards to prior probability. Or in otherwords Survivor WR = Killer WR
Since the 1 survivor here only has a 1/4 chance of being the living survivor in this situation and a 1/2 chance of winning given it that means a survivor should have a 12.5% chance of winning via a 1v1
Since the Killer only wins when the survivors are dead that means the highest his winrate can be is 50%. Since that is his winrate given a 1v1 and prior to that point he had a chance of losing without getting to the 1v1. (The 12.5 odds for survivor already takes this fact into account BTW).
SWR = KWR so if the Killer wins 50% of the time then the Survivors must ALSO win 50% of the time
Without violating the 1v1 situation this is impossible. Thus survivor winrate and killer winrate are both bellow 50%.
If all winrates are below 50% then the average game cannot be a 0 - 2k as this would have >=50% of survivors winning on average or a WR above 50%.
Since a 3k needs to be just as likely as 4k due to the fact that if a 4k is a 50/50 once you get to 3k then there is a 3k at equal probability as 4k's.
SWR = KWR and SWR given a 4k is 0% 3k is 25% 2k is 50% 1k is 75% and 0k is 100%
Thus the expected WR for everyone is 30% exactly with an average of 2.8 kills per game. 2.8/4 = 0.7, 1-0.7 = 0.3 = 30%
4k and 3k being 60% of games means that the remaining 40% of games have an average of 1.7 killsIncreasing the average kills per game decreases the number of 4k's and 3k's. Since decreasing the number of 4k's causes the average to go down faster than increasing the number of 2k's ect makes it go up that means we can't have more kills on average.
Same but in reverse for a lower kill average.
Thus a fair hatch means a winrate of 30%
No analysis. You have fun with that number
-
@Dead_by_David said:
Rebel_Raven said:It's having vast Intel at your fingertips.
Killer location.
Intel on their loadouts.
Totem locations.
Where people are being chased or downed.All this, and more without having to use perk slots.
The game isn't balanced for the speed of communication. The killers are too slow to get to people that know they're coming, they are too slow to kill, etc.
Yeah, it's not always like that, but it is more often than some would ever admit.
And they're looking at it, usually from the perspective of a well armed killer.
A lot of SWFs are looking to bully killers in their teen ranks.The Intel, and coordination is what really sets chat users apart from solos.
It makes the game a bit too difficult for the killers they're after. It takes killers at end game, usually those with stockpiles of moris and purple addons to claim they're fine for the most part. Most of us aren't that.I get the information issue, a good way to fix this is maybe give killer more information?
No because that doesn't actually solve the problem. Which is that everyone who isn't SWF does NOT have this information, and thus any buffs/nerfs in response to SWF is to the detriment of solos since everyone is playing the same game fundamentally.
The only 2 solutions I can think of are:
A: Remove survive with friends (like you said this would cause people to leave since people LIKE playing with friends)
or
B: Add voice chat to the game. Suddenly SWF is redundant as you can ALWAYS communicate. Then you can just balance accordingly since the Blue line has been moved up to the green line so to speak. (This makes a lot of perks suddenly useless, such as bond and other survivor tracking perks, since survivors can just have that information perkless. Perks such as those would need to be reworked as a result of this) -
Heal over time is equivalent to exposed in almost every way.
Remember:
Injured: down in 1
Exposed: down in 1
Injured but being healed: down in 1
Until you are both healthy and with 0 exposed statuses you have not finished the heal.
So no, temporary exposure doesn't screw over the user unless it is too long because they are still in the same situation as before only now with a timer till they get their second shot back. -
In my mind additional objectives should both be mandatory but with failsafes.
Ex: Have parts around the map that need to be put into generators before you can repair them (or before you can put them over 50% or something). There are slightly more parts than gens (like 10 or something) so You always have more than 1 that can be found.
The basement has power cells that need to be put into the gate to open it once the generators are done, but if you power all 7 gens instead of just 5 then you can bypass this.
Stuff like that
-
@Entità said:
No comments?
No comments.
-
Other way around. Good Killers are the ones who don't need ruin but run it anyways because you want to maximize your odds of winning.
This is a video game, play to win
-
@vampire_toothy said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
Literally just do the title.Everyone has SWF level info and coordination, then rework anything that needs reworking as a result of this, then Nerf survivors/Buff Killers to counterbalance the change.
Trying to avoid the issue of VC without removing SWF and the pregame survivor chat is futile, so instead just balance with the assumption that it is there
This wouldn't work, this is because there is no guarantee that a group of friends will want to use a VC with the solo to begin with. Some friend groups would rather just have a casual conversation as they play the game rather than have someone scream about what killer is being used or what they are doing and in return you end up causing certain perks which solo's occasionally use (example : kindred) to become obsolete. The main thing to keep in mind is that you don't know the random person you're going into a match with, you could hope that it will be a pleasant experience or it could just be a horrible match with nothing but complaints, slurs, screaming, etc. This is obviously worse case scenario, but I'm just not so sure about how many people are all that excited about the idea of having an ingame voice chat.
Honestly I consider this the lesser of 2 evils.
In a perfect world we would be able to have SWF groups who never share info and the game would always be 100% balanced without the need for VC because friends weren't communicating with each other.
But that's not happening, so we can instead do the next best thing and give everyone the same tools so we can properly balance in accordance with reality.
Everyone having VC is bad sure. But only SOME people having VC is much worse.
Also perks made obsolete can be reworked to account for changes
-
We could also put doors in buildings such as the Killer shack (on the non-pallet side) which can be opened and closed quickly but loudly or slowly but silently by survivors (much like windows. QaQ may or may not work here idk) and always quickly by Killer. The key item could be used to lock a door with a channel stopping both survivors and killers from opening it unless unlocked by another key.
Maybe another orb thing from above could let the Killer break locked doors or something. Or maybe if that's too much he can just do it whenever but that's another thing to break ect
-
For the Killer collectible I mentioned, there could be some kind of soul orb thing (it doesn't really matter what it is) around the map. Picking one up and bringing it to the basement would grant buffs as you collect them for example:
3 collected = Reduces TR by 10%
5 collected = 2% haste
7 collected = Get noise notification of someone STARTING to unhook someone
15 collected = See aura's of survivors more than 50 meters away from you (remember that if it gets late enough for the killer to get this then either the survivors are about to win or someone is hyper immersed and it's late game enough that we need to do the final chase already dammit) -
Say instead of a Key like I've been suggesting. The basement would have power cells, which are required to power objects. Generators can also power specific things and repairing them requires parts not cells so no change there. just a flavor thing
Each cell could power one object and is consumed by doing so. You can't partially consume one, when powering gates you put in a cell and use a channel to open the power doors.
The hatch area (imagine the hatch leads to a playable underground section that the killer can follow you into. If you aren't the last one alive then this is a similar risk to the basement but more exploitable due to the notification when being opened) would require 3 cells (all needing a channel to be activated) and there are a total of 5 in the basement. Each person can only take 1 cell at a time and someone dying destroys a cell.
The hatch escape (a door that all these cells are powering in the underground) requires 1 less cell every time someone dies so the last person can use it to escape like now just with an underground area to go through first, if it's designed such that the cells are the hard part rather than the door itself then this won't change THAT much for the endgame.
-
TLDR. Gameplay loop For survivors would go from:
Gens -> Gens -> Gate -> Escape (+ chases and optional stuff)
to:
Parts -> Gens -> Basement Key/Hatch/Map Specific -> Gate/Underground/Map Specific -> Escape (+ chases and optional stuff)2nd one is way more interesting and varied than the 1st
-
@powerbats said:
Sigh this sin't going to work because as has been pointed out no one will use it in place of Discord etc because they don't want to listen to a screaming 12 year old. Then you've got the friends just playing around and talking about gf's, work etc who won't use it.
Who care's if they aren't using it in place of discord? A game balanced with in game VC should work just as well with 3rd party VC.
-
@powerbats said:
The well if you balance around it then buff killers works right up to the point you forge that the solo's aree on the only one possibly using it and they get screwed.I don't know what this is trying to say. Can you reword it/check for typo's please?
-
@Luigifan64 said:
@NuclearBurrito2 said:
Literally just do the title.Everyone has SWF level info and coordination, then rework anything that needs reworking as a result of this, then Nerf survivors/Buff Killers to counterbalance the change.
Trying to avoid the issue of VC without removing SWF and the pregame survivor chat is futile, so instead just balance with the assumption that it is there
No (do I really need to say more?)
You absolutely need to say more. If I can't take the advice and use it to either A: Form a proper rebuttal, B: Tweak the solution to address it's issues or C: Make an alternate suggestion to a similar effect that doesn't have the same issues, then you haven't said enough.
If I am able to do A then either you are wrong, right but aren't sure why (which still isn't helpful) or you still need to say more
-
@powerbats said:
Sigh this sin't going to work because as has been pointed out no one will use it in place of Discord etc because they don't want to listen to a screaming 12 year old. Then you've got the friends just playing around and talking about gf's, work etc who won't use it.The well if you balance around it then buff killers works right up to the point you forge that the solo's aree on the only one possibly using it and they get screwed.
Oh yeah also have some kind of text option for them. Maybe more if needed.
-
@ShyN3ko said:
This game is still survivor side, but ok.
I still think, DbD need a game rework.
Generators are boring and killer are underpowered.
Both sides doesnt have much fun.I have fun, because i do stupid killer builds.
Something like this?: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/319092
-
I mean I feel sorry for them. But I play to win.
I'll just apologize in the end game chat
-
@Lonefox64 said:
Cymer said:The devs stated multiple times there will be no supernatural creepypasta killers or monsters.
They arent putting in a clown killer either right? They said that line alot aswell.
Right. Of course not that would be silly...
...Wait a second
-
@The_Crusader said:
AlwaysInAGoodShape said:Then they would just lose pressure at a later stage.
It still allows all survivors on generators to stay on generators.
Yes, but for 1 if-statement added to the perk, you'd only have to avoid getting DS'ed 1 single time. If you managed to get anyone dead without getting DS'ed, further DS's will be significantly less impactful when there's only 3 people alive.
Yeah but that's a bif "IF". It would still be possible to use it with 4 survivors alive.
I think if non-obsessions can use an obsession perk, then obsession perks like Dying light and rancor should apply to the non-obsession too if they are using an obsession perk.
Dying light - 25% if the obsession dies, 10-15% if a non-obsession dies.
Rancor - exposed + kill on the obsession, exposed only on non-obsession.
Sure it would cripple STBFL but these 2 perks get massive buffs so it's worth it.
It's only fair..
Rancor = NOED+ now
-
If you are being chased by huntress in the open then you are getting downed by her hatchets long before the exhaustion gets to youpowerbats said:@NuclearBurrito2 said:
@powerbats said:
Nurse would be limited to 1 blink and shorter range, Billy could chainsaw Sprint for 5 seconds then be fatigued etc.This would basically make it a killer farming simulator since you'd just wait for them to peter out add in the aforementioned killers or even Clown/Hag gg.
I literally removed one of the primary methods of tracking someone in a chase. Assuming you aren't in the open it is completely reasonable to get back into hiding before you run out of stamina assuming you aren't going out of your way to loop them. 20-30 or whatever seconds is longer than you think in a normal chase.
TLDR: If the Killer is at a big enough range that it would normally take more than 20ish seconds of chasing to catch up then the survivor has plenty of time to get out of sight and around multiple corners
You've got plenty of maps where you could be stuck in a wide open area and killer still has BL, then you've got Legion, Nurse, Billy, Spirit, Hag, Trapper. Clown. If Huntress sees you she just runs Iri's and chases you till you're exhausted then gets close enough for insta down.
The killers would run tracking perks more often like Bloodhound etc.
-
@powerbats said:
Nurse would be limited to 1 blink and shorter range, Billy could chainsaw Sprint for 5 seconds then be fatigued etc.This would basically make it a killer farming simulator since you'd just wait for them to peter out add in the aforementioned killers or even Clown/Hag gg.
I literally removed one of the primary methods of tracking someone in a chase. Assuming you aren't in the open it is completely reasonable to get back into hiding before you run out of stamina assuming you aren't going out of your way to loop them. 20-30 or whatever seconds is longer than you think in a normal chase.
TLDR: If the Killer is at a big enough range that it would normally take more than 20ish seconds of chasing to catch up then the survivor has plenty of time to get out of sight and around multiple corners