Orion
Orion
About
- Username
- Orion
- Joined
- Visits
- 124
- Last Active
Comments
-
Hey, the new one's out!
-
That would defeat the purpose of being banned, so no. This is like saying that people who had their driving licenses revoked should have free taxi rides until they get it back.
-
Can anyone jot down a TL;DR version?
-
@junkevil said:
@Orion said:
So you think killers are going to believe you over their own experiences. Thanks.PS: If you take away the one thing that can help insure killers have less frustrating trials, they're not going to play with you. They are, in fact, going to quit even more. They're not obligated to play with you, and they will stop playing altogether.
Killers don't get lobby dodged for anything other than ping, If you're going to call me a liar because I said survivors get dodged a lot, that's your choice. It's a funny one too considering your response to removing survivor information was to say you would just quit the game if you didn't have information to lobby dodge with. That's just special. You're a very special boy.
Killers do get dodged for other reasons, as anyone can tell you.
I didn't call you a liar, because I do agree that survivors get dodged a lot. Unfortunately for them, it's their own doing. If you spend all your time frustrating your opponent, they're just not going to play with you any more.
I didn't say I'd quit. Read what I wrote.
-
@junkevil said:
@Orion said:
@junkevil said:
@DocOctober said:
Fix the causes of lobby dodging first.Yeah, it's really just all those toxic things survivors do, such as: Having a toolbox, having a medkit, having a flashlight, having prestige clothing, having paid cosmetic clothing, loading into the lobby within 5 seconds of another survivor, being a twitch streamer, being claudette, being dwight, being jake, being feng min, loading into the game.
Such toxic.
What do you think you're going to accomplish by pretending survivors aren't toxic? Do you think killers are suddenly going to start playing the game more? Your attitude of brushing away killer complaints as if they were fake, disingenuous, or otherwise irrelevant, is just one of the many reasons why killers are quitting in droves.
The complaint in this thread is lobby dodging and killers are coming in to say that it's not an issue at all, which is literally what the word disingenuous means. Not sure if you knew that by your usage and syntax. The topic of this thread is something that has been an issue for a long time and has not been resolved. You can spend time derailing the point of the thread to whine about toxic survivors all you like, but that doesn't make what you say relevant to the actual topic.
Also, killers aren't quitting in droves. The only time it's taken long to lobby up was when the event first started and killers weren't getting good event points. I'm at rank 1 btw, and dodging happens all the time, regardless of what you do pre-match.
The solution would be to remove the killers ability to see the survivors at all. No names, no items, no avatars. It would be nice to use a toolbox and not have to re-queue 10 times before someone accepts me with a toolbox. Yes, that happens all the time.
So you think killers are going to believe you over their own experiences. Thanks.
PS: If you take away the one thing that can help insure killers have less frustrating trials, they're not going to play with you. They are, in fact, going to quit even more. They're not obligated to play with you, and they will stop playing altogether.
-
Balanced game, less survivor toxicity, an end to looping.
-
@junkevil said:
@DocOctober said:
Fix the causes of lobby dodging first.Yeah, it's really just all those toxic things survivors do, such as: Having a toolbox, having a medkit, having a flashlight, having prestige clothing, having paid cosmetic clothing, loading into the lobby within 5 seconds of another survivor, being a twitch streamer, being claudette, being dwight, being jake, being feng min, loading into the game.
Such toxic.
What do you think you're going to accomplish by pretending survivors aren't toxic? Do you think killers are suddenly going to believe you over their own experiences and start playing the game more? Your attitude of brushing away killer complaints as if they were fake, disingenuous, or otherwise irrelevant, is just one of the many reasons why killers are quitting in droves.
-
@powerbats said:
@Orion said:
Indeed, survivors rewarding campers is still a problem. I wish the devs would do something to punish survivors who reward camping.I've always thought they should make it so that you get nothing for unhooks not the initial 250 or anything unless the safe hook timer is met.
That'd stop a lot of the diving in including with BT especially against Bubba's and if they included tool tips during load screen saying as much etc.
Honestly, I feel this is something that needs a nuke to fix. In another thread I suggested double damage in a small radius around the hook (two meters, IIRC), and the unhooker drops to the dying state and is granted a permanent Broken status effect if an unsafe unhook is performed. Unsafe unhooks would also be redefined to just any time a killer hits a survivor less than 10 seconds after they were unhooked, even if they don't go down.
That way, the hook would become a dangerous location, and hook rushes would be heavily punished. Maybe then survivors would stop feeding campers. -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@OrionI'm saying that the Department of Justice is not the Department of Foreign Affairs, whether they are related to the government or not; it's not impossible to make the distinction between the 2.
But you are saying that we should look at things as if they existed in a vacuum, even though that's a gross oversimplification of the game and all its parts.
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@OrionI don't think the distinction between game-play elements, pricing elements and cosmetic elements when it comes to designing events is that hard to make.
Everything is connected and the sum is called DBD. But that's not to say that DBD is comprised of 1 mono-element.
But you are, in essence, saying that nothing is connected by denying the effects that gameplay elements, pricing elements, and cosmetic elements have on each other.
You can't look at the gameplay and say "This is fine" while ignoring the effect that gameplay had on the queues. -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@OrionNo Cathy Newman, Numbers are not People. I'm saying the Number I mentioned is not part of the Gameplay design of the event. It's only the degree and rate at which the Devs want people to unlock cosmetic.
You can keep the numbers the killers have the same and lower the event price (in vessel points) in the store to achieve the same speed survivors previously had, and no; I also don't consider prices in the store to be game-play elements.
Changes to one aspect of the game can and will impact other aspects of the game. For example, changes in how killers get their event stuff can and will affect how killers and survivors play, thus having a quantitative effect in gameplay.
Everything is connected. A game may be more than the sum of its parts, but the sum of its parts are there, in the whole. -
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@OrionEverything is connected. You can't say that queue times are not related to gameplay by ignoring the fact that it is the poor gameplay that gives rise to people not wanting to play killer.
Changing a variable in the script for something that affects a number in the menu screen after the match has ended.
No, that is not game-play and no that is not connected.There is nothing connected about the blight events game-play and time taxation on the survivor's side, and the faction cap on earning points causing queue-times. Those 2 things can be evaluated completely independently.
So you're saying that people aren't part of the gameplay in a multiplayer game?
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@OrionThat includes gameplay, queue times, player attitudes, and so on.
Yes, that is why I clarified we're talking about game-play aspects.
Many of the events didn't even really add much gameplay. Points were either attached to a Gen or Just to a hook.The blight-event was one of the few that added a lot of game-play, and here a lot of the complaints where about the gameplay elements. The ratio between gameplay-complaints and queue-time problems (which came in the opposite direction as this one) was a lot more even.
That is what I notice about this event, is that even if I clarify asking for opinions on game-play, the first reaction a lot of the time is to bring up non-gameplay elements. That's a good sign.
Everything is connected. You can't say that queue times are not related to gameplay by ignoring the fact that it is the poor gameplay that gives rise to people not wanting to play killer.
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@Orion said:
People are being honest. They didn't like it. This was made evident by forum complaints, player population (survivor queues spiked as more and more people stopped playing killer; some survivors even stopped playing survivor because of how unexciting it was), and even the devs' acknowledgement that people were unhappy.The majority complained about the points and queue-times caused by 2 too low variables.
survivor queues spiked as more and more people stopped playing killer
In your example you also mention a non-gameplay element.
The event is more than just the gameplay. Queue times were also part of the event. In fact, everything from the time the event started until it ends is part of the event. That includes gameplay, queue times, player attitudes, and so on.
If you want to say that you enjoyed the event's gameplay, that's one thing, but don't reduce the event to any one aspect. Even if you were to reduce it to just the gameplay, most people did not like it, as evidenced by the complaint threads. -
People are being honest. They didn't like it. This was made evident by forum complaints, player population (survivor queues spiked as more and more people stopped playing killer; some survivors even stopped playing survivor because of how unexciting it was), and even the devs' acknowledgement that people were unhappy.
-
Indeed, survivors rewarding campers is still a problem. I wish the devs would do something to punish survivors who reward camping.
-
@TAG said:
Had that happen to me today. Already recorded a video of it with intentions of reporting it tonight. The person still got caught, though, when they eventually got off the rock to finish gens and stepped in a bear trap and eventually died after hitting Deliverance.You need to report in-game...
-
Base 4% per attempt, following a binomial distribution. With the base number of attempts (3), there's around an 11.5% chance of a survivor unhooking themselves if they use all three attempts. Both the probability and the number of attempts can be altered by perks.
-
@Master said:
@Poweas said:
@Master said:
@michaelmyers87 said:
over rated?Hes actually not a hard killer to beat if you know what you’re doing.
He is overrated yes, good survivors will just loop you and will make you wanna drop your chainsaw....
The only true killer is nurseHag, Spirit?
The only true kiler is nurse, no other killer can compete with her even closely
Indeed. She's the only one that makes the killer player's skill significantly relevant in determining the outcome of a trial.
-
@HavelmomDaS1 said:
Well, in theory there is no p2w because every perk can be pop up in the shrine. But when you look at how often those perks like BBQ show up in the shrine (1 single time in over 1 year) reality hits hard and just shows you it's a subtle but smart way to lock meta perks behind a paywall.Yes, all those meta perks locked behind paywalls, like Dance With Me and Surveillance. Clearly, the Shrine must be rigged; there's absolutely no explanation for the complete randomness of it all. Everyone knows the "R" in "RNG" stands for "completely pRedictable".
-
@starkiller1286 said:
Hook camping has nothing try hard about it and only should be done if gates are powered or the killer knows a survivor is around to swoop in for a saveIndeed, nothing says "tryhard" like standing still for two minutes doing nothing.
-
@se05239 said:
@Blueberry said:
@Ryuhi said:
the only thing I find weird about Prayer Beads is that the Wraith doesn't have a similarly powerful addon that removes his shimmer while cloaked. Especially with the amount of time it takes him to decloak before he can attack, he's much less likely to get a gen grab or anything, and he suffers from the same tell tale signs (grass moving, sound, etc)Tbh I don't get why he still has a shimmer at all. He could use that kind of buff at base and would still probably not even be mid tier.
I'd imagine it's because of counter-play design reasons.
He's extremely slow when cloaking and decloaking. That should be enough, IMO, and I wish the devs would see that.
-
I report it. I consider it doing my part to help purge people like that.
-
@Dreamnomad said:
@Orion said:
@Dreamnomad said:
@Orion said:
@Dreamnomad said:
@Orion said:
@Dreamnomad said:
This is one of those fallacies that killer mains like to propagate. Killers camp for a reason. It works. If camping and tunneling was naturally punished by survivors pushing objectives unchallenged then killers wouldn't do it. And yet, killers continue to camp and tunnel. That says something doesn't it?Yes. It says that survivors aren't pushing objectives unchallenged. Instead, they try to force unhooks.
Unless we are talking about SWF then the survivors that were working on generators need to get off the generator and run half way across the map to verify whether the killer is camping or not. The survivor will need to spend a few seconds assessing whether they can safely get the unhook or not. Then the survivor will need to run halfway across the map again to get back on their generator.
All that time spent on a failed rescue attempt isn't punishing the killer at all. Giving up one or two generators for a secured kill is well worth it to the killer anyway just because of how snowbally this game is. All of this is assuming the survivors are willing to give up on each other for the larger strategic objectives. This is also depending on the hooked survivor not just suiciding on hook because they aren't having fun.
So again, I assert that killers camp for a reason. Because it works. The fairy tale that survivors can effectively punish a camping killer by pushing objectives is just that. A fairy tale. Even if the survivors are on board with that strategy, best case scenario the killer still kills two survivors and everyone gets horrible bloodpoints for the game.
Camping takes two minutes to kill someone, not including the time spent on the chase, which can take up to 3 generators. If two more generators pop at that point, the killer gets one kill (if that, since there's always BT). If more than one survivor dies to camping, it's because they fed the camper. It's that simple.
Survivors suiciding on the hook is not relevant because it's still feeding.
Survivors are the ones who make camping worthwhile. They've always done so, hence the epidemic. Killers should not be punished for the survivors' bad decisions.
Lastly, if the killer gets two kills, then by the devs' definition, it's a balanced strategy.
That is exactly the fantasy that killer mains like to spread. The first four months that I played this game, I spent as a camping/tunneling killer. I'm talking literally hundreds of games of camping/tunneling. This is a subject that I have vasts amounts of experience in. This was when I didn't have all killers perks unlocked and at rank 3. And I still easily got and maintained rank 1 using this basic strategy. This was over a year ago when the game was much more difficult for killers as well. There have been many killer buffs and survivor nerfs in the last year.
Why did I do all that camping and tunneling? Because it worked. Pure and simple. This hypothetical scenario that the survivors would punish me just didn't happen. Or at the least it was unbelievably rare. So at the risk of repeating myself I say again that killers camp for a reason. If survivors are incapable of punishing killers for camping then there is no reason for killers to stop. It is obviously something that ruins the experience of the game for many players so it is a problem. One that can be solved fairly for both sides.
Survivors are not incapable of punishing camping; they are unwilling to do so, period.
Allow me to present a different argument to you. You are saying that Camping is a survivor made problem. If survivors stopped feeding camping killers then killers wouldn't camp. Here is my counter argument. War is a human made problem. If humans just stopped fighting then there would be no war. Unlike your argument which is debatable anyway, mine is an inherently true statement.
What you call my argument is not an argument, it is a statement of fact. Anyone who's played this game since release knows that survivors are the ones who caused (and help perpetuate) the current camping epidemic. Don't make me give you a DbD history lesson.
-
@ToxicFengM1n said:
@Orion said:
@ToxicFengM1n said:
@Orion said:
@ToxicFengM1n said:
Micheal has been injured by literally everything and has been fine, have you ever watch Halloween?I was working on the assumption that other than their powers, all killers were, well, killable. If we go by that logic, then nobody wins, because the Entity will never let any of them die.
I went after lore
The lore is that all the killers are unkillable, because they're powered by the Entity.
No all the killers literal lore, for the horror side Michael cant die in the first place, the only killers that could survive without the unkillable side are Michael, freddy, and spirit
Original killers have their own lore as well, which is that they're unkillable.
-
@BigBadPiggy said:
No it Isn't, It's just heavily, and I mean HEAVILY frowned upon....by survivors.
Just finishing your sentence. -
It's not bannable, no. Ignore them. False reports, though, that'll get you banned.
-
@ToxicFengM1n said:
@Orion said:
@ToxicFengM1n said:
Micheal has been injured by literally everything and has been fine, have you ever watch Halloween?I was working on the assumption that other than their powers, all killers were, well, killable. If we go by that logic, then nobody wins, because the Entity will never let any of them die.
I went after lore
The lore is that all the killers are unkillable, because they're powered by the Entity.
-
@Kaelum said:
@Orion said:
Of course. That's why I report all forms of toxicity in every multiplayer game I play. I see it as doing my part to help purge the cancer.Just be aware that being toxic is NOT reportable, and abusing the report system will get you a ban. The devs have stated this at least twice since last Summer, on their live dev stream.
I'm well aware that teabagging and whatnot is not reportable. I'm talking about post-game chat toxicity.
-
Candyman, Candyman, Candyman, Candyman, Candyman.
...#########.
-
@ToxicFengM1n said:
Micheal has been injured by literally everything and has been fine, have you ever watch Halloween?I was working on the assumption that other than their powers, all killers were, well, killable. If we go by that logic, then nobody wins, because the Entity will never let any of them die.
-
@OrionsFury4789 said:
So why should I have to decide to play with nothing but a standard looking character and no items or anything a killer doesn't like? Especially knowing that at high ranks it's some insta down killer with an ebony mori waiting , it's a double standard they're allowed to equip the full loadout while they want me with nothing, It's part of the game and not my fault but I totally understand where you are coming from don't get me wrong but I just want this stopped , if the game truly is unbalanced as bad as some people think than it's dire that we let the devs collect the data to fix the problems and balance the game? Am I right?You shouldn't have to, but at this point, you have two choices: do those things and continue to be dodged, or don't do those things and avoid being dodged. You can thank toxic survivors for being left with those two options.
The devs are well aware that the game is not balanced. They don't need any more data.
To reiterate: at this point, you can either be part of the problem, or part of the solution.
-
@The_Crusader said:
When one of the biggest killer mains on this forum calls something broken you know its OP
Not a killer main, sweetheart. You should've learned by now not to spread lies about people.
-
@OrionsFury4789 said:
Yes I'm not against you being upset with toxicity but the fact I can't wear certain outfits ive bought, play certain characters, accidentally pop into a lobby wearing a similar outfit to another person, have an item I've spent bloodpoints on, or even remotely come in together.... THAT'S why I'm upset It's outrageous at this point we didn't make this game the way it is and its in a way better place than it was when this all started. I mean it could be a number of things , maybe I beat the guy before or got some BS escape on him but that shouldn't matter when you're at rank 1 you should be up for any good ping game that pops up otherwise we need to bring in survivor bots and award half bloodpoints to these guys and let them play the game another way if we're gonna get endlessly dodged for not looking like tutorial Dwight in every match, if people would stop dodging and actually play the games you say are unbalanced the survival rates should go up if it's that bad and proper data can be collected to fix it , the killers band-aid fix to getting away from anything they don't like is part of the problem and they're causing the game to stay unbalanced even more by cherry picking lobbies , end the lobby dodging and let the devs have their proper information if you guys really want it fixedI dunno who "you guys" are since I only dodge because of bad ping or when people were toxic in a previous trial. When SWF comes I just bite the bullet and suck it up, which is apparently something you're not willing to do by not equipping items or playing a different character. I will admit to occasionally DCing out of frustration when it's clear survivors are just there to troll, but killers never seem to do that when I play survivor.
While I understand it sucks to get dodged (happens to me too, even though I only play Jake and don't bring items with me), you also have to understand it's equally frustrating to play trials you know are going to be boring and filled with toxicity.
Do you think killers like to dodge lobbies? It's just as boring for them to have to open up a new lobby again and again until they get what remotely resembles a fair and relatively non-toxic trial as it is for survivors to have to queue up again.
However, survivors, rather than try to meet killers halfway, began to exploit the system in every conceivable way, to be sure they could be as toxic as they wanted, with last-second switches and actual exploits (seeing the killer's loadout before the trial has ended, DCing while keeping their items and points, etc), and blamed killers for not wanting to take part in trials where they knew they'd be toxic. They constantly bullied and harassed killers, thus confirming the main reasons why killers dodge - to avoid that behavior.
Now killers are just leaving the game, because if survivors are not willing to meet them halfway or simply tone down the toxicity, then they can play the game by themselves.Killers are tired of playing the class clown. That's why you see so much dodging and fewer people playing killer. Survivors did this by choosing to be toxic and exploiting.
Survival rates alone are not relevant, because this game is simply not balanced. In a balanced game, both sides' skill would be relevant to the outcome. Instead, the result of a trial is primarily decided by how the survivors play, because rather than balance the game at the top, as it should be, devs decided to balance for an average player, which is absurd.
Tell me, would you like to play a game where your skill is irrelevant in deciding whether or not your team wins? Because that's DbD, if you play killer. The survivors decide if you win or not, as proven by the Depip Squad, and even a victory can be frustrating if the other side is as toxic as possible.You can choose to be part of the problem on either side - survivor by being toxic and killer by dodging everything under the sun; both by deranking to stomp noobs - or you can be part of the solution and try to see things from the other side's point of view.
I know dodging sucks, so I don't do it (except in the situations I mentioned). I know toolboxes, flashlights, etc., are primarily used to be toxic and make many killers dodge, so I don't bring them in. In return, I get survivors still being toxic and killers not dodging (at least not nearly as much). Funny how that works, isn't it? -
If NOED is becoming more prevalent, that's just more reason to break totems.
-
Of course. That's why I report all forms of toxicity in every multiplayer game I play. I see it as doing my part to help purge the cancer.
-
Reports are free.
-
@e8Lattice said:
And queue all the Killer fanboys desperately trying to lie, mis-direct and smoke screen as the curtain is pulled away and the Wizard of Oz is laid bare for the fraud he is.lawl. The denial is real.
p.s: please remove Freddy's Cataracts. ty
Reality doesn't go away just because you deny it. Killers are the ones leaving the game out of frustration; not survivors. In fact, toxic survivors are the primary reason why people on both sides leave the game. However, a single killer quitting is four times as impactful as a single survivor quitting. That's why survivor queues have been steadily increasing for a while now. The event was just the final straw.
PS: It's "cue". Queue is something completely different.
-
That just sounds broken.
-
@Dreamnomad said:
@Orion said:
@Dreamnomad said:
@Orion said:
@Dreamnomad said:
This is one of those fallacies that killer mains like to propagate. Killers camp for a reason. It works. If camping and tunneling was naturally punished by survivors pushing objectives unchallenged then killers wouldn't do it. And yet, killers continue to camp and tunnel. That says something doesn't it?Yes. It says that survivors aren't pushing objectives unchallenged. Instead, they try to force unhooks.
Unless we are talking about SWF then the survivors that were working on generators need to get off the generator and run half way across the map to verify whether the killer is camping or not. The survivor will need to spend a few seconds assessing whether they can safely get the unhook or not. Then the survivor will need to run halfway across the map again to get back on their generator.
All that time spent on a failed rescue attempt isn't punishing the killer at all. Giving up one or two generators for a secured kill is well worth it to the killer anyway just because of how snowbally this game is. All of this is assuming the survivors are willing to give up on each other for the larger strategic objectives. This is also depending on the hooked survivor not just suiciding on hook because they aren't having fun.
So again, I assert that killers camp for a reason. Because it works. The fairy tale that survivors can effectively punish a camping killer by pushing objectives is just that. A fairy tale. Even if the survivors are on board with that strategy, best case scenario the killer still kills two survivors and everyone gets horrible bloodpoints for the game.
Camping takes two minutes to kill someone, not including the time spent on the chase, which can take up to 3 generators. If two more generators pop at that point, the killer gets one kill (if that, since there's always BT). If more than one survivor dies to camping, it's because they fed the camper. It's that simple.
Survivors suiciding on the hook is not relevant because it's still feeding.
Survivors are the ones who make camping worthwhile. They've always done so, hence the epidemic. Killers should not be punished for the survivors' bad decisions.
Lastly, if the killer gets two kills, then by the devs' definition, it's a balanced strategy.
That is exactly the fantasy that killer mains like to spread. The first four months that I played this game, I spent as a camping/tunneling killer. I'm talking literally hundreds of games of camping/tunneling. This is a subject that I have vasts amounts of experience in. This was when I didn't have all killers perks unlocked and at rank 3. And I still easily got and maintained rank 1 using this basic strategy. This was over a year ago when the game was much more difficult for killers as well. There have been many killer buffs and survivor nerfs in the last year.
Why did I do all that camping and tunneling? Because it worked. Pure and simple. This hypothetical scenario that the survivors would punish me just didn't happen. Or at the least it was unbelievably rare. So at the risk of repeating myself I say again that killers camp for a reason. If survivors are incapable of punishing killers for camping then there is no reason for killers to stop. It is obviously something that ruins the experience of the game for many players so it is a problem. One that can be solved fairly for both sides.
Survivors are not incapable of punishing camping; they are unwilling to do so, period.
-
@Dreamnomad said:
According to your system if I wanted to run BBQ rank 3 it would cost me 3+4+5 points!Say what? It'd cost you 5 points, because that's the cost for a powerful tier III perk.
-
@lasombra1979 said:
@Orion said:
@lasombra1979 said:
You are never forced to tunnel. It is a choice. Simple as that. Also, no sympathy for the recently unhooked survivor. You are easy prey now. Figure out where to go to hide and heal. Tunneling is not an issue and there is nothing to fix about it.It's "a choice" in the same way that holding a gun to someone's head and telling them to do something or you'll shoot them is giving them "a choice", but in common terminology, it's definitely not always a choice.
It is certainly a choice. You do not have to go after that injured recently unhooked survivor. It is the smart choice, but still a choice. You do not have to tunnel. You can still pip easily not tunneling. But tunneling makes removing survivors quicker from the game.
If that's the only survivor you see, it's not really a choice. See the gun to the head example.
-
@lasombra1979 said:
You are never forced to tunnel. It is a choice. Simple as that. Also, no sympathy for the recently unhooked survivor. You are easy prey now. Figure out where to go to hide and heal. Tunneling is not an issue and there is nothing to fix about it.It's "a choice" in the same way that holding a gun to someone's head and telling them to do something or you'll shoot them is giving them "a choice", but in common terminology, it's definitely not always a choice.
-
@DexyIV said:
Plus it makes for more fun builds because you could just run 15 ######### perks for memes XDNo, note that you'd still only have 4 perk slots.
-
Nope.
-
As a base mechanic, no. As an additional effect for MYC that activates upon an unhook, even if the primary effect didn't? Maybe.
-
@AntiJelly said:
OKAY THIS IS ACTUALLY REALLY IMPORTANT.
On consoles, when people are toxic, they have to DM you, so they can't get punished by BHVR for poor sportsmanship. It would contain the toxicity, and keep it in context. This really needs to be added.That's why you report them to Microsoft/Sony (depending on the platform) and never respond to them in any way. Microsoft in particular is usually quicker with the ban hammer.
-
@fcc2014 said:
@Orion personally for me. I was able to get matches on either side last night with no problems on PS4. Last week anywhere from 5 minutes to 45 minutes swf or solo. I would prefer to play the event as killer. I don't need teammates to pull their weight to have a chance at a good match.Well, only survivors were having long queues, so if the imbalance was being caused by the event, as was claimed, this would change things a bit.
-
@friendlykillermain said:
@Orion said:
The Huntress. The Cannibal is the only killer with an advantage at close range, and all the killers need to get close to each other to hit each other, with the exception of the Huntress. The Huntress is also the only one who is actually trained to hunt.hmmm true but if someone snuck behind her.....
You can't sneak up behind what amounts to a feral animal with very sharp senses. Not if you want to live, anyway...
-
They can't increase it too much. Putting aside the fact that it'd make the event pointless, it might break queues in the other direction.