Orion
Orion
About
- Username
- Orion
- Joined
- Visits
- 124
- Last Active
Comments
-
Ice cream?
-
So you're angry that they fixed something that was broken?
-
@SmokePotion said:
@Orion said:
@SmokePotion said:
I bought this game. Once it's on my computer it is my property.You bought a license to play the game. Don't sign contracts (like the EULA) without reading them.
They still need to inform the players of changes to the game. why are you defending this practice?
It depends on the terms of the EULA which you clearly didn't read. Why are you pretending I'm defending this practice when I'm just pointing out that you didn't read a contract before signing it?
-
@Blueberry said:
They had 12 people out of 35k registered forum users create multiple accounts to "lol" people. So because of those 12 people (.034%) of the forum registered player base, everyone gets punished.This is false, by the way. @Peanits explained that it was a recurring issue and gave the example of those twelve, but this person refuses to accept any view except his own, even if it comes from those who have access to information he doesn't.
-
Survivors can loop Killers almost indefinitely as it is. Maybe you're just bad at the game.
-
@SmokePotion said:
I bought this game. Once it's on my computer it is my property.You bought a license to play the game. Don't sign contracts (like the EULA) without reading them.
-
They go back to the campfire.
-
They're looking into options to reduce the grind. One of them (my personal favorite, which is why I'm mentioning it) is to remove perk tiers.
-
@DwightsLifeMatters said:
It's good tho, finally the killer has to position himself/bait smart. The speeded up pickup was nearly brain dead, only possible to FL save if the is dumb enuf to see and basically says "Oh, hey nerd. I saw, but I'm picking up in front of you. Try ur luck"And inversely, the Survivors don't. As usual, Killers are expected to be MLG pros, but Survivors don't need skill.
-
Press LOL to pay respects.
...Wait. -
Is that Legacy, or did you set him on fire?
-
@Master said:
@Orion said:
@Master said:
@Orion said:
But the exploit where the Killer disconnects and the Survivors are the ones who get shafted will be removed with dedicated servers.
You mean the visual bug? (never noticed an exploit on PC)
Well that would be quite optimistic, but maybe that bug gets fixed.... it has nothing to do with dedicated/p2p though^^No, there's an actual exploit on console.
Ok thats a console specific thing then, but I doubt its a p2p issue since PC doesnt have that exploit.
Supposedly it exists on PC as well, but it's done differently.
-
@Master said:
@Orion said:
But the exploit where the Killer disconnects and the Survivors are the ones who get shafted will be removed with dedicated servers.
You mean the visual bug? (never noticed an exploit on PC)
Well that would be quite optimistic, but maybe that bug gets fixed.... it has nothing to do with dedicated/p2p though^^No, there's an actual exploit on console.
-
Why wouldn't it be possible on console? If it can be done on PC, it can be done on console.
-
So how much did Epic Games Store pay you?
-
But the exploit where the Killer disconnects and the Survivors are the ones who get shafted will be removed with dedicated servers.
-
Assuming it was the Killer, dedicated servers will solve this. If it was your connection, though, the only thing that'll fix it is getting a better ISP.
-
@Wolf74 said:
@Ryuhi said:
@Wolf74 said:
@Ryuhi said:
@Wolf74 said:
@Ryuhi said:
@Wolf74 said:
@Ryuhi said:
@Wolf74 said:
@Ryuhi said:
@yeet said:
@Ryuhi said:
@Peanits said:
It's like that because you are not going to get away anyway. Even if you did theoretically get the 4% or you deliveranced off the hook, the killer could just as easily stand right there and down you again. There is no way to get endurance by unhooking yourself so you're basically as good as dead.The way it currently it just speeds up the process. You don't have to wait for the survivor to attempt an escape, get immediately downed and then rehooked. It just ends the game so everyone can move on to the next one.
A change of approach that may or may not be a hot take: If a survivor is the last one and pulls off a self unhook, they get borrowed time and or adrenaline following the unhook? Maybe the kobe gets both, and deliverance only gets the borrowed time? Would make it a more impactful and less hopeless scenario, while still being fair to the "unbroken" last survivors.
If nothing that extreme, then at least some kind of bloodpoint bonus, similar to how killers get one for ragequitting survivors
no
more
second
chances
you were downed and hooked with noone else to save you, you lost, you don't need a free BT/adren because you feel entitled to an escapeYou seem to have completely missed the context of the discussion, so let me repeat it for you: the issue is with the last survivor not getting any chance at either Deliverance or a 4% self unhook. If you get to that point and your first hook is the last hook in the match, chances are you were not the worst player on the team. And if you were? This suggestion would mean literally nothing except more free BP for the killer. The suggestion offered is one that would hardly guarantee a free escape, but would add a bit more to the match. The survivor gets a chance to stuggle a bit more, the killer gets even more bloodpoint chances (which should be super easy, at this point, tb) so its really a win/win.
And what would it change?
It would only waste time.
Because the killer has nothing to do but stand there and wait for your try to unhook and hit you as soon as you hit the ground.
Let's just skip this nonsense and just give them a bloodpoitn scoreevent, like +500BP for "last man standing".Which is why the borrowed time and or adrenaline were mentioned: it would give the survivor a running start, which could lead to a chance to defend themselves. The only way this wouldn't be a BP buff for the killer is if they were afraid of actually having to play the game a little bit more. If this is the first time the person was hooked, you've already lost out on a good amount of sacrifice points as it is.
BT does not trigger if you unhook yourself.
Adrenaline is a very small situational chance that it could trigger.
And you already got extra handholding from the Devs: Invulnerability until you landed, free exhaustion relief, new perks to buff self unhooks.
What more are you asking for??
At some point this becomes insane.Did you read my suggestion, or just the killer complaining about it? let me repeat it real quick:
"If a survivor is the last one and pulls off a self unhook, they get borrowed time and or adrenaline following the unhook? Maybe the kobe gets both, and deliverance only gets the borrowed time?"
And in case you also purposely ignored the rest of the scenario, this is specifically about last man standing situations where either the player never got to activate a selected perk (Deliverance,) or never got to even attempt to unhook themselves after going the entire match literally Unbroken. It also gives the killer a chance to get more BP in multiple categories, and would be an incredibly uphill battle for a survivor to even be able to do anything with.
lol
Yea, I actually did not read this.^^
And it would had been better if you not mention that again. XD
You ask for such an insane strong buff that it is beyond hilarious.
Stop asking for more safety nets and 2nd chances.
Survivor already have more than enough.So in other words, you'd rather make absolutely sure you get the 4k as easy as possible, without having to put in a small amount of extra work to get a lot more bloodpoints? Its no wonder all you ever do on this forum is complain about survivors.
Here we go again… the usual strawman of "easy 4K".
If arguments run out, it is the killer asking for an "easy 4K".
(And don't forget to spice it up with a little personal attack of "your biased!")How about you "process logic" now?
The killer already did everything! The killer already killed 3 and hooked the last.
No need to put some "extra work" into it.Now you're just misreading on purpose. I never said 4Ks are easy, just that this exact scenario would make SECURING your 4K Easier. You already have the 4k at the moment this scenario has happened: the last survivor has been placed on the hook. This is saying they giving them a chance to make their first hook not be their last hook. Its also saying the killer can actually cap out sacrifice points, since a good chunk of them come from actually placing survivors on the hook. The only difference is that the killer would have to work slightly harder to be able to secure the last kill, possibly. You know, assuming the survivor even pulls off the 4% self unhook, or is running a perk that would have literally otherwise done nothing.
I don't need to make my 4K "easier" in that scenario. I already HAVE it!
You just want another safety net to rob the killer of his ALREADY gained 4th K.And 4% is wrong, because it is 3x4% and the survivor can run perks/offerings to increase that to up to 100%.
So just NO!It's 11.5%.
-
@OrionsFury4789 said:
@Peanits I personally think it’s a bad idea but who am I to say? Lol
My reasoning behind it is that you’re encouraging more toxicity by making some people who we know are very vulgar survivor/killer mains on the forums HAVE to respond if they want to show they disagree instead of hitting a button and moving on, there are too many immature people on here who will definitely derail a topic for disagreeing now because it’s the only way they can show their non approval creating arguments with some people who can’t handle when people don’t always agree.Then those people will get banned and the forum will be all the better for it. That's what we call a win-win.
-
@Arik13 said:
Ok, I hate going up against this perk and when I use it I feel like I get rewarded for bad play, therefore I believe there should be a nerf incoming for this perk because it just rewards you for being bad at the game, I know some of you will say "just do the totems" like bro how tf am I gonna find 5 totems in a map like swamp or the game, it's a huge hassle that just is not worth it. Please tell me I'm not the only one feeling this way?You have a choice: either go through the "huge hassle" of breaking the totems, or deal with the perk some other way.
-
@The_Crusader said:
If they keep getting picked up and downed again it will be an extremely long process.Its holding it hostage. It's trolling. Don't defend every scummy thing in the game.
I've seen it a few times and every time the survivors get fed up and feel forced to disconnect to end the game.
It's not holding hostage. Dick move, yes, but not holding the game hostage.
Once again you prove you're paranoid. I've been supporting you this whole time, saying it's a dick move, but the second I point out you're making a false claim, I'm "defending every scummy thing in the game".
Maybe you should take a look in the mirror, do some honest introspection, and figure out why disagreement triggers you so much. -
@The_Crusader said:
Yes I've had this too. They can't find the other guy, often because they won't leave the first, so they just pick them up and knock them down again to prevent bleed out.It absolutely is holding the game hostage it's always the crap killers who do this too who only get to that position by picking off the 2 rank 16s who got put into the game with you
Survivors should have the option of bleeding out at 2x speed.
In that case above I would have just disconnected to let the other guy get the hatch. People can call it cheap but I haven't got time to sit through half an hour of that.
It's not holding the game hostage. That person will die even if they don't want to.
-
@Wolf74 said:
@thesuicidefox said:
I had an hour long game against a Spirit that outright refused to kill a guy because she wanted the 4k. I was injured (no SC and no medkit, all the chests were opened) and we need to do 2 more gens. I knew where hatch was, which was on the opposite side of the map from the other survivor. She would down him, camp the body, then get impatient and pick-up/drop them until they broke free. Then she would chase them for a bit and down them again. She did this OVER 10 TIMES!!!! What utter bull #########.The guy messaged me (Xbox) and said "do gens" which I replied "I can't bc I'm injured and I also only know where 1 gen is" (it was on Lery's and the only gen I knew about was in treatment center which was basically suicide). Eventually I found another gen in a corner somewhere, so I told him to just keep her away from this side of the map. I did that gen, she continued to do her BS. At some point she let the guy go completely, and he healed then found me and healed me. We split up and I found another gen (he went to TC to do that gen). She found him obviously, but he was maybe 15 seconds from bleeding out. He did the gen in her face, and she finally decided to hook him. I dodged her BBQ making her think I went to the gate and took hatch.
The really sad part is that this killer would have easily double pipped if she just killed the guy when she caught him that first time. She got a hook on me already, and there were 2 gens left. She basically held the game hostage for no reason other than to satisfy her ego, and at the end of ALL that BS she still didn't kill me (a typical outcome to these sorts of games). I told the guy thank you for taking the death and I owe him one if I see him again in the future. I woulda been fine to trade places with him if necessary, but that's not how things went down. He was cool about it and just wanted 1 of us to escape, so we at least accomplished that.
Killers that do this are literal cancer to the game. If she wants to slug the guy and come look for me, fine, but don't expect me to be a moron and come heal the guy when it's obvious you are camping him. Man up and leave, take the chance I save him if you want the 4k. Or kill him and take your 2 pip so the game can end. Don't be a spoiled brat.
@Orion Is the above a "dick move"? Most likely, yes.
Was it unfair or an exploit? No.
Can a killer really take the game hostage that way? No.
(Taking hostage as a killer only works with last survivor and no hatch or with bodyblocking the basement)
Who do you want to play the judge? Situations like this have so many variables, especially on the person playing it. Do you really want mechanics that force player to play a certain way to avoid this? Such things would always impact ALL player, not just the "dicks".
And btw, survivor play like douches for 2 years now and there are no outcry to force any mechanics on them to avoid that.
Not leaving the map while the gate is already open and farm extra chase points by looping near the gate and stuff like that.I said borderline exploitative. I don't want mechanics that force players to play in a certain way to avoid this, I just agree that it's a dick move.
-
Peanits said they weren't.
-
@Wolf74 said:
@Orion said:
@Wolf74 said:
@Orion said:
@Wolf74 said:
So we have an ingame mechanic that can deny the killer 4K by giving the last survivor a free escape, but a killer playing tactically around that mechanic to get the 4th kill is "pathetic"?
But other survivor mains told me that slugging is actually the build in ingame mechanic to counter the hatch.
So sides one free mechanic is legit, but to counter it with tactic ans strategy is cheap?There's a big difference between slugging to give yourself more time to find the other guy and slugging while waiting for the slugged Survivor to die. The latter, which is what the OP is complaining about, forces the remaining Survivor to move around to avoid the AFK crows, yet does nothing to help you win. It's borderline exploitative.
Erm… you mean slugging AFTER the other escaped or got killer or guarding the slugged while the other survivor is still around?
Guarding the slug while the other guy is still around.
Why not?
Is the downed guy the obsession? Could he have DS?
Without any clue where to search on anything but the smallest maps is pretty much a free pick up.
Since they buffed recovery that can happen in a run by.
If the killer is giving the other person the time to go search for the hatch and he is just making sure to get his 3rd K, why not?
It's still the killers choice.
Would I do it? Most likely not.
Would I want to have the option to? Yes.I agree that the Killer should have the option to do it, but I also think that if the guy doesn't have DS and you could've hooked him at any point in time, slugging the one guy while the other one has no choice but to walk around the map doing nothing for several minutes (because of the crows) is borderline exploitative. At the very least, it's a dick move. It does nothing to help you win, since you know the last guy is not going to save.
-
@The_Crusader said:
Trust Wolf to defend it 🤣Thank you for confirming you just claim this about anyone who does not agree with you at any given moment.
-
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you.Or you know, maybe just a lot of people disagree with you? I know that can be hard to believe.
A thousand count "lol" is highly rare occurrence and having that happen even once is not the norm.
"Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you." Based on the devs previous actions and "stats" that is a highly questionable statement and hardly a reliable resource.
I'm sure at least a handful of people disagree with me. That doesn't explain why my "LOL" count increased by the hundreds every few minutes during certain times of the day.
Anyway, I can see you're just going to keep dismissing anyone else's experience in favor of your conclusion, so I'm gonna stop wasting my time. -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
You can be highly active without simply posting as you should be highly aware apparently. Posting a lot also doesn't equate to your level of observation, simply that you have a lot of opinions and like to type a lot. I think you are quite wrong.
And I know I'm not. I've seen the effect on many people's "LOL" count, including my own, which tripled (or even quadrupled) very quickly. One forumgoer in particular had his "LOL" count increased by over a thousand overnight.
I want to point out that you're doubting my observations over the course of several thousand posts, the observations of a majority of forumgoers, some of whom were affected by this, and the observations of the mods themselves, who can see stats that we don't have access to. Maybe you should defer to those who have more experience and more access to information than you. -
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
Never said I was using myself as a sample. I'm active enough here to doubt its severity for the extent that has been taken.
See my post count? I'm active enough to know you're wrong about the severity.
-
@Blueberry said:
@Orion said:
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
This is an extreme minority and not common whatsoever. I did read it. How about we work on finding bots instead.
It was more common than you think. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to multiple forumgoers.
-
@Nickenzie said:
Actually, I'll make a thread on how to make NOED feel great for both sides instead of crowding this thread. I'll @ you on my thread because you seem very civilized to discuss things with!
First thing I do on every forum I join is disable notifications. You're better off just finding a thread I'm actively engaged in and dropping a link there.
-
@Peanits said:
@Skorpanio said:
@HatCreature said:
Yeah, we don't have a graveyard map, this game totally calls for one as well just because of what the game is. That sounds awesome, a monster creeping around with a lantern, they have no red stain because they have the lantern
Yup, Marta with her mumbling instead of a terror radius would also be nice, anything but a terror radius.
Butaaah...
@Peanits
Do devs take concept ideas from the forums or are we just arguing about noting?They keep an eye out. Most suggestions don't end up in game exactly like they're suggested, but there's been a bunch of suggestions that have made it in. Stuff like STBFL, for example.
And the Legion also appears to be a mix of various suggestions.
-
@Blueberry said:
@Peanits said:
@M2Fream said:
@Peanits, Don't you think people still need an option to express feelings of disagreement with a post? I agree people used the "Lol" in a childish manner, but I also think we on this forum are being treated a tad bit like children in this method of forced "positive only" reactions.
Perhaps you could change "vote up" and "lol" to a simple "agree" and "disagree". There's nothing disrespectful about disagreeing with someone else opinion, and it is 1000 times more respectful than laughing at them.
But hey that's just my 2 cents and I respect the moderator's decisions but at the same time, I have to respectfully disagree with this one.Cheers.
Yes. In a perfect world we'd have upvotes and downvotes- and originally there was. The problem was just that after a post got enough downvotes, it would be hidden, which basically silenced anyone with an unpopular opinion. So those had to go. The LOLs became the disagree thing, but then it kept being abused by people who would run a but to LOL spam someone, or just follow someone around and LOL every single one of their posts. Using the reaction on a post because you don't agree with it is fine, following the person around and harassing them by using that reaction of absolutely everything they do is not.
You can still show people that you disagree with them by making a post and explaining why. Others with the same feelings can upvote yours instead of the other to show how they feel as well. Hopefully that'll spark some more constructive conversations as well. We're going to see how this plays out for a while.
You are changing an entire forum community because of an extremely small minorities actions. This isn't logical and is quite a terrible reasoning behind these actions.
You did read the part about bots, yes? There were people who had their "LOL" count inflated by hundreds, sometimes thousands thanks to those bots.
-
@Nickenzie said:
BBQ is easy to counter but NOED is much more arduous for the single survivor. It's why NOED is weak on SWF and strong on Solo Q survivors because it's not just you doing everything.NOED has more counters than breaking totems. You can also hide near one of the exits, like I said, wait for the Killer to go to the other one, and then leave. You don't have to disable NOED for it to cease being a threat. The Killer can't use NOED if they can't find you.
-
@Nickenzie said:
Yeah, but you'll have to consider that my version will warn you that the killer has NOED by showing you that you're doomed. The current version doesn't tell you that the killer has NOED until after you're in dying state, you had no counter play because you didn't know. I understand, just cleanse all 5 totems which is fair to say but one survivor can only do so much against the killer when his teammates don't aid him in the process. That's why the perk should warn you that you're exposed like Rancor when you're the obsession or get rid of the instant downs for a mori (you'll know the killer can mori you by seeing the doomed status effect to the right). Both choices I'm completely fine with since you know and can have a chance to play around the perk.There is counterplay. Just like how you don't know if the Killer has BBQ, you can still take steps to prevent it. I already mentioned Dark Sense as an easy counter to NOED.
-
@Nickenzie said:
Not per dull totem, worded badly lol.Even just 10% is already a massive increase.
-
@BACKSTABBER said:
@Global said:
@BACKSTABBER said:
@Global said:
no....no we donttalk for urself, when u have 122 perks to choose, please reply this thread
not to mention, how long griding and disturbing will be the bloodweb to build your fav tier 3!!
The point of perks is to bend the game to your favor. 4 is enought especially when there are perks that are more powerful than other ones in every way. More perks would mean people would choose the most strong perks as there are more slots so they wouldnt have to actually plan outwhich perks to use. Since well theyd have enough room for more.
when u have 122 perks to choose, none will ever select the weakest ones, ok im done wasting energy in this thread
And when you have more perk slots, people will still not choose the "weakest" ones. They'll just take whatever the OP perks are.
-
@Nickenzie said:
Hex perks can be disabled, especially NOED and the survivors will get a warning (notification saying they are doomed). Trust me, I'll rather get mori'd by a killer who won a chase against me then have the killer insta down me because I didn't know a totem was still up.I'm not sure you understand just how massive a 10% movement speed increase really is, and you want it per dull totem, meaning there's a theoretical 50% maximum. That would put the Killers' speed at 165%, or roughly half that of the Nurse when she's blinking.
-
@drunky26 said:
Can i unlock it on level 5 or i have to level up to 30, 35 and 40 again, because i prestiged her.Teachables are unlocked forever, but you need to actually unlock them first. Prestige doesn't change that. If Self-Care is not popping up after you unlock it, it's just bad luck.
-
@Nickenzie said:
Your rage from losing your prey calls upon the Entity to aid you. Any dull totem remaining in the trial will have this Hex applied to it when the exit gates are powered. Gain a 6/8/10% movement speed increase and all survivors will suffer from the doomed status effect. The Hex effect's persists as long as the related Hex totem is standing.Doomed Status Effect:
Survivors are marked for death by the Entity.
-Suvivors can be killed by the killer via mori.If that doesn't work, show every survivor when the last generator is completed if they are exposed or not. Rancor does this and it does its job by telling the obsession to be careful so why not with NOED?
That sounds absurdly overpowered, beyond anything that has ever existed in the game.
-
@SpongeBob420Pants said:
@Vietfox said:
Cleansing totems is not that hard.In solo queue, just for NOED? It's pretty annoying.
Dark Sense counters NOED. Just hide near the exit that the Killer is checking first, and when they go for the other one, open it and walk out.
-
@Wolf74 said:
@Orion said:
@Wolf74 said:
So we have an ingame mechanic that can deny the killer 4K by giving the last survivor a free escape, but a killer playing tactically around that mechanic to get the 4th kill is "pathetic"?
But other survivor mains told me that slugging is actually the build in ingame mechanic to counter the hatch.
So sides one free mechanic is legit, but to counter it with tactic ans strategy is cheap?There's a big difference between slugging to give yourself more time to find the other guy and slugging while waiting for the slugged Survivor to die. The latter, which is what the OP is complaining about, forces the remaining Survivor to move around to avoid the AFK crows, yet does nothing to help you win. It's borderline exploitative.
Erm… you mean slugging AFTER the other escaped or got killer or guarding the slugged while the other survivor is still around?
Guarding the slug while the other guy is still around.
-
@Kaelum said:
@Orion said:
There is a report system, and reports are being logged. Bans are the only thing that don't work. Once they're up and running, depending on the reports, people will be banned.The only thing you can do on PS4 is click on an icon. You can’t supply any text, or additional information (i.e. pictures or videos). TBH though, do you really think that they are going to go through over a years worth of reports? And that is only if Microsoft and Sony allow them to do so, which is extremely doubtful on the Sony side. The best that they can do is lock players from using the dedicates servers once put into place. Sony does not allow publishers to lock players out of a game that they payed for. Since KYF will not be on the servers, they can still play that, which is how they will get around the Sony issue.
You're assuming they don't go through them right now and tally up the score.
-
Not nearly as many times as I'd like (once or twice, maybe). Moris are fun to watch on both sides, but unfortunately I only get the pleasure when I play Killer.
-
There is a report system, and reports are being logged. Bans are the only thing that don't work. Once they're up and running, depending on the reports, people will be banned.
-
@Wolf74 said:
So we have an ingame mechanic that can deny the killer 4K by giving the last survivor a free escape, but a killer playing tactically around that mechanic to get the 4th kill is "pathetic"?
But other survivor mains told me that slugging is actually the build in ingame mechanic to counter the hatch.
So sides one free mechanic is legit, but to counter it with tactic ans strategy is cheap?There's a big difference between slugging to give yourself more time to find the other guy and slugging while waiting for the slugged Survivor to die. The latter, which is what the OP is complaining about, forces the remaining Survivor to move around to avoid the AFK crows, yet does nothing to help you win. It's borderline exploitative.
-
@Dinaqma said:
Then take it away from the killers, they dodge a lot of lobbies. Fair is fair. THIS.GAME.IS.BROKEN.Clearly they don't do it as often as Survivors did, or the devs would've taken it away by now.
-
@RSB said:
@Orion said:
This is gonna get me crucified, but I'm hyped because I think the Legion is now better than most people think, and because I hope the devs will change the one thing that can put the Legion at the top - remove the recovery period if he doesn't use Feral Frenzy to hit anyone.With that change he would be "too OP", as some people claimed.
It would be great to have it, Legion would feel balanced, but I doubt they will buff him that way.
We'll see.
-
@Dinaqma said:
I agree. We as survivors should get to see who the killer is.. just reason 183774738291 that this game is unbanalced and favors the killers.Survivors had that right a while back and abused the hell out of it, breaking lobbies everywhere.
-
@The_Crusader said:
Its not the only case ive had. Had 1 killer who teamed up with a survivor to take me out. Had a go at him...get him later and it happens again.Had to change my steam name.
Seriously get lost. Not joking. Theres no good reaosn why anyone should have to constantly change their username due to ingame harassment. The fact that you defend this is [BAD WORD] pathetic and just shows what a toxic little man you are.
Report such behavior and wait about 1-2 minutes until you queue up again, to avoid getting into lobbies with scum like that multiple times in a row. That's what I do in HotS, should work for DbD too.
I'm not defending anything. Like I said, get off your paranoid horse.