PiiFree
PiiFree
About
- Username
- PiiFree
- Joined
- Visits
- 717
- Last Active
Comments
-
(in addition to the "toxicity of DbD"...)
There's also a weird mentality going on in DbD, it's very different to other games I've played. People expect the opposite side to care about their fun and their experience - even if it might cost them the win.
Coming from very competitive games, I thought it was quite obvious that people try to demolish the other team as hard as possible. It's normal, both teams want to win and they'll do anything to achieve that. However, if you do that in DbD, you're going to get a lot of hate.
I'm still wondering why that is? I can't really understand it... Is it the mixture of "casuals that just want to have fun" and "tryhards that just want to win"? I never expect my opponents to have mercy with me, why should I? It makes no sense.
I think that's a big part of the problem, because it's the reason why people get so frustrated over a single match. This part could very easily be solved by creating seperate modes for those; Casual and Ranked.
-
@Eninya said:
Wow, you didn't play LoL at all, then. Seasons 2-4 were this mid-game in every match, and then the post-game chat, and then angry whispers. And since you could naturally get re-queued with these people easily in the next few games, you dealt with it again.There's been blogs dedicated to ######### like this, and it's a major contributing factor to the creation of the tribunal system in LoL. How did you miss that?
In that case, that's your experience from playing LoL. They implemented the tribunal system and now it's gotten a lot better, right? So how is that relevant anymore? LoL is nowhere near as toxic as DbD anymore and neither is CS or Dota 2. That's an observation I made.
My only logical conclusion: You seem to be a Survivor main that never plays Killer? I have roughly 2000 hours, 100% achievements and more or less a 50/50 Killer / Survivor ratio. I received my 500+ insulting steam profile comments exclusively when playing Killer. I know a person with around 1800 profile comments. That's hundreds of players heading over to their profile just to insult them. Where else can this possibly happen? Name me one thing and I'll check it out myself.
It's also the nature of DbD; play Killer and you'll receive hate. Play Survivor and you'll spread hate. As a result, players that mostly play Survivor will not see as much toxicity as Killers do, at least not as the receiving part.
It's an endless discussion but my opinion stands:
After 10 years of gaming and thousands of hours in multiplayer games, Dead By Daylight has the most toxic community I've ever seen. We're at a point where deathwishes should be considered "normal behaviour, get used to it".
-
@Shad03 said:
Howdy there, inserting myself here as I am bored. I shall address your points in as much of a respectful manner as possible. For this reason, I'll consider each paragraph a point. Also understand that while not directed at me, I'll still act as if the first sentence is a point.Hi, thanks, I'll go through them one after another;
@Shad03 said:
1] I have not played any of those games, but I can assure you that the community of any game can be 'toxic' outside of the actual game itself.It certainly does, but I have never experienced it in such a frequency. My steam profiles at this point holds up around 550 comments, mainly insults and exclusively from Dead By Daylight. My account is 10 years old, open since day 1 and has somewhat several thousand hours of play time but I never received an insulting profile comment until I started playing DbD (people going outside of the game itself to insult someone).
@Shad03 said:
2] This is very true, moving on.Same.
@Shad03 said:
3] Alright, we'll do it your way. I am a console pleb so I don't have much in ways of text communication with other teams in games that permit such chats. However I can say the amount of 'toxicity' in various games I have played are equally as various in 'Quality' and 'Quantity'. GTA 5 has a special amount of toxic in both regards, no matter the system.I played GTA Online on both PS4 and on Steam for several hundred hours and the toxicity I received is nowhere near as close as that from DbD, but I'll take that as "a different experience".
@Shad03 said:
4] ... What game doesn't have people who send death threats? In fact, let's step outside of games for a second. One prime example is Steven Universe where a artist was treated horrifically for drawing a single character skinny, so much so in fact that they had to shut down their entire online accounts. Dead by Daylight is the most tame thing in comparison. Does it have a lot of toxicity? Yes. Is it the most toxic? Regarding online games, maybe.Again, psychopaths are everywhere but judging a whole community based on a specific individual (such as that Madden example of TheBean)? I'm talking about the average toxicity that you should expect to face as a player by just playing the game. As I said, psychopaths are everywhere but should I really expect that people to wish that my kids get raped to death on a regular basis just for...playing the game? It happens, but I've never seen it happen in such a frequency as it does in DbD.
@Shad03 said:
5] That is vile and I'm sorry that has happened. But my point stands that it's not just DbD. It's more pronounced, sure, but other games can be, and are, just as bad.There was an asian guy that literally killed someone over their World of Warcraft weapon. Does that make WoW the most toxic game? I don't think so, it was a psychopath that happened to play WoW, but that doesn't really represents the community. However, hundreds of insulting profile comments from the same community DO represent the community, in my opinion.
@Shad03 said:
6] This point is not really true. Again, it's more pronounced, but there will always be toxic [Bad Word] in online games. If your account can be viewed/located, then it doesn't matter which game it is, dedicated people will find you and [Bad Word] with you if they have the chance. This game doesn't breed toxicity. People will always be toxic, it is unfortunate that DbD seems to attract them more then most.I simply disagree then. From my experience, this game breeds toxicity more than any other game I played (and therea re a lot).
The gameplay itself consists of toxic playstyles which makes it so easy to spread it that people do it on a regular base without even realizing it. Camping, tunneling, looping, using flashlights, teabagging,... the list of stuff that can promote toxicity is big and the frequency of that stuff happening is high.
You tunnel someone? People insult you.
You camp someone? People insult you.
You mori someone? People insult you.
You loop someone? People insult you.
You blind someone? People insult you.
You use NOED? People insult you.
You use DS? People insult you.
You teabag? People insult you.
You hit someone on hook? People insult you.
Play Nurse? People insult you.
...
the list goes on.It can be difficult to find a playstyle that does not lead to toxic reactions afterwards.
-
@TheBean said:
Do you get it yet?Now you're narrow minded for only looking at the example of my friend, I provided a lot more examples of overly toxic behaviour that happen way more frequently. BTW, that facebook example is still a DBD exclusive for us, I'm sure it has happened before but that is absolutely not relevant to my post.
I'll make it very simple for you:
Show me a game that has more people going out of their way to leave insulting comments on a players profile.
I'll be waiting.
@TheBean said:
However it isn't DBD exclusive... That is just you pulling something out of the air and applying it to this game cause your friend was harassed.And that's you pulling something out of the air and applying it to this case. I can speak from experience, can you? Do you know of any other real scenario where this happened in any other online game? No? Then why claiming it? It probably has happened, yes, but it's a DbD exclusive for me because I have never seen it anywhere else. If you head up to the post you just quoted, you'll find out that all the informations provided are based on personal experience and nowhere did I claim that any of the things should be considered as facts.
-
@TheBean said:
@PiiFree said:
Firstly, you're comparing popular streamers with some casuals /randoms getting bullied.So streamers aren't people aswell?... So they should be subject to online harassment? Sorry I didn't realize you were only taking about YOUR friend, cause they are all that matters.
Secondly, how often has that happened yet?
It happened enough that there are laws now against it, specifically, and it was given its own term. But sorry yeah.. it probably doesn't happen enough like what happened to YOUR friend, cause they are all that matters right?
@PiiFree said:
Thirdly, has absolutely nothing to do with the toxicity of a community. Anything that happens to streamers happens to them due to them BEING STREAMERS, not being part of a specific gaming community. A random person would never get swatted or anything like that. It's a Twitch / Streaming issue, not a specific gaming communities.So if I was watching a streamer who plays Hello Kitty I would SWAT the streamer who plays CS:GO?
So is this only DBD exclusive?
https://kotaku.com/man-spends-six-months-plotting-murder-of-counter-strike-5550609
ok lets forget about that one... what about this one...
https://www.polygon.com/2018/8/26/17783924/madden-tournament-shooting-jacksonville-florida
Oh yeah... but it doesn't fit into the DBD exclusive... So.. these can't apply.
LULS
Listen, I think you completly missed the point, by miles. What are you trying to tell me? That there are psychopaths out there? Did I EVER deny that? Seriously, what's are you trying to tell me?
I want you to go back to my post, read it and then explain to me how any of this stuff is relevant to my post.
I don't consider a shooting (which I btw unfortunately had seen happening live on twitch) an act of toxicity, it's pure psychopatic and has absolutely nothing to do with the specific game (Madden, in that case) per se. It's a psychopath that happened to be part of the Madden community. Same with the Swatting (which doesn't exclusively happens to CSGO players, btw). All those things happened because of the STREAMS. It's a STREAMING issue, just like the guys that shoot at DrDisrespects house. No one will shoot at your house for playing PUBG, but they will start to do that when you become a popular streamer because out of the 10'000'000 followers you have, chances are high that a few psychopaths are amongs them. You get it?
In DbD, even the "normal" players have to fear to get targeted personally, because the overall toxicity has reached a really high level. I think it's important for you to understand that I never claimed that the MOST TOXIC things have happened in the Dead By Daylight community, I'm saying that the general playerbase in Dead By Daylight is a lot more toxic than any other community that I know - and this includes CSGO, Dota 2, LoL, ARK, CoD, BF,...
-
@Gorgonia said:
Still, SWF is not the problem, it is at least the means to another problem. Like I said before, my friends are bad and playing in SWF doesn’t make them any better. And good survivors will still be good even if playing solo. The problem is how some SWF groups use this feature. Blocking voice comms is stupid. I can pretty much make a voice chat on my phone and still talk to friends there. There’s no way to control that.
What should change tho is how solo and SWF work towards the goal. And what limits or handicaps you could add to SWF mode to keep it from having the same possibilities as a solo player.It's great to see this transformation.
You're absolutely right, SWF per se is not the problem but it's often related to it. You're also right that blocking voice communication, is simply not possible.
You said yourself that it should be adjusted regarding balance, but sadly that is not the case at the moment. The only possibilities Killers have to avoid the "possibly unfair SWFs" are:
- Dodge SWFs
- Equip strong add-ons to make up for the imbalance
- Don't care about it and risk getting destroyed on a regular base
People will run out of strong add-ons, so that's not constantly possible. People will start to get frustrated when they keep losing, so that's also not constantly possible. What's left is "Dodging SWFs".
It's the unfortunate reality and it sucks for a big part of the playerbase, Killers and Survivors alike. Lack of balance. That's the MAIN problem.
-
Not by default, no, but every Killer should be able to reach S-tier once you master them.
-
@Gorgonia said:
I’m root to nothing, but whatever. My SWF games are 5 in 100. We hardly ever get a lobby so we disband and play solo while still on voice comm.Well, I could say I’m fascinated by your logic too, because killers dodge everything they don’t like... swf, clothes, items, names, yet I have to endure such behavior on a daily basis, where’s that empathy.
I never claimed Killers are saints, I'm just providing legit explanations as to why Killers try to avoid SWFs and solely that. Yes, by playing in SWFs you automatically became part of the problem.
I'd bet my secondary control unit that at least one Killer reconsidered their lobby behaviour and started to pay more attention to the players in the lobby after they faced you. Almost guaranteed. Whenever you completly destroy a Killer with a SWF, that Killer is going to look for excuses and they'll find it in your SWF.... and TADAAA; one more Killer that tries to avoid SWFs - that's how fast this problem spreads.
For the record, I never dodge a lobby because of SWFs because I myself sometimes play in one - but I often regret not dodging them. The difference in my SWFs is that we usually play WITH the Killer AGAINST each other instead of playing TOGETHER AGAINST the Killer.
We put the Killer in a neutral position while we make ourselves our biggest enemies. They have fun, we have fun, perfect.
-
@Gorgonia said:
At least voice comm gives me something to do while killers dodge by asuming everyone is SWF. And I didn’t generalize. I replied to a generalization by explaining my case.And empathy for killers? After the last couple of weeks of 1 hour lobby waits? Nah, thank you...
Where ignorance is bliss...
I hope you realize that you are the root of the problem you constantly face? And now you're basically asking Killers to have empathy with you for those waiting times.
Can't lie, I'm fascinated by that logic!
-
@Gorgonia said:
It’s funny when people think voice comm = militar strategy to defeat the killer. I play with friends and while there are a few “hey, ######### come save me”, we mostly joke around and laugh at each other... but wellYou're doing exactly what you want Killers to stop doing; you generalize based on YOUR behaviour / experience.
Just because YOU don't abuse voice communication, doesn't mean NO SWF does it.
We all know that both situations are very realistic so trying to talk it down with the "I never do that, I just want to have fun with friends" isn't exactly going to solve the issue for Killers because THEY will still face Cancer squads.
While I appreciate that you don't abuse voice communication, it would be nice if you could look a little bit further than just your own monitor & think about the Killers that have to deal with other types of SWFs. Maybe, just maybe you can even start to develop some sort of empathy for those? And agree to the fact that Voice communication CAN and WILL be abused? And that in that case, it DOES provide a significant advantage?
Maybe you might even come to the conclusion that voice communication - after thinking about all the possibilities and advantages it brings - actually does require some nerfs and balance adjustments?
Instead of just saying "I never abuse it, therefore is must be fine!".
-
@TheBean said:
Yet... people who are streaming CS:GO need to worry about the SWAT Team knocking down their door... But yeah... It is DBD exclusive, that ######### bags reach out into others personal life. I don't think the term SWATTING got born out of the DBD experience.Firstly, you're comparing popular streamers with some casuals /randoms getting bullied.
Secondly, how often has that happened yet?
Thirdly, has absolutely nothing to do with the toxicity of a community. Anything that happens to streamers happens to them due to them BEING STREAMERS, not being part of a specific gaming community. A random person would never get swatted or anything like that. It's a Twitch / Streaming issue, not a specific gaming communities.
-
@TheMidnightRidr said:
My point was KYF is not a viable alternative. Additionally, if you don't want to play against groups of people in general, why are you playing a matchmaking game? I promise you that if SWF was taken out of the game, DBD would die. I personally like to play with my friends. It makes the game more fun even though I survive less since they're less skilled. Same reason why I like playing Halo with friends, or GTA Online, or Destiny. Games are just more fun with friends. You can't make a blanket statement that all SWF are bad if there are a few bad apples in the bunch. I main killer and I still defend SWF and will as long as there isn't a better alternative.At least you have an alternative. What's the Killers alternative if they don't want to play against people that communicate which each other?
It's not really about you playing with friends, it's about you guys communication with each other and exchaning important informations. This puts Killers at a disadvantage, so they try to avoid this from happening.
It's a very logical thing to do and I honestly can't get why people have so much trouble understanding that.
Not every SWF is toxic, not every SWF is high skilled but (a wild guess based on my experience) 95% of the SWFs use voice communication, so they will exchange important informations and this alone already puts them in a better position than the same people would be without voice communication.
They can't remove SWF but they could implement different game modes for "SWFs and Casuals" and for competitive players. I never claimed that all SWFs are bad, but most if not all of them are at an advantage that's not intended and not part of the game.
Voice communication is NOT part of the game. Playing with friends is.
-
@TheMidnightRidr said:
Oh yes. Heaven forbid anyone play online with their friends. While there are groups who can wipe the floor with killers, the majority of SWF is just friends wanting to play together. I know you can go to KYF, but some groups might not like playing as killer and actually want bloodpoints for playing. Quit your whining, bud, and grow a pair.I like that statement, especially this part:
@TheMidnightRidr said:
some groups might not like playing as killerNow I know this is going to hit you like a truck but keep calm when you read it:
Some Killers might not like playing against you and your friends.
-
League is NOWHERE near as toxic. Not even close. Neither is CS:GO or Dota 2 and similar.
Listen, there is a basic level of toxicity in every online multiplayer game. Mostly it's just the typical "you stupid noob, learn to play!".
Maybe we should differentiate toxicity by quantity and "quality"? Yes, in CS:GO toxicity happens frequently but the level of toxicity is rather low. As I said; stupid idiot, noob, l2p ect. is mainly what it is about.
Dead By Daylight has a whole new level of toxicity. Deathwishes, wishing someones kids / wife to get cancer, getting raped to death ect? That's just sick. And that happens AT LEAST once a week. They leave insulting comments on steam profiles and whatever other social media account is connected to it.
A friend used a steam profile pic she also used on facebook and that's how people found her accont, then started to insult her real friends via facebook because she happened to kill them. It's a true story and that level of toxicity is a DbD-exclusive. I'm playing online games since CS 1.6 and not once has anyone gone outside of the specific game to make someones life miserable because of a single match.
In most communities, toxicity happens within a match and that's it, you'll never see them again. Not in DbD.
-
Ah, a new troll was born.
-
@JohnTed said:
2 years, actually 110 hours in total.Then it's no surprise that you think Ruin is OP.
I'll never stop saying this: Only bad Survivors are affected by Ruin.
-
What's Dwight doing in the lockers?
Self-caring his Sippery Meat!HUEHUE
-
SWFs be like:
-
@DelsKibara said:
@SenzuDuck said:
Don't worry about it - all the decent killers who don't care are playing the game.It's only the bad ones on the forum complaining about it honestly.
That is something I noticed as well in the Steam forums actually.
People who often cry about SWF being a problem often don't have the Rank 10 Killer or Survivor Achievements.
Like, we get that you are frustrated, but why are you complaining about a feature in the game when you haven't even played enough to get the Rank 10 achievements on both sides?Don't confuse SWF with Voice Communication.
SWF is a feature. Voice communication isn't.
-
...and 99% of the times it doesn't work, it's because the Survivor messed up the timing and then tries to excuse it somehow.
-
I'd respect the kobe if they tried it when not being in a hopeless situation xD
Usually it's their last hope when they already lost, no point in respecting anything. They had nothing to lose at that point. Kobe on first hook at 5 gen and you may survive it.
-
@fluffybunny said:
What would you suggest them measure instead when measuring for balance? I know what the community says regarding possible issues, but maybe there's too many voices for them to hear out everyone. Whether you pip or not doesn't always mean anything, either. I don't believe I've every lost a pip as killer and when I lose one as survivor, it's usually thanks to survivors farming you, which I don't think is intended.My suggestion for BHVR:
Implement a ranked mode with a way harder and more punishing ranking system, obviously without SWF because that would ruin the whole balance aspects again.
Adjust the emblem system. Many Emblems are all bound to some sort of grinding, they're not exactly skill related.
If you have such a system in place, the skill brackets would be a lot more accurate, leading to more balanced matches (skill / experience-wise) which would inevitably lead to better representation of balance.
On top of that, certain key factors need to be considered. How long did it take for the gens to be done? How long did it take to get the hooks? That's ultimately what defines efficiency for each role.
Right now, all that matters is the quantity: How many hooks? How many hits? How many gens? How many unhooks? The efficiency respectively the quality of the performance that lead to that result is irrelevant.
There are many things you can consider when looking for a measurement of skill or balance but the most important part would be to provide an even playground. In my opinion, right now it's mostly "one side stomping the other side" because there is such a massive variety of skill brackets even in the highest rank. It may look balanced OVERALL, but in fact most matches are already over before they even started. You win some, you lose some but you rarely get really tense matches where players of equal skill participate.
A more detailed answer would break the topic here but I think you get the point.
-
@terrortil said:
@PiiFree said:
That doesn't really matter, my point is simple: You are allowed to DC for somewhat 40% and only then the devs consider it worthy to punish. That's their tolerance, it's a simple fact. You are allowed to DC for roughly 40% of the matches and you won't get any punishment because the devs think that's fine.I'm really sorry. I really wanted to avoid you because our discussions never progress. But @Peanits stated a few days ago: "I'm not sure where the 40% number is coming from but it's not true. I've seen it mentioned a couple times now and that's not the case."
Thanks for that!
Did they provide any additional information in that regard? A bit more specific? Because saying "It's not 40%" might aswell mean that it's actually 50%. Or 41%. or 39%. Just saying, you get the point. You should not take that number too precisely, the actual value is not relevant. They are way too tolerant when it comes to DCs, that's what it's about and that's a simple fact.
The mods and devs chose their words very carefully when it comes to such things, in the end they leave it up to everyones interpretation of a statement.
In other words, it would be nice if we could get actual numbers!
-
@fluffybunny said:
Accidental DC isn't against the rules, but it IS under unsportsmanlike conduct. They should do more to punish it imo. It completely ruins the game for everyone else left in the match. Other games have wait times to discourage DCing, I'm pretty sure. I've heard about that from elsewhere. Otherwise just resetting the lobby and keeping your offerings would also be a nice fix if someone DCs at the very start or can't connect due to the loading screen freezing, etc.That doesn't really matter, my point is simple: You are allowed to DC for somewhat 40% and only then the devs consider it worthy to punish. That's their tolerance, it's a simple fact. You are allowed to DC for roughly 40% of the matches and you won't get any punishment because the devs think that's fine.
@fluffybunny said:
I still play competitively, I just also play for fun and I just don't consider it a "win" if only one person leaves and does so through the hatch. The hatch is a boring mechanic and often a free win for survivor and most of the time the best player doesn't even get the hatch. It's the person who's afking next to it and hiding when things look bleak that does. That's just my opinion.I honestly don't think it'd be a good idea to make being killed = depipping, either. I don't think it'd make for fun games. Skill isn't really something easily measured in games like this. There's so many things to account for, such as the skills of allies, what others are doing, etc. If they HAD to live to get pips, they'd be more likely to play SWF and bring in the OP perks (hi, DS) and the really good items. It'd probably make for more selfish players, too. And anyone who plays survivor would cry about their survival rate as it actually would account for more than leaving with an item, doing a daily, and getting gold/silver/iridescent.
Survivors would avoid feeding unnecessary kills if escaping was of higher priority, that's my point in that regard. Escaping shouldn't be a requirement for you if you play for fun, because escaping (running through the exit gate) is not fun in any way or form. It's just a few seconds of running straight forward.
One of the biggest problems in DbD is that both sides can win at the same time. There is no real competition against each other, objectively seen, which is why pip progression and match results should never be used as representation for balance.
A match can result in a 4k but all Survivors pipped. A match can result in a 0k but even the Killer pipped. Especially towards the end of the match, Survivors that are still alive most likely pipped anyway, so they're a lot more likely to throw the match by going for stupid rescue actions. Stuff like that wouldn't happen if escape was more important or even a requirement to "win".
-
We should keep in mind that the idea is not just limited to the non-progressive hooks.
Other mechanics would come in place to make up for the lack of pressure of hooks.
Being able to put a Survivor into the next hook stage by hooking another Survivor doesn't sound like a bad idea to me. It would pressure survivors to unhook quickly to prevent this from happening.
The only problem I see is that certain Killers like Nurse, Billy, Spirit*, Huntress would profit from such a solution while others, already weak ones, would suffer (looking at Leatherface, Wraith, Trapper...).
-
No, how dare you ask for Survivor nerfs... * shake my head * Crazy people here today...
It only nullifies 8 hits, no big deal
-
I don't like her duckface, no matter what hairstyle....
-
That's what happens when only 1 Red Envelope gets burned. Happens all the time for me.
-
@terrortil said:
@PiiFree said:
I see it on a daily base, I'm sure most of the hooks that happen in the endgame happen because of "stupid" actions of Survivors.Again assumptions not facts. Please handle it like that. Your experiences are not statistical proof.
Listen, I know it's a popular phrase to come up with but if someone starts the sentence literally with "I see it on a daily base" it's obvious that the following part is based on the experience they see on a daily base and not meant a fact at all...
You're an incredibly annoying person to deal with and I'm at a point where I believe that even if I took the time to provide video evidence of such a quote regarding balance, you'd probably be like "That was waaay back in [random time zone] and is no longer the case anymore!!11".
No, if you don't believe it, inform yourself. I'm not here to teach you.
-
@terrortil said:
@PiiFree said:
Feeding unnecessary kills is always a case of stupidity or incompetence. Whenever you approach a hook for an unhook attempt, you can easily evaluate how high your chances of success are. BT? NOED? Oneshot-killer? Exit gate open? Exit gate nearby? Next hook = dead?
Many factors come in place in that situation and if you're smart, you can clearly see how your rescue act (most likely) will end up like.
Yes of course I look at the factors in advance (like the above) and I will not always run straight to the hook without consideration of many things.
If you mindlessly run into a facecamping Leatherface (and that happens) it has nothing to do with "a high risk / high reward gamble", it's simply stupid and nothing else.
Of course you will take that one example. Yeah, a facecamping Leatherface is dead situation, I agree. But what if you can provoke him. This will not work if you stand a mile away and point at him. But get close in a range he could get you and maby he will let his guard down for a moment. I've seen a lot of rescues like this and yes I have seen it fail also. Killer will also make mistakes from time to time. Even the best do not always play perfect.
Or maby he is close patroling or maby it isn't a LF or or or .... as you stated there are dozens of factors when, how and why I go for a risky rescue and when not. But just bc it is risky and could end in a "unnecessary" dead is not reason.
As for the proof for that "balance around kills / escapes", just shows me that you never watch the dev streams. Just watch some of the streams right after they released a new Killer and you'll find out they'll use "escape and death statistics" to evaluate if a Killer is broken or fine.
Just look at freddy for example, they figured he had a high kill rate in rank 20 upon release so they nerfed him because obviously people had trouble against him. Ignoring the fact that people DC'd left and right as soon as they realized it's a freddy, which lead to those escape rates.I saw all streams since I play this game. And when you look back on the dev stream for the freddy nerf (as I do right now) you will see that:
high DC rates are mentioned
different opinion about his power level are mentioned
ppl dont have fun against him is mentioned
devs listening to feedback is mentionedNow, of course, you can say that she did not take it all into account for the nerf but just because it was retrospectively wrong is no proof.
It's a rather pointless discussion because an "unnecessary death" or a "stupid action" is a matter of opinion. As you said, sometimes it can work out and sometimes it ends up in a disaster, that's part of the game, but very often it's just stupid imo. I see it on a daily base, I'm sure most of the hooks that happen in the endgame happen because of "stupid" actions of Survivors.
As I said, I try to get the match result that represents the overall performance of the players. I'm also willing to purposely lose a hatch standoff if I think the Killer deserves the 4k.
As for the dev stream part, I think if you watched all of them you would've noticed that they balance the game around 2 kills and 2 escapes. If this result is achieved, they consider the match to be balanced. I'm surprised that this is news to you, as they often (if not exlcusively) provide those stats in relation to balance.
I'm sure I could find McLeans statement in regards to the depip squads experiment, where he excused the success of the depip squad quite literally with "we never said the game was balanced", implying that anything apart from 2 kills // 2 escapes is the result of imbalance.
Or we could look at the old victory cube, which was clearly designed around 2 kills / 2 escape balance.
Another irrelevant question: Since when do you play this game?
-
@Attackfrog said:
@EntityDispleased said:
The devs are hiding in fear of the community they created.It's true. The player base of this game is one of the most "toxic" (aka insulting and unfriendly) I have encountered in 20+ years of online gaming.
I have to be this guy now:
The devs are not exactly innocent when it comes to the toxicity of this community.
For way too long they ignored the toxic aspects of this game (insulting endgame chats, for example). It's burned into peoples brain, if someone played in a way that was not fun, they'll insult them. That's how it is.
On top of all the "supported" streamers that promote toxicity regarding playstyles and behaviour after the match. They tolerated this stuff for way too long. It COULD've been avoided if they immediately took actions against toxic players but they refused to and what we have here is what's left.
The toxicity and negativity spreads over to the forums, making it very hard to actually find good content.
-
@fluffybunny said:
While I could venture and say farming and suiciding may not be against the rules (I know they do have farming in the rules, but I believe that is regards to screwing over your team), DCing is clearly against the rules. Still farming and suiciding can indicate skill or lack there of in a situation that shouldn't have happened organically. That happens out of boredom or ill will. A survivor messing up is organic gameplay, though, and therefore someone feeding the killer kills due to lack of information or an over assumption of their own skill isn't misleading to the game's stats. EDIT: @PiiFree I thought I quoted you, but guess not.DCing per se is not against the rules, it's a matter of how often you DC. The moment the ban hammer hits is the moment the devs consider the frequency of DCs to be a problem. IIRC, it's at around 40-50% at the moment? That's the DC tolerance the devs allow until they consider it to be "against the rules" and therefore punish players for doing so.
I surely agree that a survivor messing up is normal and part of the game, just like Killers messing up is normal. I think I made it clear enough that typical mistakes are not part of the problem but pointlessly feeding kills (or letting survivors escape) can have a negative impact regarding balance.
Maybe that's the difference between competitive players (or tryhards) and casuals. It would be interesting to see how the game would evolve if escaping was of greater value. It's not a big part with the current emblem system, which is why I'm confused why they use escape ratios to represent balance. It's not something Survivors desperately try to achieve, but the devs use those stats it as if it was all about escaping. Maybe those stats were more accurate if getting killed = depip and escape = pip, but that's not the case.
@terrortil said:
@PiiFree said:
It simply represents the spupidity or incompetence of the players.We just had this discussion a few days ago. And your ignorance annoys me. This is not a case of spupidity or incompetence. It's a gamble. High risk, high profit. We (altruistic players) know the odds when we do such things.
The problem is that the devs use such stats to measure the balance. Which is why I try to avoid providing inaccurate / not representative match results.
Again I see no prove that's the case. This is an statement without any basis on which you want to dictate to others how to play.
Feeding unnecessary kills is always a case of stupidity or incompetence. Whenever you approach a hook for an unhook attempt, you can easily evaluate how high your chances of success are. BT? NOED? Oneshot-killer? Exit gate open? Exit gate nearby? Next hook = dead?
Many factors come in place in that situation and if you're smart, you can clearly see how your rescue act (most likely) will end up like.
If you mindlessly run into a facecamping Leatherface (and that happens) it has nothing to do with "a high risk / high reward gamble", it's simply stupid and nothing else. It's like going to a gunfight with only a knife when you could've simply avoided it. There's a difference between altruism and blatant stupidity, you still gotta stay realistic.
As for the proof for that "balance around kills / escapes", just shows me that you never watch the dev streams. Just watch some of the streams right after they released a new Killer and you'll find out they'll use "escape and death statistics" to evaluate if a Killer is broken or fine.
Just look at freddy for example, they figured he had a high kill rate in rank 20 upon release so they nerfed him because obviously people had trouble against him. Ignoring the fact that people DC'd left and right as soon as they realized it's a freddy, which lead to those escape rates. We're in the internet, in case of doubt you can always do a quick google search for the dev streams and spend some time watching them.
-
Toxic behaviour will lead to such reactions.
Stuff like flashlight spamming, teabagging or othweise excessive looping, toxicity in endgame chat or posting insulting comments on my profile.
Everyone else will be fine.
-
@fluffybunny said:
Survivors feeding deaths is part of the k/d ratio stats, though. It isn't to mislead. If we want to talk about something misleading the stats, let's talk about matches where killers farm or survivors kill off their team by farming. Let's talk about the DS missing their DS and suiciding on the hook or DCing. Let's talk about DCs. Someone attempting to go for saves and accidentally feeding the killer kills isn't misleading; it's part of the stats and is intended to be part of it.I will say when it's 3 gens left, it's most of the time to get as many points as you can before the last person alive can maybe get the hatch.
Not exclusively, no - but feeding the 4k is still one way to mislead the stats, besides all the stuff you mentioned (and many more).
I mean, we could also say that DCing or suiciding on hook is part of the game, because that's what many Survivors do. Just like feeding kills against campers. It's part of the game but it doesn't represent actual balance of the game. It simply represents the spupidity or incompetence of the players.
The problem is that the devs use such stats to measure the balance. Which is why I try to avoid providing inaccurate / not representative match results.
It's not really selfish, it's not because I desperately need to escape. It's because I don't want to provide undeserved kills.
-
@fluffybunny said:
Pft, well, if I were to just camp hatch, you might as well get a 4k. I'm being useless, then. My altruistic actions are typically dependent on the scenario, but I'm quick to defend and protect other survivors. I'll block the way or gain aggro so that they may have a chance to recover and do things. I am well aware that there are many survivors who are super selfish and would avoid taking aggro, even if that means someone getting on their last hook and being short one extra person to loop or do gens. If the killer camps with gens left, I'll dedicate myself to gens in the hope to get as many people out as possible. It makes it hard with others try to go for saves and essentially farms the hooked survivor, though. But might as well try to see if you can sneak closer and get the downed survivor up. With how they changed the healing on the ground, the survivor is typically just a short tap away from getting up again.I'd say it depends on the amount of gens required for the gates to be open and what Killer you're up against.
1-2 gens? Sure worth a try. 3 gens? Against a Nurse? Nah, we'll never make it out together, in that case it's always better to make sure at least one Survivor escapes to not feed unnecessary deaths that just mislead the k/d ratio stats.
I've started to become very strict in that regard and always try to avoid handing out free kills, as those lead to match results that don't represent the actual performance. I mainly do that because the devs put so much weight on kill / escape ratios without considering cases where survivors feed kills because of pointless altruism.
-
@SenzuDuck said:
~~~so your entire comment is a lie then.
Your steps include
record them cheating
record how you check their steam profile (for steam ID)
minimize dead by daylight without leaving the endgame lobby
edit the video to point out the specific situations
create an account on a video platform
upload it on said video platform
go back to the ingame and report the player
add the link of the video you just uploadedBut you forget to mention the very useful form you apparently used to report them, you forgot to mention that is where you post the video evidence and not in the end game report form you make up this lie about having to create an account and upload it and keep DBD in the same lobby until the upload and link is pasted... but somehow conveniently forgot that you didn't need to do any of that except post it in the form?
I mean if you gotta keep changing how you reported them between comments I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't report them at all.
It's not a lie, it's just how you report ingame. You're just once again trying to white knight their incompetence and (as usually) hating on me because I called you out a few days ago, "big" boy.
Assuming that I just reported them ingame with said video, they'd have the following informations at hand, directly connected to the report:
The reported players steamID & DbD identity
The match ID
Video proof of me playing IN THAT SAME MATCH against the hacker AND showing their steam profile by directly clicking on it AFTER said match.And while I can certainly understand that you try to call me out as lier, my point still stands. The only step you can skip is that you don't actually have to report ingame but instead, have to fill out the formular which is btw a lot more time consuming than just directly reporting the player ingame with a video proof. (which I did both to make SURE they get banned, but STILL was not enough)
-
@SenzuDuck said:
It's very easy to see why no one was banned during this, when you opened the steam profile of the user you simply showed a vanity URL which can be changed at any time to anything and there is no way to see the previous owner of the vanity URL. also not to mention the 420P stream makes the link unreadable regardless of whether it was their STEAMID or VANITY URL.You realize that their profile ID can't be changed? It's not their customized profile URL, it was their steam profile number. On top of that, I reported them ingame (where they get the players ID) and via the support formular where I obviously added the steamID64, as they explicitly ask for that. So I (once again) ask you kindly to stop making up stuff you don't know.
@SenzuDuck said:
Secondly, your entire comment is grossly misleading, if you report in game, and submit the twitch clip as evidence it AND showed the correct ID you'd have been fine.The reason no one was banned was simple mistakes by yourself, not the moderation team.
8 Months ago they were using a simple form to report cheaters, there was no need to stay in the end game lobby passed reporting them with the THUMBS UP/DOWN Option and grabbing their vanity URL to post on https://steamid.io/lookup.
Again, this ID is enough to track them down. You can type in that profile number and it'll lead you to the exact profile of that player, you can even track down the name history and find the name they used in this video. There is no excuse for that, I provided a steamID64, a bullet proof video, reported them both directly ingame and via web formular with the link to the video attached in both of them.
I don't know what else is required, it's already sad enough that WE need to provide all those informations to them because they refuse to backup.
Seriously, this statement right now is triggering me
@SenzuDuck said:
You can't simply report someone and expect them to be banned without evidence, just last week I reported two people and both were banned within a day.WITHOUT EVIDENCE? Look at the goddamn video and stop licking their butthole. I did exactly what they asked for.
-
@fluffybunny said:
I'll go for a save 'cause often one will be chased and the others will try to get the remaining generators. It's easier to get the doors than the hatch in some cases and I'm like Rick Astley. Never gonna give you up.
Lmao I really appreciate your playstyle, it often helps me getting a 4k xD
-
The vessel is not actually an item you pick up, it's like those vials you had to fill up - a visual indicator on the screen that you have a vessel. If you get hooked, that icon disappears and the vessel is brought back to the original place where you picked it up.
On top of that, there are also special generators and hooks that give points towards the event. Survivors get bonus points if they manage to escape with a vessel and the killer gets points if they manage to destroy a vessel after they hooked someone.
If a killer hooks someone, all the Vessels that are not yet picked up turn red, which allows the Killer to destroy them. They can only destroy one vessel per hook and when the survivor gets unhooked, the vessels turn back to yellow. The Killer has to leave the hook to find a vessel but at the same time has to prevent survivors from unhooking because that would turn the vessels invulnerable again.
-
@OGlilSPOOK20 said:
Oh no a survivor has a flashlight whatever shall I do... I know I'll just use Franklin's Demise! I play both Killer and Survivor dude... Maybe you should use the perk... It actually works or maybe you know... Lightborn!Oh no, a Killer is camping, what shall I do.
I know, I'll just finish gens and escape!
-
It's even worse if you want to report a cheater.
You need to:
- record them cheating
- record how you check their steam profile (for steam ID)
- minimize dead by daylight without leaving the endgame lobby
- edit the video to point out the specific situations
- create an account on a video platform
- upload it on said video platform
- go back to the ingame and report the player
- add the link of the video you just uploaded
I've done this 2 times so far, months if not years ago and I still got the steam profile of these guys saved and they are still not banned to this day.
This is an example of blatant lagswitch and speedhack from 8 months ago and they're still playing.
-
Speed Limiter for sure the worst Killer add-on.
-
@fluffybunny said:
I've had games where the killer and a survivor was obviously teaming together. It isn't common, but it does happen and sucks when it does. It's against the rules 'cause the survivor can often see where the survivor is, especially when downed. Killer can only occasionally do so with perks and certain situations. I was SWF with a friend and watched someone with OoO get downed and point the killer in the right direction to go and find my friend.Sorry they cussed you out, though. It's uncalled for.
Yes, that happens, but that's not what the other guy meant.
When I play Killer and I want to let a specific guy escape, I usually slug them and hunt the last one down. Then I hook the last guy and let the slugged guy wiggle free to get the hatch. That may look like we worked together but in reality I just thought this survivor deserved the hatch while the other guy didn't deserve it at all. I don't know them, but during the match I built up a sympathy towards one of them, maybe because they had an amusing playstyle or maybe they just tried really hard.
I do this quite often and many Survivors confuse it with "teaming up to kill the last survivor" which is not the case. I just don't want to kill a specific Suvrivor because I think they deserve the hatch
-
Brady said:
Do you know how hard it is to win a game with 5,4 gens and one dead?It's called the death-efficiency problem that was pointed out with the mathematics. The hatch was created to solve that problem because it's nearly impossible to win a game with 3 people alive and 5/4 gens left to do unless The Killer is absolute trash.
The hatch was just poor execution, but survivors had every right for it to be added.
Why not implement a feature for Killers, so if they get roflstomped (5 gens done without a kill), the Killer can kill survivors by hands? Sounds fair? Let's do it!
"bUt KiLlErS dOn'T dEsErVe A 2Nd ChAnCe!"
-
@OrionsFury4789 said:
PiiFree said:I don't really get it.
How did the slugged guy team up with the Killer? How is that even possible in first place?
Because when you're down you see your team and some people get salty and party chat with the killer to give you away when you don't die to pick them up off the groundHow are you going to party chat with the Killer while they're busy looking for the 4th survivor? In my 2000 hours playtime I've not once seen that happening, so I call for made up bullshit.
-
I don't really get it.
How did the slugged guy team up with the Killer? How is that even possible in first place?
-
@Detective_Jonathan said:
@PiiFree said:
I highly doubt this was solo. Maybe you were, but the other 3 were not.He asked if i was solo, i don't give a rats ass about the other 3. Like @Shad03 said, this match should never have happened. Period.
But I do, that's why I asked.
I on the other hand don't care if you give a damn about it or not, so you could've kept that reaction to yourself since you didn't provide any actual answer for me. You post something, I ask for further informations and not your personal opinion regarding the value of the information I'm asking for.
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
The reason why the removal of the variable works is that the killer is compelled to leave because of generator progression, but in the end, there's no longer something they'd loose. If such an issue would become a problem then an adjustment could solve that last piece of the puzzle.The unfortunate reality is that it can very easily take longer than 2 minutes to catch someone 2 times again, which is why camping sometimes is more time-efficient than going after others instead.
I must admit, I didn't read through the linked threads (Yet) where you refer to the balance adjustments required for the Killers.
I'm all for making camping less efficient BUT it would require major changes regarding chase efficiency of Killers, which I'm certain wouldn't be accepted by the majority of the playerbase (read: the survivor mains).
No one likes to get camped and no one likes to end up with 0 kills, especially after hooking 8 survivors. You'll end up looking at 4 teabagging Survivors that did next to nothing to achieve this match result while you ripped your own ass up to get those hooks.
There needs to be some proper balance regarding dedication, efficiency and contribution for everyone, not just the Killer. Repairing 5 gens as 4 Survivors is a joke, it's a bit more than a single generator per survivor and then you're effectively ready to escape. A task that requires 100s for a single survivor - but there's 4 of them.
So, if you read this and think "oh man, that's exactly what the other threads are about -.-"; I'll probably be reading them by that time so you don't have to bother replying :P...
I'm just really careful when I see onesided balance adjustments and this goes both ways. As you said, in the end we want to make the match fun for everyone; this includes both sides.
-
@Shad03 said:
@PiiFree said:
I highly doubt this was solo. Maybe you were, but the other 3 were not.Even then, that match should never happen. I remember my first Halo games back when I was forced to use Xbox. Jesus, I don't want Dead by Daylight going through that just because two people of different ranks can exist.
Isn't there a system that takes both ranks and goes through a medium rank?
(If someone was rank 1 and their friend was rank 10, then the killer they'd match up to would be rank 4-8?)
I totally agree, the matchmaking is absolute garbage but I usually only have such huge problems when in SWFs.
I played with a friend in duos when he just started playing DbD. This is how the lobby ended up like (He's top with most points, I'm the guy that died and the others were randoms, not part of our group):
-
I highly doubt this was solo. Maybe you were, but the other 3 were not.