Power_Guy
Power_Guy
About
- Username
- Power_Guy
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2407530#Comment_2407530
You must not have read what I said because I don't see where I said "Killers winning is a design flaw!"
I said a player preventing another player from playing a game they purchased, is a design flaw.
But being hooked is part of the game. Survivors saying 'I'm not playing when I'm hooked' does not mean they are not playing.
They are just not playing AND WINNING. They don't consider being hooked 'playing' because they are losing when it happens. Again; it boils down to Survivors whining that Killers trying to kill them is a flaw.
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2407023#Comment_2407023
This isn't about Killers or Survivors, this is about one player having the ability to completely negate another players ability to play the game. That is a design flaw.
'Killers winning is a design flaw!'
The three replies above me said it best; the Killer killing you is not a design flaw. This is what I mean when I say 'Survivors want to control Killers'.
-
@Zozzy said:
I am getting survivors rage at me because i am using lightborn.
How dare you negate flashlight save squads! 😂
Or, as some Survivors put it 'A perk should never 100% negate an item! 🙃'
-
@Artick said:
Yes, every killer must be completely busted. Only then killer mains will be happy and claim everything is balanced. There's no other way.
Every Killer must be nerfed. Only then will Survivor mains be happy and claim everything is balanced. There's no other way.
See? I can make sweeping generalizations as well.
-
This is the only game I've ever played where one side seems to think the other side has to:
- Avoid tactics that win (slugging, tunneling, camping)
- Avoid Killers or Perks that win (Don't use <x> character/power/skills/etc)
- Have to reward the other side playing badly (It's a Killer's fault if Survivors 3 gen, and Survivors WILL insist the Killer is holding the game hostage for not giving them a free gen)
- Hold the other side responsible for their fun (IE: It's Killers who 'play like sweats' or 'need to let up' or 'stop tryharding' and 'be happy with a 3K' and 'stop trying for a 4K')
- Let someone get away. Seriously, I get blasted for not giving someone a free escape for...vague reasons. (IE: Stop trying for the 4K (again). Give Final Survivor the hatch/door or you're a 'sweat')
- 'Stop trying so hard' while also trying hard to win. (Again; Killers need to stop 'tryhard'ing while Survivors bring 4 man SWFs and toolboxes with BNPs and 4 second chance perks, each. But Killers are supposed to not try to kill them before 1 gen pops, or after 5 gens pop. Speaking of...)
- Make up an arbitrary time limit and think it's enforceable. (IE: 'The Killer has lost after 5 gens.' and 'NoED rewards failing since 5 gens popped'.)
Oddly, when I do play Survivor with a friend, I never see a Killer demand the Survivors stop genrushing, or stop using certain perks, or give him a free kill if he does badly, or give him final kill, etc.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2406991#Comment_2406991
Did you read anything or did you just go 'Only killers matter' again?
I read it. Your points boil down to 'Survivors should control Killers' and 'Killers have a duty to make the game fun for Survivors'.
Basically standard Survivor main talking points where they blame Killers for trying to win, think they can control how their opponent wins, and think Killers are employees that have to follow a set of rules to make Survivors happy.
Camping is fine. If Survivors can genrush, Killers can killrush; IE: camp & tunnel to kill as fast as possible.
Why are Survivors allowed to do their objective as quick as possible, with gen stacking, toolboxes, BNPs, and perks to speed up gen repairs, yet Killers are evil mean toxic jerks for trying to kill as fast as possible?
Oh, right; Survivor entitlement.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2405966#Comment_2405966
Hey, remember ye olde moris? They were removed because they did exactly what you describe.
It's almost like the game is designed around survivors having three hookstates instead of only one.
Yet Survivors think they deserve to tell the Killer how and when he can kill.
Okay, hot take: They actually ######### do. This isn't player vs. AI, this is player vs. player. This is a -game-. Those survivors are there for your entertainment, but you are equally there for theirs. Or rather, you're supposed to be.
Your job isn't to 'kill survivors, any means necessary', your job is to kill survivors within a set of limitations oriented at making the game fun. We throw the whole concept of fun and fairness out the window, you might as well hack the game to immediately put all survivors on hooks at the start of the game. That'd be 'the killer doing his job', wouldn't it?
You whine about survivor entitlement, you whine about people acting like survivors are the elite class, but you refuse to consider anything other than the killer's victory, not even their own enjoyment of the game.
Yes, facecamping is toxic. It's exploiting a weakness in the game's design in an effort to suck the fun out of it. You wanna be that 'competitive', there's another game you can play.
Rofl. Your view is invalidated by saying that Survivors get to decide how their opponent kills them.
In an FPS, does my opponent get to decide which gun I use?
In an RTS, does my opponent get to decide which race I use?
In a MOBA, does my opponent get to decide which character I use? Or when I use my power?
No, no, no, and no.
And camping is not equivalent to hacking. Sorry. All your post reads as is someone trying so very hard to invent some excuse as to why they're right and camping is evil and Survivors are victims and Killers need to be screwed by game mechanics.
Camping is fine. It's Survivors being unable to take a loss that are the problem.
-
Well, no program or code can tell the difference between losing connection by accident, or losing it by force-closing, or turning off router, or unplugging wi-fi, etc.
To the game; it's all just 'connection gone'. Not much can be done about that. There's nothing, as of right now, that can detect the intent behind a lost connection.
-
@lemonsway said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2405686#Comment_2405686
No it's not meaningless, i still have 3 years played of this game but i'm not playing DbD until performance gets fixed, i've said this multiple times now, if people don't read then that's not on me. I'm just saying DC penalties should not be back on when the game still isn't performing well, doesn't matter if i'm a minority or not, you don't ignore minorities, you don't ignore customers. That's all i have said all this time. And i'm using real world anologies to make the point across. You don't issue temporary bans on people in the real world without cause. If you're caught stealing and go to jail there's a worthy cause to time you out of the rest of society, you got caught cheating the rest of society so until you pay for it you're locked out. DC'ing in DbD isn't a worthy cause to ban someone from playing until you have a worthy cause to issue the Ban but since the game isn't performing well there's plenty of causes for DC's so it's much easier for the reason to be outside of players control thus the system can't work and punish people just because a DC happened.
Is this dude still trying to insist that he's right and everyone else is wrong and the DC penalty is bad?
My man; the DC penalty is literally the ONE thing Survivors and Killers can agree on. (Well...1 of 3 things; DC penalty, Trapper needs a buff, and Legion is pitiful).
You have tons of people telling you you are wrong. Just accept it; we need the DC penalty. Your attitude shows exactly why.
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2401146#Comment_2401146
A killer that face-camps is literally nullifying the ability of a player to be able to play the game they bought. That is the most spiteful BS thing you can do in Dead by Daylight. The behavior is rewarded by the game because the killer gets a kill and get points. Why not remove the reward for camping and instead punish this toxic behavior. If you are a killer main, then you should agree with this, unless you participate in this extremely toxic behavior.
Rofl. And there's your mindset 'Agree with me, or you're the problem'.
Guess what? CAMPING. IS. ALLOWED. 😨
You not liking it does not make it 'toxic' and does not mean it has to need a punishment. The Killer's goal is TO KILL YOU. Gasp! How dare he! 😱 The Killer is evil if he removes Survivors from the game, for Survivors are the elite upper class!
Yet Survivors think they deserve to tell the Killer how and when he can kill. Can't get much more entitled than that! 😂 If Killers don't ask permission to kill, they're 'toxic' and whatever new word Survivors invent tomorrow to pretend it's not about them losing, when it's all about them losing.
-
'He’s one of the most requested killers for DBD!'
No he's not. I don't get where this idea comes from. One DBD streamer who likes FNAF and his followers is not the majority of the player base.
FNAF is cheap jumpscares, and jumpscares are lazy. Pass.
-
@Sadsnacks said:
Proxy camping is low skill, reserved for killers who dont know how to keep track of which areas survivors are at and what gens theyre focusing on and arent confident in chase.
Say it with me: 'Camping is a tactic Killers can use to confirm a kill.'
It is not 'low skill' or 'baby' or any other stupid bullshit people invent to shame Killers into not doing it.
-
Honestly, my fix:
- Remove all items form the bloodweb except for keys.
- The hatch only appears if Survivors have 1 or 2 gens to go when the 3rd is killed (IE: A close game). If the Killer steamrolls he DESERVES his steamroll & 4K. Just like he can't teleport Survivors to the hooks if they leave the match en-masse; why can Survivors escape asa group if they are failing?
- The hatch no longer needs a key, since only 1 person will get it anyways.
- Items now spawn in chests, which need a Key to open. This is now how Survivors get items. They still work like normal. (IE: You can carry it from match to match if you escape with it).
- 4.1 Or item chests open to a random item without a key. Using a Key lets the Survivors pick which item they want. Rarity & addons is based on the key's rarity.
Keys fixed, hatch fixed, and chests are now a secondary objective to help Survivors, if they take time to open them.
-
@jbunch said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403822#Comment_2403822
And I get that, I do. But I think we can both agree that there does have to be something done to try and fix it so that it doesn't catch those legitimate issues and punish those people. I've see coders say that the devs can code it so that it can register people actually suffering issues prior to getting disconnected, they just choose not to or can't figure it out.
I need a source on those coders, because, from my coding experience, it's impossible to tell a disconnect apart.
Game crash? Alt-F4 would ALSO look like a crash.
Internet crashed? Pulling the plug/Shutting off wi-fi would ALSO look like an internet crash.
It is not possible to know WHY someone lost connection. No program I can think of and no code I can think of can read intent, or tell 1 'pulled plug' from another 'router randomly cycled' or 'power went out'.
So whoever told you the devs can code a magical program to tell these apart was lying.
-
@jbunch said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403796#Comment_2403796
You act like it's only one person that has this issue. I've seen numerous people on Twitter complain about this exact issue. It's not only the internet drops causing dc penalty, but game crashes themselves, or even server issues kicking people from the game.
It happens. No game is flawless. I have never seen a game that did not crash, or servers that did not have hiccups.
The thing is that the people having problems? They are the minority. And the people who would rage-quit? They are the majority.
We saw it with the last few weeks; I had 1 out of 7 games or so actually play to completion, and that was only when I was losing as Killer. The second a match went in my favor; DCs across the board.
That is unhealthy for a game's existence. If no one sticks around for matches where they are losing; no match will complete. If no matches complete; no one can play. They leave reviews that there's no point in buy the game because people ragequit if they start to lose, and the game dies.
This is why there has to be a quit penalty. Sometimes it catches legit crashes, but I would bet money (if I had any) that, for every 1 person eating a 5 minute penalty due to software/hardware/internet issues; it's catching AT LEAST 10 people pulling the plug because they were losing.
-
@jbunch said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403242#Comment_2403242
It does indeed sound heartless, as your essentially saying one should not play online games with friends if they have spotty internet. Not everyone can afford god tier internet that will keep you connected at all times. But, unfortunately, that's always the arguments from people: get better internet, get a better pc. Always a great argument for people who only want to be able to play games with their friends and not feel alone.
Sorry but you have to think of the other players, too.
Why should they be punished with someone DCing every 2 out of 3 matches simply because that person really wants to play? You're acting like it's unfair to the one person with spotty internet, and they should be allowed to ruin the match for 4 other people.
If your 'net sucks, it's not the other player's faults, and they should not have to get stuck with someone selfish enough to log in KNOWING their net is spotty & will probably drop them. It's called 'thinking of others'.
-
@lemonsway said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403555#Comment_2403555
Regardless of the timer you're still locking someone out of Queue wether or not there is a valid reason for the DC. The penalty is there regardless of your actions or lack of actions. You're punished the same for DC'ing and being kicked for whatever reason, even a hacker can DC you and you're eating the DC ban.
You understand why they turned off the DC penalty during this Chapter and Event right? Cause clearly the game wasn't performing well and alot of people were being kicked out of the game. So obviously you can't just expect people to accept DC penalties for that hence why it was turned off.
They've patched the game twice but people are still reporting problems but now the DC penalty is on and some people are being banned regardless if it's them DC'ing or getting kicked out of the game. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
And you can't tell who's DC'ing or getting kicked and they DC'ed or got kicked and you can't see their timers so there's no way to tell what circumstances are causing the Dc's but most everyone here is hopping on the "using any excuse to DC" train and not wanting penalties when clearly the game isn't ready for the DC penalty to be back.
Let me put it yet another way:
- There will always be a DC penalty, for the health of the game.
- Those with legit problems are (barring buggy updates) the minority of DC statistics.
- Arguing that it should be turned off for the minority of DCers while ignoring that the majority of DCers will abuse the ######### out of it is silly.
- There will always be a DC penalty.
They turned it back on, because they fixed their problems. There will ALWAYS be people who crash and lag. Always. I have never not seen a game where some people don't have issues. Again; to claim it needs to be off for this SMALL SUBSECTION of DCers, while ignoring how many ruin the game on purpose, is ignorant of the larger picture.
There. Will. Always. Be. A. DC. Penalty.
-
@lemonsway said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403477#Comment_2403477
You're going from the stand point of every DC being a legit bad sportmanship, i'm saying that's not the case. You're already mindlessly saying every DC is a guy being a bad sport. Undoubtly those exist and always will regardless of the DC penalty so the penalty isn't doing anything anyway. So you're only punishing people who crash or lose power or net or whatever that isn't directly them quitting a match.
Let me put it another way:
If someone drops net or has a game crash; this will be so uncommon that they don't get more than the default 5 minute penalty. Which will probably last longer than their net rebooting. They may have to eat 3 minutes if it was only the game crashing.
But if someone crashes SO MUCH that they eat a 5 hour penalty? They are booting up the game KNOWING they will probably crash, and putting their fun ahead of their fellow gamers, JUST LIKE A DCer! If someone has net issues in 4 out of 5 games; they either need to fix it, or be CONSIDERATE OF OTHERS and not play games where them crashing will ruin it for other human ######### beings.
The bottom line is that no program can know the INTENT of a disconnect; be it a crash or someone rage-quitting. And to keep a game from being ######### UNPLAYABLE, those with PC/net issues have to eat the penalty alongside people who would RUIN THE GAME BY DCing ALL THE TIME.
To say 'Well, 1 disconnect in 500 is someone crashing, so the other 499 should not be punished' is either very short-sighted, or you're one of those 499 looking for an excuse to dodge being punished.
-
@lemonsway said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403439#Comment_2403439
How does it ruin the match for tohers? You have no way to know why the DC happened, whats so hard to understand. THe only problem here is Queue times get longer cause there's someone else not in Queue, but without the penalty then there's still the same amount of people on Queue or not depending on why the DC happened. You shouldn't be DC banning people for any and all reasons.
Rofl! 'You shouldn't be DC banning people for any and all reasons.' 😂😂😂
Riiiight. Let people ruin the game because they feel like they deserve any and all excuses to DC. Not gonna happen. Stop DCing and you won't get punished. The end.
Imagine how entitled you must be to think you deserve any reason to ruin the game for everyone else. Boo-hoo, poor you; you need the world to revolve around you so you can't comprehend that DCing ruins the game for everyone else in the match.
-
@lemonsway said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403198#Comment_2403198
what's toxic about DC'ing? If they found a reason to DC then let them, you don't lose anything, only the DCer does. The only thing you can complain about is potential longer queues.
It ruins the match for everyone else in it. How is this hard for people to understand? Think about others for once.
-
@lemonsway said:
I don't get why DC penalties in a casual game. DbD isn't Competitive, there is no Competitive scene, it's all Player Made with external rulling. There's no Competitive DbD because the game isn't made to be competitive, it's a party game, at most BHVR will endorse some Tournaments as Marketing decisions and that's it, just like the Amateur Console only Japan Tournament, and even this was made with outside rulling because there's no competitive Balance or Rulling in DbD and never will be. The moment DbD becomes Competitive Half of the population won't like the game cause at least half of the population is the Casual players that BHVR wants.
If that's the case then why the DC penalties? DC penalties only make Queues worse, you're banning people from playing so what do you think happens next? More Wait time, less Players in Matchmaking, More Rank variety and Unfair matches because Matchmaking has to lower Queue times for those eligible for Queue.
Results of this? highly unfair matches, longer Queue times and guess what? MORE DC's because of this. Until DC penalties became a thing i had no problems with Queues unless i was playing at times where it would be expected to have low population. And before Cross play i could actually find Console Lobbies, now it's a goddamn MIRAGE to find a full console Lobby, it will take ages. But thanks to Crossplay it's easier to face Pc cheaters not to mention the obvious PC vs Console argument in terms of controls, especially for killer and not to mention how ######### Console optimization is and how manny problems Old Gen and NEW GEN consoles are having.
There's no way to keep DC penalties up with this much reasoning against it.
The only excuse people have in favor of DC bans is people being sore losers, which doesn't happen that often, more people are having performance issues or crashing rather than just going oh no they did a gen or oh no they hit me let me DC ... I'd rather lobby dodge if i suspect i'm facing something i won't like based on people profiles and who and what they are bringing. I'll even dodge shady survivors while i play survivor.
Rofl. You could not be more wrong.
If you don't have DC penalties:
- People DC for any reason that hurts their paper-thin feelings
- Matches never complete
- People write reviews 'Don't buy; can't play a match'
- Sales plummet
- Game goes under
To think DC penalties will kill a game is the height of either not knowing how anything works, or wanting to doom-say to try scaring people into agreeing with pure BS.
Source: Literally any PvP game with DC penalties has never died due to DC penalties.
-
@Junylar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403319#Comment_2403319
How is it better? Yes, the amount of DCs is smaller now, but the amount of quits of any kind, including DC, suicides and plain AFKs, is the same. It just takes a bot longer to quit, and the unhooked quitters will just run around the map wasting pallets and throwing the game to punish their team for not letting them go from the first hook. Nothing is changed in essence.
Jackasses will always find ways to troll and bail on matches. The answer is not to just let them do it.
Once again; the only people arguing against the DC penalty are those who would abuse its lack. Almost like they totally want to DC without penalty. 🤔
-
@kate_best_girl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2403343#Comment_2403343
Its not about being self centered its about actually wanting to play the game instead of being stuck with 1 or 2 killers that I can actually viably play in this environment. Survivors get a win if killers DC so whats the problem lol.
The point is to play the game, win or lose, not to just 'win'. I'd be pissed if I bought a game and 'won' because I never got to play a match due to self-centered people.
That's the problem 'lol'.
-
DCing is DCing. Don't do it.
-
@ich_häng_mal_rum said:
I think everyone agrees that tunneling is the most effective way for the killer to quickly take a survivor out of the game, but at the same time it is the most frustrating situation for the survivor because he is simply down in one hit.
And we all know that neither BT nor DS can really stop the killer.
Just because something is within the rules doesn't mean it doesn't take the fun out of the game for the other side! Why doesn't DS activate twice, after all you can be tunneled twice or why isn't the stun for example 8 seconds, so that the survivor really has a chance to make distance or hide...? Or why does it deactivate when you get tunneled but manage to stall the killer longer???
It's really cheap to argue that changes to the tunnel theme (same goes for camping) are abused by the survivors, so the conclusion of the devs is "then let killers continue to use these game mechanics, even if partly the survivors are deprived of the fun of the game"....
in my opinion, it is the task of the devs (in the best case in exchange with the community) to look at these mechanisms, and to find a reasonable solution.
Or maybe you should be tunneled away five matches in a row in your game... and then tell us again: „hey, it’s the game rule“
The reason Survivors dislike 'tunneling' is because
- They seem to think they're owed some 'fun' quota for the match, and should not be killed before they have fun
- They refuse to look at the Killer perspective
Let me work on #2:
What I mean is that, if 'tunneling' were mechanically punished, it would hurt Killers when they absolutely HAVE to kill someone now, or face a massive loss of momentum that costs the game.
On top of that, every 'fix' for tunneling or camping has been spiteful trash, or easily abuseable by Survivors. But most of the time, the people making these suggestions KNOW THIS, and want a mechanic that helps THEM win. They don't care about the Killer experience.
Also; the Killer DOES NOT have the time to 12 hook. It takes the Killer, on average, 13-14 minutes to 12 hook. It can take ONE survivor 6.66 minutes to do all 5 gens without skillchecks or items. Forcing Killers to not 'tunnel' or 'camp' will literally remove their ability to get any kills in a match.
And to top all that off; it's a PvP game. People will get removed. If being removed from this game comes as a surprise after 5 years; that's not the dev's fault.
It's also not up to you to decide how and when the Killer can kill. He's not an AI. If Survivors can genrush in 6 minutes & focus on their objective; why can't Killers?
Oh, right; because it makes Survivors sad. 🙄
-
@jbunch said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2402689#Comment_2402689
There is an issue with this however. It does more to punish those who have internet struggles outside of their control, than it does to punish those that intentionally DC. So unfortunately, when Events happen or people would like to participate in the Tome stuff, they are unable to play due to the timer constantly stacking if loss of internet disconnects them from the game. I understand the intentions of the DC penalty, but all it truly does is cause more trouble for people that actually want to play, as at least people who intentionally DC can control when they do it.
Going to be honest; if your internet is so spotty that you're receiving DC penalties, then you are knowingly ruining the game for 4 other players on a regular basis, just like a DCer.
You're sitting there 'I know I get kicked from every 3 out of 4 matches due to my internet, but I still want to play, so screw my teammates!' Maybe not in so many words, but you are still ruining the match for other players just as much as a habitual DCer, if you're running afoul of the penalty.
-
I think the DC penalties last more than 24 hours? So it's still a question of how many times you DC'd.
I think it tallies for a week.
-
How come a Killer is punished if a Survivor afks? (No chase, no pallets to break)
Or if a Survivor kills themselves on first hook? (Again; less chases, less pallets to break, less Struggle points rewarded)
Or DCs? (Not the same as a sacrifice, as you do not get points for the hook stages this way)
Goes both ways.
-
@DarKaron said:
Honestly, the corpses don't even need new animations.
They're limp anyway. They just wouldn't make noise.
Not entirely true. I don't think this game (maybe the engine?) has ragdoll physics? I mean, it's not something that is just baked into the game automatically.
And given how stilted some of the moris look, I honestly think they are all hand-animated. I honestly don't think the game has ragdoll physics baked in.
-
Clan tags. If I see multiple people from the same gaming clan; I know it's a SWF and they are 99% of the time going to try to swat-team my butt. The gloves come off, in that case.
-
@Junylar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2402037#Comment_2402037
Yeah, there are less DCs with the second penalty, but you haven't counted suicides and AFKs. Not surprising, because killers tend to only see DCs, never caring about other ways survivors leave the game.
Har har, nice attack for no reason. All Killers are selfish. Boo-hoo. 🙄
We can't CONTROL how a Survivor plays, but we want our matches to not have 3 people DC because they're pansies. The DC penalty is a needed thing, and I have found that those against a DC penalty are the most likely to abuse not having one.
-
I don't get this whole 'It's bad if Killers can 1v1' or whatever mentality.
A Killer has to deal with 4 Survivors. This means, as he eliminates them (or if he gets them 1v1 during a match) he SHOULD be the power role. That's how balance works.
If A Killer was literally only strong enough to deal with 1 Survivor, then 4 Survivors working together would trounce him.
-
We just saw what happens when there's no DC penalty; matches are literally unplayable because wusses will wuss out for any reason they can invent.
Surprisingly; that happens allot less when there IS a DC penalty. Almost like it works to discourage people from being babies. 🤔
-
@stikyard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2401587#Comment_2401587
One shot stun might be too much, maybe if you had to land 3 shots to stun or a head shot.
Otherwise, add zombies to every match in a Walking Dead chapter that we can shoot at. Nemesis would benefit from having his own two more zombies than other Killers.
Shooting also creates a notification for the Killer.
Sadly, the reason why there are only 2 zombies for Nemi is because the engine can't handle more. He was supposed to have more than 2.
-
@Pat00tSack said:
I always say how I wish there could be an ultra rare gun item that's single use (one bullet) that's an aim-to-stun deal. Now that flashbangs exist, it's easier to explain cause they'd basically have the same function. Just an idea that could be neat. Item description could sorta explain away the empty holsters (entity is a toolbag and it takes people's guns and has a sort of gun lost and found box that ends up in bloodwebs or chests)
Ehh, no. As a Killer, it'd be pissed if a Survivor had a gun that could stun me over range in an instant. Like an insta-flashlight I can't avoid.
That's a free rescue from a carry, that 4 survivors can bring into a match, each. No way. Never.
-
@unluckycombo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2401228#Comment_2401228
Here's an idea: they could just be trying to say that it's not fun for them to verse, which is quite subjective.
Plus, I think you're ignoring two major points in your reply.
If you're supposedly having issues finding people, then run a perk like Thrilling Termors, BBQ, or heck, even Surge or Whispers. There are a lot of good perks to track down Survivors as Killer. It takes it from a wild goose chase to consistently knowing the location of others.
To add to it, there's also the point of the fact that you can still maintain pressure by going after someone who didn't just come off hook. Especially if you're running like a Sloppy/Thana build. If you harrass someone off gens, they can't just continue to sit on them for free, and the survivor who just got unhooked both gets to now have a little bit of a chance to play the game, and gets to make some choices of their own- heal up, do side objectives, lose DS, etc.
Idk, I just don't think that the idea of 'Playing smart' as you put it, or as it seems to me as 'Play for the 4k/4 man out', is very fun for either side, and isn't really something to be encouraged unless you actually are in a situation where it's necessary, (You know, like against high level SWFs that will make you cry yourself to sleep for the next 5 years.) But in my experience, they're rare.
You're not wrong but this whole 'Play nice' idea seems to be one-sided.
Killers, because they can do the mortal sin of removing someone from the game (their goal), are expected to play nice; spread the hooks around, let everyone have fun, don't knock someone out too fast, yeah?
But I've never seen that apply to Survivors. The same Survivors who say 'don't camp/tunnel' also say 'There is no such thing as genrush'.
They expect the Killer to ease off the throttle, to 'play nice', and 'don't be toxic'...while doing their best to speedrun the match for the world records.
And it's because Survivors will bang out gens with purple toolboxes and 4 second chance perks EACH while also telling Killers 'Don't be a dick' that I get irritated. Killers are expected to not try as hard by another name (aka 'Don't be toxic' and 'Don't be a dick') while Survivors are free to try as hard as they want every match.
It's a one-sided expectation that stems from Survivors thinking they're deserved <x> time (or 'fun') in a match before they can be removed. But since they control the speed of the match overall (the maximum time of a match is how long it takes Survivors to do gens), the Killer can't ease up, or speedrunners destroy them and twerk out the gates to insult them.
And I honestly got tired of sweaty SWFs treating me like I'm a minimum-wage employee of The Entity, Inc., here to pat them on the heads while they leave through the exit gates. It's not the Killer's job to ensure Survivors have fun. Putting that onus on them, as fellow players of the game, is unfair.
If Survivors get to bang out gens as fast as physically possible, why can't Killers bang out kills as fast as physically possible? Because it's 'unfair' to those knocked out of the game? It's not the Killer's duty to be fair. They are trying to win, same as Survivors are; stop expecting them to 'play nice' just because Survivors don't like losing.
I'm sorry, but that's what it boils down too; both sides want to win, so neither side should tell the other side HOW or WHEN they can win, within the rules set in the game and EULA, so cheating and exploiting glitches are against the rules.
If people can't handle being knocked out quickly in a 2-sided PvP game...Don't play 2-sided PvP games? 🤷♂️
-
@stikyard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2400240#Comment_2400240
Proxy camp is a thing.
Faced a Bubba who walked away every hook and returned every time. Just enough for terror radius to fade then comes back. This is how he scored every down aside from the first.
If someone hadn't already saved me from the hook and gone down, I would'nt have even bothered to try to save anyone but, I felt obligated not to let my teammate hang there.
I guess, I get it just seems kinda lame to me. By hooking a survivor you are already pulling at least two Survivors off main objective. If you have basically any reveal information you can pressure a third Survivor off main objective, that's a lot of pressure.
But no, just return to the hook to harass the same people who already aren't doing gens, whatever.
It's called 'Playing smart'.
The hook pops:
You know where half the team AT LEAST (2 Survivors) are; at that hook.
1 of them (at least) is wounded and can be downed without a long chase.
Re-hooking the wounded person demands Survivors attempt a fast, sloppy save, because they only have 60 seconds before that person dies.
Or if they were in Struggle Phase, now they are dead. 1 less person to heal, sabo, do bones, and do gens.
As opposed to:
Searching for someone(s) you don't know where they are.
And needing to hit them twice to get anyone down if you do find them.
It may be their first hook, which means Survivors can take their time rescuing them.
It's almost like people bitching about 'camping' and 'tunneling' are just trying to control how the Killer plays, and force him to play badly! 🤔
-
@thrawn3054 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2400240#Comment_2400240
If you're going to call it a bs term, at least define it right. That is not proxy camping.
That's what every Survivor who has accused me of 'proxy camping' was doing. I would walk away, come back if someone was unhooked, and be accused of 'proxy camping'.
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/270113/new-idea-to-prevent-camping
It's already been tried. However, if you add the stipulation that "the Killer is within X meters of the hook and is not in a chase for x seconds", then that would prevent survivors from abusing it.
I personally think survivors should get an extra 1,000 bps every 5 secs and the killer should get -1,000 bps every 5 secs they meet that condition.
No. Stop with the 'TaKe ThE KiLlErS bP!' spiteful BS. This is not 'balance'; it's spiteful BS simply to punish the Killer as extremely as possible.
Also; Survivors could still abuse that idea, as they were too far away for a chase to start. I have said this how many times now?
-
'Proxy camp' is such a BS term. It was invented to claim a Killer is camping, even if he does not camp, I'm sure of it. I'm sure it went something like this:
*Killer hooks Survivor* 'I'm walking away from the hook. I am not camping. Don't complain."
*Killer walks away.*
*Survivor #2 unhooks Survivor #1*
*Survivors start healing under the hook.*
*Killer returns* *Killer downs Survivors*
End Game Chat:
Survivors: Reee! You camped!
Killer: I left the hook, kicked a gen, and went hunting for Survivors when you got unhooked. You were half-way healed by the time I got back to the hook. I WAS ACROSS THE MAP!
Survivor: You...You PROXY camped! Same thing!
Killer: 🤦♂️
-
Not going to happen. Folks would turn it right off to hear sound effects and wounded Survivors.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2399416#Comment_2399416
If you stay; the person on the hook is now no longer able to die, or the timer is slowed, giving the Survivor on gens infinite or near-infinite time to do gens. There goes your pressure from hooking someone!
And you think you get pressure from not actually going after any survivor on any of the gens? You're just gonna stand there for 120 seconds while the other survivors are just gonna finish their gens?
With or without anti-camp, you lose the match that way, because you are giving survivors full freedom to do whatever they want while you wait for your first hook to bleed out. You're going to have to chase a survivor anyway, so you might as well take advantage when two survivors are showing themselves to you. Hell, you even get extra time, because they should've all three been working on a gen to cut down how much time you, as killer, have left, but they instead chose to pull off a perfectly coordinated gambit that costs them way more time.
Seriously, consider the situation if the survivors -weren't- 'abusing the system', and only one guy stealths his way over as would be the standard, while the other two finish the last two gens.
Your problem in the situation described is, legitimately, that you can't just camp your first hook to death, because the 'abuse' puts the survivors in a worse position, actively benefitting the killer.
It WAS abused. You not understanding how it was abused means literally nothing. And you ignoring the flaws does not mean they don't exist or are somehow minimal.
It doesn't matter to you because you WANT camping to be a thing. I, and a great many others, want it gone, so we're constantly looking for a solution. Understanding exactly how it was abused is quite relevant.
Case in point: @NoOneKnowsNova mentions someone looping around a hook to abuse the frozen timer. But from what I could see on the wiki, this anti-camp timer was tested in 2016, long before Bloodlust was a thing, and chases could last longer. Would it really hold up now, when chases are much more limited with vaults getting blocked and killers speeding up if the chase lasts too long?
You dismiss the entire thing off-hand for an experiment that ran FIVE years' worth of patches ago.
The thing is; if you change camping. if you 'fix' camping? That forces the Killer to 12 hook more, since he can't camp to kill someone early, right?
And the game, as it is designed right now, is anti-12-hook. The Killer DOES NOT HAVE THE TIME in a match to 12 hook. Not when 3 gens can pop in the first chase. That's 3/6ths (or 1/2; 5 gens & exit gate) of the Survivor's objectives done. At bare minimum, that's 1/4 of the Killer's objective done (4 hooks; 1 for each Survivor)
If Killers can't camp? Can't confirm the kill? That's 1/2 (3 of 6 objectives; 5 gens & exit gates) of the Survivor's objective done in one chase, and 1/12th of the Killer's objective done when he hooks that first Survivor.
And that's to say nothing of end game; if the Killer wants to camp because the gates are 99%'d. He can't regress the gates. He can't close the doors. So why would he leave the hook?
But a camping 'punishment' would deny him even an end game kill.
This is why I say it should be 3 things:
- Give camped Survivors 'Distraction' points for 'Being wriggling meat on the hook & distracting the Killer'.
- More points for the hook phases, to lessen the sting when Survivors just don't save you, even if the Killer is not camping.
- More 'leave the hook' perks for Killers, like Devour and BBQ. Encourage a meta that requires the Killer to leave the hook of his own volition.
But I can't abide these 'punishment' ideas for a few reasons:
- More than half of them are pure spite. 'Take the Killer's BP & give it to the Survivor'. Really?
- They are easy to exploit: Make the Killer blind. Slow him down. Disable his attack.
- They will screw the Killer at times where he HAS to camp a kill to turn the match around. It would not be fun to lose the match 4 minutes in because the Killer can't ensure someone dies.
So, until the base game is changed, camping can't be punished, or 'fixed', because Killers, except for the top players of the top 3 Killers, would almost never get even 2 kills at that point. Not with gens speeds as they are.
-
I somehow posted this in the wrong thread.
-
@Nico_0 said:
Yes please
At least trapper only for the first release, knowing they won't want to program the AI for all killers.
Some addons might require AI code.
All maps should be possible, or they don't have the bots walking paths either?!?
Aren't all previous points covered in the mobile version?
Most games don't use predetermined paths anymore. They use what's called a 'navigation mesh'. It's less work for the developers.
Instead of needing to hand-draw paths the AI can take in a game, they now just list areas via the navigation mesh as 'can walk here' and 'can't walk here'. And the AI, using that mesh, knows it can't walk on a rock or wall, so it won't spend time trying to walk into it.
-
@EvilJoshy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2399420#Comment_2399420
Seriously. How many perks do the devs need to give survivor for them to cleanse the bones? I'm secretly thinking BHVR is trying to tell survivors something.
I think Survivors are hoping they can get the devs to remove totems if they continue to ignore them and then scream about how 'unfun' they are.
You can see this same tactic in use with every Killer launch: New Killer hits PTB *5 minutes later* '<Killer> is unfun!' 😁
-
@fixdeadhard said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2399438#Comment_2399438
kinda ironic to say they have a fragile ego, here you are 2 years later writing about it 😂
To laugh at it. You do understand that making fun of someone being a jackass does not mean I have a fragile ego? But go off, queen. I guess you felt you needed to take a jab at someone today. 🤪
-
I still remember a match with a 2-man SWF & 2 pubs, a few years back:
I killed the 2 pubs, put 1 of the SWF on the hook & he offs himself to give his buddy the hatch. Him and his buddy had been immersed for 8 minutes at that point, and never tried to save the pubbies even once.
His buddy in end game chat: 'Noob baby killer. ggez. No 4K for you, rofl. get dunked' and more insults.
I'm sitting there thinking 'Only you escaped, and only because your friend exploited bad game design to give you the hatch, and you're going to act like I played badly? Someone has a fragile ego!' 😂
-
NoED is fair and balanced. Survivors just want to speedrun gens without punishment.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2399235#Comment_2399235
Oh right, sorry, I forgot that an anti-camping measure shouldn't prevent camping.
How is it a bad choice to chase a survivor? What if neither survivor shows up to the hook and instead do gens, wouldn't that be a way worse situation for the killer than the 'abuse'?
JFC. People like you ignore anything you don't like. All you can see is 'Camp gone; all good!' and ignore everything else.
Imagine you need this kill to snowball. 3 gens popped in your first chase. 2 gens left. You hook someone.
Now 2 Survivors are near the hooked Survivor. If you leave; they will unhook him and go do gens while you chase someone who will take another 120 seconds to down because they are healthy.
If you stay; the person on the hook is now no longer able to die, or the timer is slowed, giving the Survivor on gens infinite or near-infinite time to do gens. There goes your pressure from hooking someone!
It's not rocket science, yet entitled Survivors think 'It punishes camping; iz gud!' and ignore every single flaw with the idea, because they don't care about the Killer's gameplay. All they think is 'Killer is punished, I get free unhooks; There is nothing wrong with this! 🤪'
All you can see is 'Chasing is good, therefor not chasing is forever bad'. And you're ignoring when the Killer needs to kill someone to start applying pressure.
These facts are not open for debate.:
The idea is terrible. It would be abused. It WAS abused. You not understanding how it was abused means literally nothing. And you ignoring the flaws does not mean they don't exist or are somehow minimal.
-
'We heard you asking for a Pig buff, so in the next patch, we're nerfing Pig.'
And Legion. 😁