Predated
Predated
About
- Username
- Predated
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@ShadowRain said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2102612#Comment_2102612
Wrong. Her killrate isn’t even a 2k its 40%. Nurse buffs needed or devs only pick and choose what they wanna change
They based it on red rank stats tho. Nurse has a 57% killrate in red ranks. Freddy has a 3k average only on red rank stats.
-
@Northener1907 said:
Freddy was easy to learn, okey i agree but he was not op killer. I dont know why he deserved nerf like that. Maybe he needed little nerf but this is ridicilous.
Changes made him useless.
First clocks will not be useful. Because you still need to run end of map and that will not worth for 30 seconds. So when i play as survivor, i cant see reason to run and leave my gen.
Add-ons? Nerf useful add-ons and add useless one. Who thought Freddy need loud add-on? Seriously? Freddy's gameplay doesnt need that, so thank you give us useless add-on.
About snares. Snares are not storong like Hag & Trapper's traps. Hag can teleport traps. And bear traps make survivors stop. And they both using for area control. So Hag and Trapper using them before start chase. Because they will be useful after that. But Freddy cant do that. Snares can be useful only on chases. And in chases you will have 2 options now: Use snare and lose speed. Or dont use your power and be worst m1 killer. And ıf you use snare 99% survivor will leave this loop area and will go to next one. And when survivor will do that, survivor will get far than you because you will waste time with snare and will lose speed. So you will have clearly worst power ever.
Great Job seriously.
"Snares is only useful on chases." Only if you're bad in pushing the chase towards your traps. Sure. This is why people called Freddy a brainless killer in the first place.
-
@ShadowRain said:
They said the reason Freddy got nerfed is because he had the highest kill rate but Nurse has the lowest so a Nurse buff should be coming soon? Or are they just gonna pick and choose what to change
Average killrate devs are going for is 2k. Nurse already complies to the 2k. This argument is invalid in this case.
I agree where you're coming from, but it needs to be an actual valid angle for this to work.
-
@Surikato said:
not being able to see blood pools AND scratch marks is going to be meta plus Iron Will, killers who depends on visual and audio cues to detect survivors will litterarly give up on chases and maybe quit the trial xd
oh no, 90 full seconds of no scratchmarks and bloodpools that will permanently deactivate, boo hoo. Not like there are killers that have addons that increase their movement speed up to 175% while not giving any visual or audio cues to detect the killer and literally changes the chase into a coinflip.
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/241989/im-glad-they-are-adding-totem-counter-but
Why not add value to an underused perk? Small game has always been awesome.
Drop one of your second chances and equip it sometime.
I mean, if killers would run perks like ruin and pop less, sure. There are tons of awesome killer perks not being used.
-
@GeneralV said:
The way out? If it is up to me, he is not going anywhere. Nothing is capable of making me quit Freddy. And they didn't fix him, they nerfed him.
I mean, they fixed him in the same sense that killer mains say that windows being blocked by the entity was a survivor fix. Either both are fixes, or both are nerfs. Cant have your biased ass put in double standards in the game.
"fixing genspeeds" would mean nerfing genspeeds.
-
@Profezia said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2101089#Comment_2101089
One is still set in night, just in the light of moon, the other is set in between (which I also always found very wrong, but could partially deal with it, as it was never really a day. It was almost a day and it made up a good metaphor). This map is completely different story. Warm and bright light, I'm 99% sure there would even be sun.
""It was afraid of light and it literally destroys it"" "One is still set in night, just in the light of moon"
Ah, so we have someone just being butthurt over here.
If light literally destroys it, moonlight also would. Shining a flashlight anywhere on the map would harm it. Finishing any generator should turn that area extremely survivor sided as the generator turns on light in that area. The halloween medkits should literally hurt the entity wherever you move as it brightens up your area. Hex totems should harm the entity as it's literally a source of light. Campfires and hearths in the game should harm the entity.
Hmmmmm, seems like all sources of light are simply an illusion created by the entity. So why should this map be any ######### different?
-
@Chordyceps said:
Really the only nerf that they really needed to give him was reducing his lunge range, it's ridiculous. Freddy Krueger, the man with the mile-long lunge.
Freddy has a normal lunge, his model just doesnt line up with his lunge range.
As for the only nerf, I mean, being able to spam traps while running at full speed was ridiculous. You have a killer that has incredibly strong gen defense AND strong chase capabilities. Having that kind of killer is kinda unhealthy. So either his teleportation needed to be removed/heavily nerfed. Or his chase needed to be slightly nerfed. You can set traps prior to chases happening and push people towards your traps. You can set pallets prior to chases.
This makes Freddy more strategic rather than brainless.
-
@Tsulan said:
BT is OP now. Or in other words, BT nerfs stealth killers hard. Stealth killers usually have it harder. But now it will be almost pointless to play any stealth killers/builds.
I guess people want to see Oni all day.
I mean, stealth killers need a different buff. Crowd Control already helps stealth killers quite a lot. Having slightly more movement speed so they can be more hit and run-like killers would be nice, or having some basekit that warns you about people healing alone with a medkit or selfcare to pretty much remove the biggest weakness stealth killers have.
-
@Adjatha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2099964#Comment_2099964
Perhaps I should've stated a little more clearly: every one of the hex perks I noted as being weak are Weak BECAUSE they are hex perks. They don't belong in that category, because their abilities are not better than perks you can take that the survivors cannot simply disable (or they have a single effect and you have to just hope you can get the most out of it because then it's gone, more like an item or addon than a perk). If Lullaby were a regular perk that couldn't be removed, sure it might be useful sometimes, even if it just always granted like the effect of 3 tokens and never went up. Retribution might be okay if it were a default power, that just showed auras the whole game, like Bitter Murmur or BBQ, but as something that is basically a one-shot johnny, it's awful. Same with Thrill of the Hunt. If Third Seal put blindness on for, say, 3-5 minutes and wasn't a hex, THAT might be useful. As a hex, you've got to be playing against non-SWF gamers who are just totally oblivious to everything going on and are just holding M1 on that gen all day.
A perk that survivors can turn off NEEDS to be game-defining, like Ruin, or perpetually useful, like Crowd Control. Anything linked to a hex totem needs to be stronger than Sloppy Butcher, Whispers, Pop Goes the Weasel, BBQ, or any of the other standard, always-good default perks that are not vulnerable to survivors spawning next to them. The whole travails of totems really only come down to the 3 good ones, with the others being either weaker than normal perks to begin with, or just existing to try to protect your 3 good hex options. That's awful.
But hey, I appreciate your thoughtful response, so please enjoy this:
You're really looking at hexperks individually for most of the perks. And they are hexperks because their effects are too powerful to be normal perks. Thrill of the Hunt not being a hexperk would essentially give you a permanent Thanatophobia without doing anything. Third Seal being a normal perk would simply be too powerful, unless you give the blindness effect for a limited time(which is at most 1 minute), making it a very weak perk. Giving it '3-5 minutes... ..THAT might be useful." would be too powerful to be a regular perk as you essentially blind a survivor for the entire match without them having any way of reducing that time. Blindness is a heavily underestimated effect. Retribution working whenever a hextotem is cleansed without it being a hextotem itself is utterly worthless unless you add other hextotems, which then doesnt change a thing from what it does now. That would be like DS never working, unless you also use Unbreakable. Besides, Retribution works on ANY hex totem, not just itself.
"As a hex, you've got to be playing against non-SWF gamers who are just totally oblivious to everything going on and are just holding M1 on that gen all day." This would apply to NOED, Ruin and Crowd Control aswell. Heck, 1 quick vault and survivors would be looking for Crowd Control, making it last arguably shorter than the average hex perk as survivors actively search for it. Is Crowd Control being active for 1 minute really stronger than Third Seal being active for 50% of the match untill survivors realize how much they're actually ######### for not having cleansed that totem for so long but then realizing they have no way of finding the totem other than brute forcing or using Small Game? Third Seal is strong because it appears to be weak. Just as the new ruin is stronger than old ruin because it appears to be weak. All hex totems are too powerful to be normal perks(except bloodfavor)
"A perk that survivors can turn off NEEDS to be game-defining"
Not neccesarily, it needs to make an impact on the game that gives you the oppertunity to change the endresult, sure, but they dont need to be game defining. Heck, by that reasoning, NOED and Ruin both do not fit either. As both are not really game defining by equipping them. Ruin is worthless if you do not chase survivors off gens. NOED is worthless if you are unable to get someone on the hook.
"Anything linked to a hex totem needs to be stronger than Sloppy Butcher, Whispers, Pop Goes the Weasel, BBQ, or any of the other standard, always-good default perks that are not vulnerable"
And they all are. Obliviousness in perks is rare and not easy to pull off. Deathbound only works outside a range and only if survivors heal each other. 99 each other and finish yourself with a medkit and there no longer will be Deathbound applied to you, and even then, its only 60 seconds and you can avoid both statusses. Retribution's obliviousness applies to you whenever you finish a dull totem, regardless of the situation, making it far more likely for a survivor to run into you because they do not expect you to be close. Let alone that Retribution's oblivious effect and hex status isnt really noticable since they moved that information to the top right of the screen. Does Whispers, Pop, Sloppy and BBQ give you survivors running into you for free hits? Totem defense perks NEED to be totems themselves, or they need to be having potential totem defense as a secondary effect(like thana, which has a primary effect of reducing gen speeds) otherwise they are essentially empty perk slots.
And yes, you could rework weaker hexperks into decent or weak normal perks that have a more generic application. But hextotems arent there to be generic applications. The more generic they are, the stronger they are, sure, but lets not forget the original hex totems being ruin, third seal, noed and thrill of the hunt. One totem defense, one endgame perk, one slowdown perk and one effect over time perk.
I have made and tried very effective builds with all the hex totems on different killers. Third Seal has gotten me more kills due to random survivors not being able to locate the correct hook in time of a survivor going into second state, let alone people using maps or Detective's Hunch to find totems, all useless. Thrill of the Hunt is arguably one of the best totem defense perks, the more hexes you have, the stronger this perk gets since survivors need to cleanse dull totems to reduce its effect. You could argue the effect needs to be stronger, but in 99% of your games, you're able to prevent a survivor from fully cleansing that totem. Especially if you add Thana. It's main effect is notifying you that someone is working on a Hex. Something that was one of the reasons why old Undying was considered too powerful. Retribution works really nice with Undying and Haunted Grounds and has ended a lot of games that otherwise would not have ended. Not a single other normal perk combination has that power.
"with the others being either weaker than normal perks to begin with" I mean, I'd argue you to be wrong here. With the exception of bloodfavor ofcourse. Some hex totems could be made stronger, but turn them into normal perks without heavily nerfing them and they'd instantly be meta or useless unless you already use another hex totem. But I'll make a short list just to give a small taste of how perks would be if they were nerfed to be normal perks:
-Lullaby, no longer have the 6% additional regression on missed skillchecks, reduce the warning sound by 10% for each unique hook. Which is far weaker than Lullaby is as a hex and not really worth running as a normal perk.
-Bloodfavor, instead of a 40 second cooldown, an 80 second cooldown(bloodfavor again, being the absolute worst excuse of a hex totem, being even outshined by people running Thrill of the Hunt as their only hextotem for extra BP).
-Third Seal, give survivors blindness for 60 seconds after being hit by a basic attack(maybe 120 seconds if you're lucky).
-Retribution, no longer give the oblivious status effect for cleansing dull totems, instead, give a 3 second aura read on survivors who finished cleansing any totem.
-Devour Hope, no longer can kill survivors by your own hand, get a 2.5% movementspeed bonus after hooking a survivor for each unique hooked survivor, give survivors a 30 second exposed timer everytime you hook someone after having hooked all survivors at least once.
-Haunted Grounds, would be a completely different perk, it cannot be converted to a normal perk as it is now.
-Thrill of the Hunt, no longer gives you a warning for cleansing a hextotem, it just gives BP for totems standing. Maybe an added 1% slowdown per totem standing if you're lucky.
-Undying, gives a 5 second aura read when a survivor passes a dull totem, 30 second cooldown.
Out of all of these, Devour Hope and Bloodfavor have the only potential to be a normal perk and being decent at that. With Bloodfavor obviously being already as close to a normal perk as it can be.
These totems are hexes because they are either designed to be defending totems, or because their effects are too powerful to be a normal perk.(Ignoring bloodfavor, which is an absolute joke of a hex perk).
I might have said Third Seal instead of Thrill a couple of times still, trying to edit them all out.
-
@Adjatha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2099768#Comment_2099768
"They have the most powerful effects in all of DBD"
Let's take a look, shall we? https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Hex_Perks
- Blood Favor: Blocks palettes in an extremely small radius after hitting a target, with a very short duration and a long cool down. The only time this is ever going to be useful is if you down someone inside a palette before they can drop it and another survivor is right nearby waiting to drop the palette on your head when you go for the pickup. Extremely niche and significantly less powerful than almost every non-hex perk
- Crowd Control: Rushed Vaults block windows for a short period. It can block multiple spots, is not limited by range, and has no cool down. THIS is strong.
- Devour Hope: Rescuing people from hooks while the killer is gone builds stacks. At 3, you're exposed. At 5, you can be killed. Hilariously difficult to keep up before, with Undying, there's a chance that this may actually affect your game, though the killer is using two perks to do it. This is a strong perk, but requires the killer to already be doing very well to get any mileage out of it due to the build-up time.
- Haunted Ground: A trap that exposes everyone if cleansed. Literally only there to punish survivors for cleansing or to (theoretically) protect other hexes. Exposed lasts 60 seconds, but everyone is alerted, so unless you're very unlucky AND your team is playing foolishly, it's rare to get more than down down out of this, even against solo queues. This effect CAN be strong, but considering it's a one-shot, it almost never is.
- Huntress' Lullaby: Makes skill checks slightly harder by messing with audio cues. This also has to build up by hooking survivors, and has almost zero effect against experienced players whose muscle memory nails every skill check instantly. It has limited play against new survivors, but you have to be doing VERY well to build up to that point. Very bad.
- No One Escapes Death: Very Strong, but only in the end game and does not suffer the effects of all other hex totems by not lighting up until it's good to go. Some of those token-based totems could learn from this. Very strong.
- Retribution: Reveals the auras of survivors who cleanse hex totems (but not dull ones) for 10 seconds. Hilariously weak.
- Ruin: Gens automatically regress. Very Strong.
- The Third Seal: Inflicts Blindness on survivors you hit. You'd think this would be strong, but you can still see when a survivor gets downed or hooked. It just shuts off being able to see slugs and still-on-hooks. If you remember where the alert came from, you can find the target easily. Weak perk
- Thrill of the Hunt: Reduces cleansing speed and increases BP gain. Increases a cleanse from 14 seconds to 18 seconds. Extremely weak.
- Undying: Saves one of your other hexes from being trashed (and now preserves the tokens on it). Also reveals auras, but only around Dull totems, not hexes. Literally does nothing other than keep another totem up. It's basically a perk tax to try to avoid a bad spawn. Wouldn't be needed if totems were hidden better. Only as strong as the perk it's protecting.
So, that's 3 strong hexes (Crowd Control, Ruin, Noed), 2 situational hexes (Devour, Undying), and 6 worthless hexes (everybody else).
Bloodfavor works nice on killers that have a secondary attack that doesnt count as a basic attack. And people being downed near pallets is quite more common than you'd expect. Let alone that in most cases, 16 meters is plenty of distance to gain a second hit without having to care about any pallets. It is a bit too niche to work as it does right now, but the devs are a bit too afraid to block pallets too long(look at Cruel Limits for example, it blocks ALL vaulting locations, except for dropped pallets). This is simply indicative that this game needs more counterplay than just pallets. Like breakable windows.
Devour Hope "but requires the killer to already be doing very well to get any mileage out of it due to the build-up time". Not really, there have been plenty of games where I've been able to get 9 hooks and only kill 1 survivor simply due to them tanking hookstates efficiently, Devour Hope, even at 3 stacks, has a lot of value that goes ignored. Especially on m1 killers like Trapper and Myers that dont really have any way of effectively close gaps.
You should be running Haunted Grounds more often I hear. In a lot of cases, if you have ANY information perk, you can easily get more than 1 down out of it.
Lullaby is a tad weak, but not hearing any skillcheck trigger is worthy of it being a hex totem. Even if you already do decent, if ignored too long it makes the difference between a win and a loss. Which is essentially the secondary effect of any hex totem: forcing survivors to do anything other than just gens.
NOED well, you're right, except in your token based totem argument. Lullaby has an effect as long as it is active: if you fail a skillcheck, you get a 5% additional penalty. Devour Hope allows you to kill survivors without finishing any sacrifice.
Retribution is a very strong perk. Especially combined with any other hex totem. Giving survivors the oblivious status when they cleanse any dull totem means they do not hear you coming for 45 seconds. Cleansing any hex totem reveals their aura's for 10 full seconds(remember me saying that Haunted Grounds combined with ANY information perk easily would grant you more than 1 down? Retribution with Haunted Grounds is powerful enough to end games THAT is why it's a hex totem).
Ruin, nothing to add
Third Seal, VERY strong perk might I say. A lot of survivors actually dont look for this perk actively when they are affected. "but you can still see when a survivor gets downed or hooked." Well, that has nothing to do with blindness tho, that is simply the survivor HUD. But you CANT see where a survivor is downed, you do NOT get to see an alert where someone gets downed. You can see where a survivor is hooked for 5 seconds, sure, but after that, you do not see them, nor their hook. Heck, if you're on the opposite side of the map, survivors wont have a clue as the bubble they see is the same size on their screen, regardless if you hook them 2 meters away, or 100 meters away. Third Seal is a hidden gem. Remember Trail of Torment originally being buffed to keep killers Undetectable untill they down a survivor, yet quickly getting nerfed to include injuring survivors also? Third Seal is why. It's not the strongest effect, but it's definitely too powerful to be a regular perk. You'd be surprised how many people reach their second hook state because survivors are blinded. Or the new suggested OoO change? Third Seal is going to be it's main counter. My only grudge with this perk, is that it requires you to hit survivors actively and only applies to the survivors you hit.
Thrill of the Hunt, again, ALSO notifies you of people working on any hex totem. Solo it's relatively weak and doesnt do anything but grant you extra BP and a way of telling if survivors are cleansing dull totems(the counter goes down when they do). However, like Retribution, it's amazing at totem defense. So if you have a perk like Ruin and want to make it last, slap on Thrill of the Hunt. It's quite strong.
Undying, I mean, the old perk was far too powerful to be a perk. It's slightly weak right now as I think there should be a difference between cleansing Undying and cleansing a specific hextotem, but it's information is still quite nice(again, Haunted Grounds, people running around a totem without knowing = free down with Haunted Grounds being respawned). Still quite strong as it revives a hex totem that would otherwise be gone.
So out of all the hex totems, only Bloodfavor is one that I argue to be too weak, due to it having a cooldown it does not need as it's already reliant on basic attacks. You thinking other hex perks are worthless is you simply not thinking outside of the box and just slapping whatever is deemed meta by the community.
-
@Katzengott said:
As long both sides playing their objectives (gens and hooks), they're playing competitive, no matter if they "just want to have fun".
DbD is competitive, it's just still balanced around R10 and not on high level play.
Balancing around rank 10? So undying being nerfed because it was totally broken on half the killers was it being balanced around rank 10? Sure, keep dreaming
And no, both sides playing objectives does not equal competition. Mario Party has you play objectives like reaching the star. You're competing for that star, but by no means is Mario Party competitive even though there is an actual competition around objectives. Then you have games like Among Us, which is by no means a competitive game, even though both sides have seperate objectives(tasks and kills).
YOU can be competitive in the game, that doesnt mean the game is competitive. All that means is that you're just a player trying to please your own wincondition, most commonly through playing sweaty even though you absolutely do not need to, nor do you get rewarded for that kind of play.
-
@knell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2085143#Comment_2085143
"And aaaaaaalll this text is useless, because you could get a 4k within 1 minute and derank. Therefor, the goal to sacrifice as many survivors as possible simply cannot be the win condition. Winning doesnt make you lose progress. So there are other things you need to balance it out with."
I've already stated that ranking has nothing to do with the wincon of this game - it's simply used as a way to matchmake people in its current form. Do you not read? Why should you make any progress to face more difficult opponents when your previous opponents didn't do anything to challenge or prove your skill? A high school soccer team champions obliterating a peewee soccer team doesn't mean that they should then next be matched with a professional soccer team, despite having a "win."
"I can compete in dying as quickly as possible with a tumor, does that make having a tumor a competition just because I say so? No, it does not. Therefor, YOU wanting to compete doesnt make something competitive. Me and another person having a tumor could both make a competition out of it, but that's 2 parties agreeing to participate in said competition. In DBD, you do not agree prior to the match."
In your tumor example, it is in fact a competition if both sides agree to all the rules to that 'game' since you guys are the ones making it up. But a game that is already made by someone else has its own rules - you and your friends are simply participants who have agreed to play by those rules. And if the creator of that said game states, "As a Killer, your goal is to sacrifice as many Survivors as possible. As a Survivor, your goal is to escape and avoid being caught and killed," then that is obviously the objective of the game. It's not difficult to understand.
"No, but she'd only need 50 hours playing Spirit alone to be able to get a 3k if RNG is a tiny bit in her favor. Just because you cant instantly win due to RNG doesnt mean it's not a party game. Among Us is a party game too. Yet if you're new in a group that has 50% of the players being 1000 hours in, you simply wont win as an impostor. Yet, 50 hours in, you know enough about the game to win."
I don't know what kind of parties you are used to, but needing 50 hours to have a chance at winning, or even learning the basics, isn't a party game. In any type of hidden role games (like Among Us, or even Werewolf/Mafia/The Resistance), where you are divided into teams, you really don't need any experience at all to win. I've seen plenty of games in which completely new players just happen to win because they were in a right place at the right time, or picking a random person to kill off, and just happens to be the right person, or if they are on the other side, made themselves as obscure as possible. And even when you don't win, you never feel like you didn't have any chance at winning, unlike DBD.
"A huntress with 100 hours is capable of defeating survivors with 1000 hours, a doctor with 100 hours is capable of defeating survivors with 1000 hours, a nurse with 100 hours is capable of defeating survivors with 1000 hours, a deathslinger with 100 hours is capable of defeating survivors with 1000 hours, do I need to go on?"
First 50 hours, and now 100 hours? Definitely not a party game. Personally, if I can't get a handle on a game within the hour, I don't think I would qualify it as a party game. People don't have that much patience to learn games while they socialize and drink.
"Oh, so that's why DBD players tend to fill up a custom game if they have 5 players, you know, as if they were at a party?"
Are you seriously now saying that if you have a player-count of 5, it's immediately a party game?
"Because DBD fits all your definitions too."
It really doesn't.
"I've already stated that ranking has nothing to do with the wincon of this game"
Except that a 4k is not a win condition. 4 survivors being removed from the match is the condition for the game to end. Ending the game does not equal a win. Examples:
Football is a 90 minute game, lasting the full 90 minutes ends the game, lasting the whole game does not mean you win.
Quidditch, while it is a game from a fantasy world, it IS a game, catching the snitch is the endcondition, not the wincondition.
Stalemates in chess is an ending condition, yet it does not win you the match.
You are not being scored by your ability to kill survivors, therefor, it is not a wincondition. Killing all 4 survivors ends the game, but doesnt mean you won. In tournaments, sure, it might, but DBD is not a tournament by default. Ranking has nothing to do with skill, but it does have to do with the winconditions. The only way to change this, is for a system that ranks up killers who kill survivors and a system that deranks survivors that "lose" to a 3k. Yet the game isnt balanced that way, killers gain a massive advantage as soon as 1 survivor has died, snowballing easily into a win. Which is why the killrates are not averaged at 2. Survivors keep their momentum as long as they all live, but they will lose all their momentum just because 1 teammate died. Killing survivors ends you the match as a killer, but does not equal a win. There are many more factors in the game that matter.
Dead By Daylight has an endgame conditions, where nobody wins, one where nobody loses, one where everyone wins, and one where everyone loses. You are free to personally interpret the "nobody wins" as a win or the "nobody loses" as a loss. You would be wrong, as the game has never truly been in a state where a 4k was a win regardless of the situation without there being a heavy imbalance at play(coughcoughdyinglight+ruincoughcough)
"it is in fact a competition if both sides agree to all the rules to that 'game' since you guys are the ones making it up. But a game that is already made by someone else has its own rules - you and your friends are simply participants who have agreed to play by those rules. "As a Killer, your goal is to sacrifice as many Survivors as possible. As a Survivor, your goal is to escape and avoid being caught and killed," then that is obviously the objective of the game. It's not difficult to understand."
Oh, the irony. You do realise that sacrificing 1 survivor because its the only survivor you can possibly sacrifice completes your objective as a killer? Because you literally sacrificed as many survivors as you possibly could? Making a 1k a win? You completed your objective, you sacrificed as many survivors as you possibly could. Were there more survivors you could have potentially sacrificed? Sure, but that wasnt possible. Therefor, you still finished your objective and "won". Congratulations.
"but needing 50 hours to have a chance at winning, or even learning the basics, isn't a party game."
To have a chance at winning against someone with 1000 hours*. I never even stated learning the basics of the game. And yes, that is a party game. Skribble is a partygame, I'm sure you would agree, but there is no chance you with 50 hours of drawing skills will defeat someone who has 1000 hours of drawing skills. Still a party game.
"I've seen plenty of games in which completely new players just happen to win because they were in a right place at the right time, or picking a random person to kill off, and just happens to be the right person"
And in how many of those games were those players facing people with 1000 hours that just let them go on even though they were actually quite obvious? Because you'd be surprised how many people hold back for the sake of having fun together. I could grab examples of video's where people who had hundreds if not thousands of hours simply ignore evidence they would use to get someone else out, simply because they were new at the game and wanted them to have fun. Just like 99% of the games you play in DBD, where people dont tend to sweat because they want to have fun in the game and they want their opponent to have a chance to have fun in the game. If DBD wasnt a partygame, this would never be the case.
"And even when you don't win, you never feel like you didn't have any chance at winning, unlike DBD."
Eh, there have been many, MANY cases in games like Among Us where you dont feel like you have any chance at winning. Like people constantly stacking together in Among Us, making it impossible to make kills. Or in Town of Salem where you instantly notice your teammates are terrible and you essentially have to carry your team to even find a possibility at a chance of winning. So yeah, the feeling of not having any chances at winning exist in party games.
"First 50 hours, and now 100 hours? Definitely not a party game."
TO WIN AGAINST PEOPLE WITH 1000 HOURS, ######### HELL, DO YOU EVEN READ.
"Personally, if I can't get a handle on a game within the hour, I don't think I would qualify it as a party game."
You can get the hang of this game within 10 minutes, you can play this game with friends and succesfully win games within 30 minutes. So you would qualify it as a partygame.
"Are you seriously now saying that if you have a player-count of 5, it's immediately a party game?"
No, I am saying that you can play this game with friends only instantly if you have 5. You literally do not read.
""Because DBD fits all your definitions too." "It really doesn't."
Yes, it does:
-"if I can't get a handle on a game within the hour, I don't think I would qualify it as a party game"
You can get the handle of it within 10 minutes.
-"As a Killer, your goal is to sacrifice as many Survivors as possible. As a Survivor, your goal is to escape and avoid being caught and killed,"
Sacrificing 0 survivors because it was not possible to sacrifice 1 survivor, is sacrificing as many survivors as possible. Escaping is only 1 of the 2 objectives that can only succeed of you succeeded the second one first, which, is an endless request untill you actually die.
-"it is in fact a competition if both sides agree to all the rules to that 'game'"
Your rules are that 3k+ equals a win, the game rules do not state that. Therefor it is not a competition.
-"People don't have that much patience to learn games while they socialize and drink."
Like, people socializing and drinking while playing DBD together
So yes, I would argue that dbd being a party game DOES fill your requirements.
-
@knell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2082337#Comment_2082337
"You play against each other, but one player winning DOES NOT mean the other player lost. Hence, the game not being competitive. I agree that the setting FEELS competitive, but its not. Who loses if everyone won? Again, the only winconditions that COULD make the game competitive, are all arbitrary."
There is nothing arbitrary about the win condition of DBD. "As a Killer, your goal is to sacrifice as many Survivors as possible. As a Survivor, your goal is to escape and avoid being caught and killed." Those are the only game objectives. From that official wording, it's straight forward for survivors, but for killers, it may seem a bit questionable to determine how many sacrificed survivors constitutes a "win." But given how the developers have already determined game balance by establishing "2 Kill/2 Escape average" as the overall target, it's easy to conclude that killing more than 2 survivors would be a win for killers. If the players meet their objectives, they win; if they don't, they lose. Sure, there are some atypical game results where one survivor may win (escape) with the killer (3 deaths) and vice versa, but that is simply the result of the unusual decision by the developers to make this asymmetrical game with a player-elimination format. All of this has nothing to do with the fact that this game (and all pvp) is still a competitive game, given that players must compete against someone else. And "Rank" has nothing to do with the wincon of this game - it's simply used as a way to matchmake people (albeit in the most inefficient manner) in its current form.
"Even though YOU compete doesnt mean the game is competitive."
*blinks* Ok...
"Spirit proves you wrong. You need a minimal amount of knowledge in Spirit to topple players that are much more skilled than you are. Let alone that there are plenty of games where people with "only" 100 hours being capable of destroying people with 1000 hours purely because RNG is in their favor. "
So if I bring a random friend who has never played DBD before, have her play the tutorial and read through Spirit's power, she would then be able to beat you and three of your friends playing SWF? Perhaps that speaks more about you and your friends than about how strong the Spirit is. But let's say, for the sake of argument, that Spirit is overpowered. Then that is a problem with the game balance that needs be fixed - it has nothing to do with the fact that it's an unbalanced, competitive game in which the player using the Spirit is "competing" against the other players to win.
"ALL of them being party games with RNG being large enough to dictate a win if all skill is equal."
'If all skill is equal?' See, this is the part of where you are misunderstanding. Generally party games don't require much skill at all because of how easy they are to pick up and learn. Everyone pretty much has an equal chance of winning despite the difference in skills or experience at the game because RNG can often dictate the win regardless. That's why they can be played, here it comes... at a party. DBD don't fall into that category.
"All this added, and you have much more RNG than a Poker game."
Then your definition of whether a game is competitive is determined by your personal feelings on how "luck-based" the game is. I see. So in your world, all games that you feel goes above a certain threshold of RNG is a "party game," and all games you feel that goes under that threshold is a "competitive game." Ok then. And by your definition, a game of Poker does not have much RNG, so it's a "competitive game," but DBD have too much RNG for your tastes so it is a "party game."
...alrighty then. I think I got everything I needed to know about your understanding of 'games' from here.
"I wasnt talking about fun, I was talking about ENSURED fun. There are enough games where you face a deathslinger who just camps and tunnels you the first moment in the game, and those games arent fun. So the only way to ENSURE fun is to prevent such a situation from ever happening in the first place."
No one can be ensured fun. Fun is very subjective. Even the best games will have critics with differing opinions on what they find fun. But all good games are balanced, and balanced games often raise the probability for fun for everyone, and not just for the chosen few.
Look, this is ultimately a discussion about whether DBD is tournament-ready, or even tournament-suited. If that is the discussion you want to follow, then in my opinion, DBD is certainly not tournament-ready, and it's very questionable about how it can even be tournament-suited. But right now you are deterring everyone, yourself included, from having that discussion because you want to interchange "tournament-ready" or "tournament-suited" for the word "competitive" when that word already has a specific meaning in the gaming setting - "competitive vs cooperative." And "party games" are just a subgenre of game, just as "shooting games", "fighting games", "abstract games", "resource management games", "card-drafting games", "hidden movement games", etc. are.
"There is nothing arbitrary about the win condition of DBD. "As a Killer, your goal is to sacrifice as many Survivors as possible. As a Survivor, your goal is to escape and avoid being caught and killed." Those are the only game objectives. From that official wording, it's straight forward for survivors, but for killers, it may seem a bit questionable to determine how many sacrificed survivors constitutes a "win." But given how the developers have already determined game balance by establishing "2 Kill/2 Escape average" as the overall target, it's easy to conclude that killing more than 2 survivors would be a win for killers."
And aaaaaaalll this text is useless, because you could get a 4k within 1 minute and derank. Therefor, the goal to sacrifice as many survivors as possible simply cannot be the win condition. Winning doesnt make you lose progress. So there are other things you need to balance it out with.
Let alone that dying as a survivor early on DOES make you lose progress, but dying later on in the match you gain progress. This has been true since release, regardless of the wording. Progress has never agreed with the wording. Even the victory cube had you "win" as a killer by sacrificing all survivors and still count as a loss.
They are objectives, but finishing your objectives does not guarantee an increase in progress. THAT is what makes any competitive view on this game worthless.
"*blinks* Ok..."
I can compete in dying as quickly as possible with a tumor, does that make having a tumor a competition just because I say so? No, it does not. Therefor, YOU wanting to compete doesnt make something competitive. Me and another person having a tumor could both make a competition out of it, but that's 2 parties agreeing to participate in said competition. In DBD, you do not agree prior to the match. This is why the "killer rulebook" and "survivor rulebook" are considered memes, even though both "rulebooks" do make the game more fun to play for either side and anyone breaking those "rules" is considered a sweaty #########. People dont need to adhere to those "rules", but there is plenty of room in a match to respect those.
Essentially, its a soft agreement between respectful players that you do not work on 3 generators at the same time as a survivor, just as you dont rush out a survivor when there is no obsession in the game. Both those actions adhere to the "rules" of either side, but they are not enforced. Yet survivors splitting 3 gens early(4 initially, untill you find one of them) instantly are considered ######### just as much as killers that rush kills are. In both cases, we have people being competitive towards their opponent without their opponent having agreed to participate in there.
"have her play the tutorial and read through Spirit's power, she would then be able to beat you and three of your friends playing SWF?"
No, but she'd only need 50 hours playing Spirit alone to be able to get a 3k if RNG is a tiny bit in her favor. Just because you cant instantly win due to RNG doesnt mean it's not a party game. Among Us is a party game too. Yet if you're new in a group that has 50% of the players being 1000 hours in, you simply wont win as an impostor. Yet, 50 hours in, you know enough about the game to win. You need minimal skill to realize how you can gain an advantage. Same applies to DBD. You can be a rank 1 killer within 100 hours of having bought the game, even though you're facing players who have played this game for 2000 hours. Does that make that killer super skillful within 100 hours(50 hours if you only play Spirit), or is the skill requirement to take advantage of RNG low? How is this not a party game? In what other game can you see players with only 100 hours consistently defeat players with 10x the amount of hours they made? A chess player with 100 hours will not get lucky and defeat a chess player with 1000 hours. Yet in DBD, 100 hours is enough to hold your own against people with 2000 hours. So how is it different from a party game? Your definition of party games essentially only limits it to games of chance.
"it has nothing to do with the fact that it's an unbalanced, competitive game in which the player using the Spirit is "competing" against the other players to win."
A huntress with 100 hours is capable of defeating survivors with 1000 hours, a doctor with 100 hours is capable of defeating survivors with 1000 hours, a nurse with 100 hours is capable of defeating survivors with 1000 hours, a deathslinger with 100 hours is capable of defeating survivors with 1000 hours, do I need to go on? All these are cases where one player has 10x less experience than their opponent, and still is capable of defeating them. Does that not fit your definition of party games, or are you going to stick with games of chance that have near true randomness as party games?
"Generally party games don't require much skill at all because of how easy they are to pick up and learn."
100 hours vs 1000 hours. That's easy to pick up and learn. The skill floors in DBD are not as high as you think they are.
"That's why they can be played, here it comes... at a party. DBD don't fall into that category."
Oh, so that's why DBD players tend to fill up a custom game if they have 5 players, you know, as if they were at a party? Just because you're all playing over a program like Discord doesnt make it less of a party game, in fact, people play it at LAN parties. You know, being a party game.
"Then your definition of whether a game is competitive is determined by your personal feelings on how "luck-based" the game is. I see."
No, the definition goes by how much RNG tends to make the difference between a win or not. In Poker, only the final hands are dictated by luck, but your way up to the final hands are mainly dictated by skill. In DBD, your game can be won or lost without you even realizing due to RNG being so heavy in your favor, this is exactly why RNG altering offerings and perks are considered the strongest ones(map offerings, hook offerings, old undying, Trapper's traps RNG even being changed to be less RNG because it was too RNG, infinite T3 myers, because encountering survivors is RNG aswell, even if you have an educated guess). THAT is what makes it a party game. But if we go by the definition of games played at parties, then DBD also falls into that catagory. Or do we go by the definition where someone with significantly less experience can defeat someone with significantly more experience? Because, again, 100 hours, 1000 hours. If you play 1 hour a day, that's 3 months vs 3 years of experience. Do you really think someone with 3 months experience in a game is capable of defeating someone with 3 years of experience consistently if it were not a partygame?
Or do you now suddenly want to change your definition of a party game? Because DBD fits all your definitions too.
-
@FrenziedRoach said:
"You cannot choose to play casual games or competitive games, therefor the default goes to casual."
blinks
What?!
*blinks in confusion again*
Say again? NO..... dude.... There's no such thing as a "Casual" mode in any game. Just ranked and unranked. Sweaty players like myself can still play unranked. Soooo....... your reasoning is flawed.
Yes, and the default for unranked is casual, even if YOU decide to play sweaty.
-
@xEcoLog1cDuk3Xx said:
Not a competitive game and yet we have Ranks???
Oh, you mean ranks that you can gain by killing 0 survivors? Ranks you can climb with 0 escapes?
In what competitive game do you GAIN ranks for failing to complete your objectives? In what competitive game can you achieve the highest rank by losing?
Let's take the easiest example: online chess
If you defeat your opponent, your rank increases based on elo difference, if you get defeated, your ranking decreases based on elo difference. If you tie, your elo rarely changes unless the elo difference is too large(essentially, landing a tie with someone who has 600 elo while you have 1200 elo tends to slightly decrease your elo).
Now, how does DBD fit in here? You can defeat your opponent, and lose your ranks. You can be defeated and gain ranks. That's not how a ranking system works.
-
@TicTac said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081619#Comment_2081619
I asked that wrong. I meant what is the consequence if dbd is a party game? Does it matter?
Oh, it's just that the playerbase shouldnt play as competitive as they currently do. No reason to sweat games for utterly meaningless things like bloodpoints or rank and just start having fun instead. Stop actively ruining people's days for no reason than ruining their days, and just have fun scaring the ######### out of them. This is why a lot of people enjoy facing or playing T1 Myers, while competitive players absolutely despise him.
If you stop thinking about the most optimal way to face your opponent and instead go for the most fun way to face your opponent, the endresult wont matter(which, if you already noticed, doesnt matter anyway). It would change the mindset of overall players.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
I've learned that "playing for fun" means you don't care for winning at all, and will most likely sink the whole team with your inexperience and nonsensical map awareness. This is why we need a ranked and a casual mode, so they can please the competitive and non-competitive people.
No, playing for fun doesnt mean you dont care for winning. It means you dont care if you lose. I am not going to turn my frustrations up 9000000% just because I could win if I did. I win 80% of my games as survivor, meaning my version of winning which is most of my team walking through the exit gate. I win 90% of my killer games, meaning my version of winning where most of the survivors do not exit through the gate.
I could win 99% of my killer games, and I could win 95% of my survivor games if I played sweaty, I only lose 10-15% more games but in exchange I have 200% more fun on average.
As for inexperience and nonsensical map awareness, excuse me, I have 2.5k hours in the game. Having fun matters more at this point than getting wins that doesnt mean ######### anyway. If there is 2 dc's I could end the match early and "win" or I can ######### around with survivors and have some fun. I know maps, I know vanilla distances and know which addons are used when there is a discrepancy in distances. I can 99% of the cases fully predict what the killer is using before the second generator is popped. So me "playing for fun" doesnt mean I dont care for winning, I still try to win while having fun, but I am not gonna sacrifice fun just to get a shallow, meaningless win.
-
@BananaBlooD95 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2082166#Comment_2082166
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/3VSNNFPJ9PGK/image.png
What are you doing here if you don't bother reading all message let alone read an entire reply? Are you a troll or what?
The game have seen far worst than that and people managed to deal with it and there are far more oppressive perk/add on load out for a 3gen.
The doctor can't be at 3 place at the same time, 4 survivor can. Once he go pressure one gen, 1 survivor go work on the gen completely at the opposite side of the 3 gen. Get to madness 3 or injure? Go heal with one of your team mate with the two other survivor pressure 2 gen. after 5min you're done.
I'll say it again: pressure the 2 gen at the same time the 2 that are the furthest apart. While the killer push survivor away from one gen the other survivor can work on the other gen.
Oh and a third time for good measure: You have gen A,B,C. Gen A and C are the furthest apart.
The killer go pressure gen A, survivor work on gen C. Killer go pressure gen C, work on gen A. You get hit, you go heal. You get madness T3, go break it out.
----
If you can't hit the skill check and/or are just too afraid to pressure 2 gen at the same time in a 4 vs 1 then you DESERVE to stay in a ######### 40min games
Ah yes, because I am supposed to follow all the threads of all people commenting to this post. Oh wait, what did I say?
Oh that's right, I didnt say in the entire comment section, I didnt say anywhere in the messages. I just said this thread.
"The game have seen far worst than that and people managed to deal with it and there are far more oppressive perk/add on load out for a 3gen."
As a doctor main, I have to heavily disagree. This is actually a 3-gen build that has gotten stronger post-rework and there are very little comparisons you can make, as not a single load-out forces you to throw yourself at the opponent for 40 minutes in this game. The only comparison that can be made is hiding as a survivor and not doing any gens ever. "people managed to deal with it" People managed to deal with the old 2016 survivor hiding, so guess we can remove the EGC, right? People managed to deal with it, so lets just bring it back into the game, remove the EGC and torment killers with 40 minutes of survivors just hiding in lockers and refusing to escape.
"The doctor can't be at 3 place at the same time, 4 survivor can. Once he go pressure one gen, 1 survivor go work on the gen completely at the opposite side of the 3 gen. Get to madness 3 or injure? Go heal with one of your team mate with the two other survivor pressure 2 gen. after 5min you're done."
Again, not gonna work. You have to go outside, only 1 gen can be pressured at a time at most and everytime you pressure a gen, you get hit. Every 30 seconds, you get madness, forcing you to go out of the radius and letting gens regress. You thinking this takes 5 minutes is laughably ignorant about how this situation works. Gens are at most 16 meters apart in these kind of 3-gens. And going upstairs means going upstairs unnoticed
"Oh and a third time for good measure: You have gen A,B,C. Gen A and C are the furthest apart. The killer go pressure gen A, survivor work on gen C. Killer go pressure gen C, work on gen A. You get hit, you go heal. You get madness T3, go break it out."
That's against a normal killer, not a Doctor with Surveillance, Overcharge and Iri queen.
You have Gen A, B, C. A and B being essentially next to each other while gen C is 3 seconds away. Oh whats this? a survivor at gen C? shock them, give them a charge, kick the gen. Survivor goes back to the gen with a teammate to pressure the gen, Skillcheck comes, Static Charge gets triggered blocking you from hitting the skillcheck, forcing you to miss even if you could hit it causing you to lose 5%, for you to regain this 5%, Doctor has kicked both other gens, injured 2 of your teammates and is now back to your gen where he shocks you, giving you another charge. While your teammates are both injured and in Madness 3, he just forces you off while shocking you into M3, causing 3 gens to be regressing at the same time with only 1 survivor uninjured. Oh, this survivor could be going to gen A upstairs, whoopsies, he got spotted because of Doc's hallucinations that you can see with King. Guess he needs to run away before he could even touch the generator while the other 2 people just got out of madness 3 and are now forced to heal each other.
All this is already 1 minute of the time on 4 survivors, 1 minute of the generator regressing vanilla(aka, 20% progression gone), all while Doctor has been able to get you back into Madness 3 again if you got even slightly into his TR. So you need to be able to progress the generator for 10 seconds in a row with 2 survivors without Doctor interrupting you for you to GAIN progress in this situation. Which you cannot as you need to approach a generator solo to get rid of Overcharge, which Doctor would already notice due to Surveillance, chasing you off, with 1 person rushing to Gen B to get rid of Overcharge, then all of you triggering Static Charge to get rid of it, but since its 2 people, that means they gain a madness stage for free. Meaning you just use a Static Blast to make 2 of them unable to keep progressing.
And yet you still think survivors have time to heal up, get out of Madness AND gain progress at the same time? There is no 3 man gen here, so you simply cannot gain progress fast enough. One of the gens is even out of question due to it being a solo gen.
Essentially: Red gens are 2 man gens, black one is a 1 man gen, the circle is a rough estimate of a 32 meter terror radius on this map.
1/4th of that circle(8 meter radius), is the reach of Doctor's shock. To do a succesful heal, as you dont know for certain if this Doc has Nurses or not(he had NOED, which cannot be confirmed), you need to stand outside of the TR to heal up, assuming you just got hit, means 8 seconds. Then you have to meet up with someone to heal up, which can take some time, during the 8 seconds you needed to get out, the gen you worked on has already been kicked and started regressing at 0.268 charges per second. Assuming this is the 2 man gen close to the white van, the only other gen that can be pushed its right around the corner. That's 1 gen regressing, 2 people busy and 2 people about to be hit, shocked and shoo'd away from a gen, at least one of them being forced out. Lets assume even that only people who are injured run out, and that the other uninjured person instantly started working on the gen you got hit off while the other uninjured person rushed to that gen aswell. Doctor has kicked the other gen, also regressing and spots the previous Gen is yellow, goes there to hit another survivor and shock them into Madness 3. Now you only have 1 survivor left to pressure gens while all 3 generators are still regressing, and he doesnt even need to check up on 1 of them due to it being a 1 man gen and he can hear it being worked from outside.
This situation is near impossible to break, and there is 1 hook inside that 3 gen.
And you think its 5 minutes at best? I'm sorry, but I really scoff hard at you if you think it's 5 minutes at best, when 1 gen is essentially impossible to push and the other 2 are very easy for Doctor to keep pressure on.
-
@Toastyy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081210#Comment_2081210
If they did have a competitive game mode it people won’t want to play it for long because all you’re going to see is nurse and spirit because let’s be honest no killer is going to beat a 4 stack running super meta perks with comms unless it’s a very experienced nurse or spirit player. People will just get tired of playing against the same two killers over and over. Dbd should not be a competitive game nor should it have a mmr system.
If there is a seperate mode for it, why would they leave it? They could easily play "casual" games when they get tired of facing the same 2 killers over and over again, you know, the same reason players play casuals in any game with a competitive scene because they get tired of facing the same meta over and over again.
We're literally talking giving players who WANT to play competitive a place to be competitive. If they dont want to play competitive, they dont have to join the competitive mode.
There is a semi-option for steam players right now: turn crossplay off. You'll only face people who play meta perks and play optimal. So there already is a place to go for some players to play more competitive. And you'll see that not only Nurse and Spirit have the power to beat a 4 stack with comms, as there are other killers like Oni, Freddy, Hag, Huntress, Blight, Bubba, Doctor, Plague and Twins that are quite effective there too. And I am talking people who mained those killers for 1500 hours+, so optimal aim, optimal timing, optimal placement and optimal hunting, especially since DS has been nerfed. They might not all get 4k's, sure, but 3k's are within the realm of possibilities if you constantly prepare for a 4 stack with comms.
Because that's the biggest thing why most killers cannot handle a sweatstack with comms: they are not preparing to face one at all times. If you're not prepared to face a 4-stack with most killers, then sure, only Spirit and Nurse stand a chance. But a competitive scene where 4-stacks would be the norm? You bet your ass that a lot of killers have builds dealing with that. The only thing that a competitive scene needs is unlimited addons and all perks unlocked, essentially Kill Your Friends.
There simply is a demand for a competitive scene, as long as the competitive scene is seperate from the normal scene, how is that ever a bad thing?
-
@MrSmashem said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2082013#Comment_2082013
Gross oversimplifications and falsehoods here. Competition doesn't require equal skill, a fair competition would(given balance existed within the game). Also, RNG doesn't determine the victor in this game, it does play a part in balance, though. If RNG determined the victor, the second the map loaded in, in favor of either side, the game would immediately end and give the victory to the favored side. You have to have skill and knowledge in order to utilize RNG to your advantage, at which point balance is called into question.
Skill is also not knowledge of the maps, it's understanding how to utilize said knowledge and doing so in-game. And yeah, lets disregard every other mechanic in the game and pretend map knowledge is all this game has going for it.
"If RNG determined the victor, the second the map loaded in, in favor of either side, the game would immediately end and give the victory to the favored side."
This is what happens the majority of "high skill" gameplay tho. Tons of games with survivors not being able to use resources in the game due to a lack of them being spawned on, tons of games with killers being unable to reach survivors due to too many resources being spawned into the game. So yes, RNG determines the victor. The only reason you dont notice this, is because most people dont really play competitive.
-
@rrogers_NW said:
DBD is tho lol
Gib evidence.
- what rewards do you get for rushing objectives?
- why would you ever derank for rushing objectives?
-
@knell said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081963#Comment_2081963
Oppositionary games arent always competitive. Party games arent always cooperative.
I think you just don't understand the definition of competitive games, despite most people here trying to explain it to you in the simplest way possible. Perhaps you just don't want to understand. Any and all games in which one player is "competing" against another player, by definition, are "competitive" games. If they are not "competing," but instead playing "with" another player, it's cooperative. Party games can be both competitive and/or cooperative.
I clearly stated that RNG was dictating the endresult of the game more than skill would.
The fact that a completely new player would not be able to win, no matter how much the element of luck sides with him/her with its map or totem/pallet placement against you or I, should be an indication that it isn't on the level of a "party" game. You wouldn't just invite 4 random friends to a "party" who have had no experience with this game, and expect them to win, would you? No, of course not. That wouldn't be fun for anybody at this "party". Except, if it was, say, "Apples to Apples" or "Dixit" they would definitely have a chance to win. Because those are actual party games. That's the difference.
There are no competitive games where luck truly made the difference.
Would you categorize Poker as competitive or not competitive? How about Magic the Gathering?
For DBD to ensure fun for all players, it would need to block killers from hooking survivors more than twice untill all survivors are hooked twice or untill more than 2 generators are finished. Yet that would not be fun for a lot of killers who sometimes need to get rid of a player quickly due to the amount of problems they cause.
I don't know what you are talking about here. I've had fun in DBD games as a survivor in which the killer had tunneled or camped. I've had fun as a killer in which survivors were done with 2 generators right after my first hook. That sounds more like your personal preference than anything.
"Any and all games in which one player is "competing" against another player, by definition, are "competitive" games."
Let me quote something really quick: "Competitive games are those in which players play against one another and where one player winning means another player loses."
You play against each other, but one player winning DOES NOT mean the other player lost. Hence, the game not being competitive. I agree that the setting FEELS competitive, but its not. Who loses if everyone won? Again, the only winconditions that COULD make the game competitive, are all arbitrary. This is why even though you THINK it is simple because "PVP=competition", but that isnt the case. In a competition, you either have 1 winning side and 1 losing side OR a tie. DBD doesnt fit in there. Your 4k means nothing if you lose ranks. Your 4 escape means jack-######### if you lose ranks. Therefor, Dead By Daylight is simply NOT competitive. Regardless of how much you like to dance around it. "The community generally agrees a 4k is a killer win" so what? The community generally also thinks Legion is the weakest killer even though his winrate is quite high and he is one of the least addon reliant killers here. The community could create a third-party site where a 4k IS a killer win, but according to the game, it is not. Even though YOU compete doesnt mean the game is competitive.
"The fact that a completely new player would not be able to win, no matter how much the element of luck sides with him/her with its map or totem/pallet placement against you or I, should be an indication that it isn't on the level of a "party" game."
Spirit proves you wrong. You need a minimal amount of knowledge in Spirit to topple players that are much more skilled than you are. Let alone that there are plenty of games where people with "only" 100 hours being capable of destroying people with 1000 hours purely because RNG is in their favor. Yes, it's not as RNG heavy as something like Mario Party, but it would be more comparable to games like Worms, Bomberman, Rayman M, Super Monkey Ball, Town of Salem or Among Us("Because those are actual party games." FYI). ALL of them being party games with RNG being large enough to dictate a win if all skill is equal. A new player in any of those games would not be able to win against someone who spent hundreds of hours in the game, but with relatively minimal experience, they could. THAT is what makes DBD a party game. Minimal experience can easily push you up to red ranks.
"Would you categorize Poker as competitive or not competitive? How about Magic the Gathering?"
Luck isnt as much what makes people win or not unless everyone goes all in. Luck can be a factor, but by no means does luck dictate who wins and who does not. In Poker, bluffing is the main skill, pretending you have something better than you actually have. In Magic the Gathering, you keep cards in your hand that might be worth something later, essentially making no difference if you drew it the first round, or the round before you actually play it. You know what is in your deck, you know what strategies work with your deck, it's only RNG to some extent.
In DBD, you have NO CLUE which structures will generate where other than the shack and main structure(s), the rest is essentially RNG. Will you have access to 8 pallets, or to 18? Will you get The Game, or will you get Lery's? Will Balanced Landing be a useful perk to run this match or will you get Sheltered Woods and essentially 0 value? All this added, and you have much more RNG than a Poker game. Let alone that for a full poker game, you face the same opponents for an average of 2 hours with an average of 60 hands. In DBD, you only face your opponent for 1 game and 1 game only. All this context matters.
"I've had fun in DBD games as a survivor in which the killer had tunneled or camped."
I wasnt talking about fun, I was talking about ENSURED fun. There are enough games where you face a deathslinger who just camps and tunnels you the first moment in the game, and those games arent fun. So the only way to ENSURE fun is to prevent such a situation from ever happening in the first place.
-
@FrenziedRoach said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2082214#Comment_2082214
I don't believe he was griefing because in this case, he was actually hooking people. It was mentioned further up.
That's the issue, as a survivor, you want to prevent being hooked. So you literally have to suicide to get out of the game. How is this different than being forced to check every single locker for survivors hiding all match? You can still kill the survivors, so how is hiding in lockers in 2016 considered hostage keeping when there was a way out, but this isnt?
-
@FrenziedRoach said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2082074#Comment_2082074
I wouldn't use that build for a 3 gen on a Doc. His build is actually kinda amatuerish if you are going for a full-on defensive 3 gen build.
If you are serious about doing a 3 gen, it's Distressing, Disturbing Presence, Overcharge, Surveillance. The Distressing and Disturbing Presence combo is really powerful in a confined space and guarantees all regular skillchecks will be half-sized on top of your already oppressive madness.
Stacking the Iri's is a waste, I'd go with one or the other then pop in an interview tape so I can shock the gens at long range and interrupt people on them. For the purposes of a 3 gen though, I'd go with the Queen over the King due to how it discourages survivors to clump together and spreads madness if they do. You won't be getting all the best benefits of the King running it in a confined space
Haven't done that since the dock rework though as Distressing/Disturbing isn't as effective for normal games without 3 genning like it used to be due to how his static blast works so you're much better off using something else.
King and Queen combo is actually quite strong due to King giving you long distance vision everytime a survivor hits Madness 3. Although Order would give you a bigger cooldown. And instead of Noed he could use Thana to add slowdown and instead of BBQ Disturbing Presence. With the way gen spawning works nowadays, you dont need Distressing to cover all 3 gens.
But this build is considered to be holding the game hostage if you focus on the 3-gen from the start of the match purely due to the sheer amount of time it would require to break the 3 gen. I mean, back in the day you COULD find all survivors hiding in lockers if you wanted to spend 45 minutes looking around the entire map for them. Making it possible for you to kill all the survivors. So I really dont understand why killer mains think a build that causes survivors to spend 40 minutes breaking a certain 3-gen isnt hostage keeping.
-
@BadDocter said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/240305/dr-holding-the-game-at-a-stalemate
Since you didn't mention anyone getting hooked, i can only assume you were all too afraid to be injured and kept the status quo. If you were willing to shed some blood it would've been very possible to break his 3 gen.
Being forced to suicide is not a valid argument here. You have people running in, taking hits trying to get the killers attention only for the killer to ignore them as soon as they get out of a certain area. And if they're not healing, they're getting out of Madness 3.
"JuSt DiE 5hEaD" isnt really an argument. That's like saying "JuSt ChEcK lOcKeRs 5HeAd" against killers in 2016 when survivors hid in lockers.
-
@Huge_Bush said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081792#Comment_2081792
I actually agree with your sentiments, it's just one of the mods have already confirmed that if the killer refuses to commit to a chase for a long time, they will be regarded as holding the game hostage. I don't agree with it, but it is what it is and no use arguing about it.
They did add to it that it needs to last a prolonged time to a point where they can say with certainty that it's an intention to grief the game. Refusing to commit to a chase when there is obviously 3 survivors going for a gen is fine. But keeping people in Madness 3 essentially the entire time while only hitting them if they are within your area while only committing to that area from the start of the match? Yeah, that's griefing.
Essentially, if you're given the 3-gen, it's not griefing to defend that 3-gen, especially if you continue to down survivors. If you go into the game with the sole purpose of creating a 3-gen with addons and perks that make it near impossible to break that 3-gen? That's griefing and no different from survivors hiding in lockers for an hour in 2016.
I mean, preventing survivors from exiting the game to the point that their only option is suiciding is no different from survivors preventing the killer from exiting the game without a DC. We're talking a minimal of 40 minutes just to fatique the killer enough to make mistakes vs a minimal of 40 minutes of checking every single locker and hope you find a survivor here. Why is one not hostage keeping but the other is?
-
@sad_killer_main said:
Thanks for the post, now I have a new build and strategy to try.
This strategy is bannable. Any predetermined situation causing the game to be extended by nearly 20 minutes is considered hostage keeping. Because your intention is to keep the game from ending as long as possible.
You can defend a 3-gen given to you like this, but you cannot initiate the defense of a 3-gen by ignoring survivors all game.
-
@EvilJoshy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081990#Comment_2081990
I don't know what survivors you face but the only time I get a 3 gen is because the survivors are potatoes. Anyone survivor with a decent amount of playtime, swf or random, knows not to do all the gnes on one side of the map. I can chase them off a gen or kick it with pgtw but I can't guard gens and chase survivors at the same time. There's 4 survivors and only 1 killer. Like I said earlier. If even 3 survivors take one of the 3 gen they will complete it.
That's mostly because you do not force a 3-gen and actually go for chases as a killer. We're talking a killer here that identifies the 3 closest generators and sticks to it, ignoring anyone going outside his predetermined area, hitting everyone that gets in range.
-
@BananaBlooD95 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2082038#Comment_2082038
I did read, you didn't.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/6G82RNJ54EX3/image.png
Let me explain it again. One person doing the gen upstairs in the house, 1 doing the gen furthest apart from that one and the 2 other survivor resetting (getting rid of madness 3/healing.
Do I need to write in an other language? Maybe I should write it in 3 different way, maybe you'll understand one. Or maybe you just need to read the entire post before replying and sounding like an ass...
I didnt reply to that part because nowhere prior to this moment is there a mention of a house in this thread prior to you talking about it. But I am assuming the 3 gen in question is one upstairs, one next to the house and one on the street(as I didnt see any footage here or pics, I do know general gen spawns on Springwood).
The Springwood house against a Doctor can be essentially a guaranteed down, once the side wall is broken, that's essentially a 2 gen you cannot work on without giving doctor multiple injures or a down. By the time you can fully heal up, Doctor has access to his shock, which guarantuees a full tier. If you're not close enough to each other, every single survivor will have a charge. Any survivor getting close to you once you touch a generator that has Overcharge on it makes you fully unable to hit that skillcheck. So you have to solo a generator untill Overcharge is gone. Doctor with iri king causes reverse skillchecks and places them randomly on the screen. So if it's a quick hit, you're screwed. Add in that frustration makes it even harder to hit those skillchecks over time.
So lets break down the maths here:
You have 1 doctor that takes 3 seconds to kick each generator, hitting anyone that is close and shocking those within range.
Anyone being injured forces you to heal up, otherwise its a free hook and anyone hooked inside the 3-gen makes it even harder to break.
2 people working on "the furthest gen" requires 40 seconds of Doctor fully ignoring you, which he does not, thanks to Surveillance. He hits and shocks people, forces you to heal up and get out of madness. Every second spend getting out of madness or healing means a generator regressing. Add in shocks and quick reverse Overcharges that happen in the corner of the screen before you can react, and you have essentially a 3-gen that can take up to 30 minutes to break.
30 minutes to break a 3-gen that is forced upon you is essentially just as bad as 2016 survivors hiding 30 minutes in lockers once the final gen is done. So why is 1 considered hostage keeping when the other is not?
-
@PanicSquid said:
He did not hold the game hostage, he did not block you in a corner to prevent you from moving.
The way to deal with a 3 gen is to heal up, split up and work on all 3 of the gens, when he comes to pressure you, run away, let him kick the gen, then go back and work the moment he walks away.
So you agree that the EGC is pointless then? I mean, survivors cannot outrun you forever. So the way to deal with survivors hiding is just search better?
Once a certain moment in the game lasts longer than the average game lasts 10 minutes, it can essentially be considered hostage keeping. The only way out of here is to suicide. That is the only reason it's not a hostage situation. But if he were to refuse hitting you? Definitely a hostage keeping game.
-
@BananaBlooD95 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081986#Comment_2081986
Overcharge skill check are not that hard to hit & no Hex: Huntress Lullaby. Surveillance doesn't pressure gen and let's be hones on a 3 gen that doesn't change anything since without it you either SEE survivor working on gen or HEAR them.
Like I said, it take time and patience but it's doable, beside walking up the stairs of the house take away some precious time which give you more time to work on the furthest gen. There were 4 survivor alive, two for healing and 2 pressuring the furthest gen apart and voila.
Didnt you read? I said: "he had iri queen, which, if you try to rush a gen with more than 1 survivor, means you get shocked and forces the Overcharge to trigger."
You literally cannot hit the skillcheck if you're being shocked.
"Surveillance doesn't pressure gen" No, but doctor's power does.
"Like I said, it take time and patience but it's doable" Oh, like "holding the game hostage back in the day by walking around as a survivor hiding in lockers forcing the game to last 2 hours"-doable? Sure. But oh, whats this? Killers complained too much and got the EGC introduced to prevent that situation because 2 hours simply is too long? If a game lasts more than 20 minutes because of a build, it's essentially hostage keeping. The fact that this killer was actually killing was the only reason this game was not being held hostage.
A 3 gen that takes longer than 10 minutes to break is not doable.
-
@Jago said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081661#Comment_2081661
Imagine a baseball game where any round is randomly generated, just like dbd. Its Rng, not competition.
Competition is fighting against each others, on the same level. Baseball yes, football yes, League of Legend yes, Street fighter yes. Dbd no.
Rank is an illusion of progression. "Skill" is just knowledge of maps. Its not competitive.
Sorry stretched res users.
I mean, DBD can be competitive, if you had a team consisting of killer+survivors facing another team of killer+survivors. Because that is essentially what baseball is. One team plays the bat side first and then the other team plays the bat side.
This still forces each team to play against the same killer at least best of 2 or best of 3 to reduce RNG being a factor as much as possible. But that is the closest you can get to a competitive scene in DBD.
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081987#Comment_2081987
What??? thats like saying spliting up on gens in the begining is essentially admitting defeat. The no 1 piece of advice I would give to killers struggling with how fast gens are done is thinking about their 3 gen.
Yes, survivors working on 4 seperate gens from the start on purpose are survivors who are essentially too afraid of being overpowered.
You're literally trying to force the game in a state(through vanilla mechanics) that the opponent cannot do anything about unless they brought very specific items and/or perks to break those situations. How is that any different than basically admitting you're losing from the beginning?
-
@MrSmashem said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081911#Comment_2081911
You win by succeeding at your objective. For Killer, thats killing and for Survivor, thats surviving. In terms of "what," you get for winning, Survivors get extra BP for an escape and Killers get extra BP for sacrifices/kills, so thats something. What do you get in most PVP games for winning, besides maybe a currency bonus or extra xp?
Except you can get max BP as a killer with only 1 kill. You can get max BP as a survivor even if you die.
And in competitive games? You get ELO. You get rank rewards at the end of the season. You gain more xp than if you lose. You gain much more currency than if you were to lose. And if you lose, you actually lose ELO.
Besides succeeding at your objective, that can be done by getting 1 kill as a killer. That can be done by 1 survivor escaping. Both, again, very arbitrary. You wont consider 1 survivor escaping a loss. But survivors succeeded at their objectives if at least 1 survivor escapes.
-
@EvilJoshy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081897#Comment_2081897
If a killer could "force" a 3 gen then every single killer would do it. "The doc glued himself to the gens" How was he in 3 places at once? Gens aren't that close together. If the 4 survivors spread out they can beat this. As he chases 1 survivor off 1 gen 2 more are being worked.
You do realize almost all killers can force a 3 gen right?
And Gens are closer than you think. Even if you spread out, there is only so much progress you can make. Overcharge can be forced by Doctor by shocking a survivor as soon as they hit a gen. Madness 3 forces gens to regress. That is enough to force a 3gen.
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081628#Comment_2081628
no because that is literally just playing the game smartly. 3 gens are the saving grace of most killers.
If 3 gens are given to you, sure. Forcing a 3 gen from the start of the game is essentially admitting defeat.
-
@BananaBlooD95 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081897#Comment_2081897
3 gen are doable especially at 4player. it take time & patience but it's not hard. Work on gen, wait till the last second before leaving the gen then come back when he move toward the other one. If he kick the gens it's even better, it give you more time to work on the other one.
Against a Doctor? No. Especially not with the build he had. You would essentially need perfect timing everytime an overcharge gets along, otherwise you lose 5%, let alone that he had iri queen, which, if you try to rush a gen with more than 1 survivor, means you get shocked and forces the Overcharge to trigger. Then he has surveillance to see which of his 3 gen is being touched so he can instantly go there and chase survivors off again.
For you to win this, you need to keep a killer at bay from 1 generator for 40 full seconds or for 60 seconds without failing any Overcharge skillcheck. You need to avoid him shocking you, because very shock and meeting with other survivor grants you half a madness point. Once you reach Madness 3, which is quite easy to do in a small area where you have a 3 gen, you need to snap out, in which time, you cannot work on a gen. Add in the fact that Doctor would keep smacking you whenever he can, forcing you to heal or be a free hookstate. Because once you are slugged, you cannot work on a gen.
To break this 3 gen against this build, you need at least 1 brand new part and prove thyself, all while you force the doctor to "waste" time hooking survivors instead of kicking gens.
So no, 3 gens are not always doable.
-
@knell said:
First and foremost, the opposite of competitive games isn't "party" or "casual" games - it's cooperative games. You are either playing against other players, or playing with other players against the game itself.
Most games have an element of luck to them. Abstract games tend to have the least amount of luck, and party games usually have the most element of luck. And because of that, in most party games, the skill ceiling is so low that newcomers can pick up the rules and mechanics so quickly that they are able to compete relatively well against players with much more experience.
So is DBD a "party" game? The fact that the luck factor usually can't make up for the difference in skill level should easily give you an answer.
So is DBD balanced for a tournament-type of play? Not by a long shot. But it should continue to strive to be more balanced. Because in the end, any and all competitive games should be well-balanced, regardless of their learning curve and ease of play, luck or no luck, so that it is fun for all players involved.
Oppositionary games arent always competitive. Party games arent always cooperative.
"Most games have an element of luck to them."
I clearly stated that RNG was dictating the endresult of the game more than skill would. There are many games you can play utterly perfect, making 0 mistakes and still lose. There are no competitive games where luck truly made the difference, it's always the player/team making the most mistakes that loses the game. That is not the case with DBD.
" the skill ceiling is so low that newcomers can pick up the rules and mechanics so quickly that they are able to compete relatively well against players with much more experience."
You mean like Spirit players with 50 hours being able to compete against survivors with 1000 hours and still winning? Or Freddy players with 100 hours being able to compete with survivors that have 1000 hours and still winning? Yes, this game fits that definition very well. Heck, it goes the other way also. Survivors with 100 hours each can hold their own against killers with 1000+ hours in the game.
"The fact that the luck factor usually can't make up for the difference in skill level should easily give you an answer."
Except that in a lot of cases, this is exactly the case. There are games where the skill difference is TOO large, but there are quite a lot of times where there is a lack of pallets in an area that normally has plenty, there are quite a lot of times that an area know to have few pallets suddenly has plenty. You dont recognise this easily due to not having a bird's eye view of the map. But I bet that at least a quarter of the "wins" you gained is due to RNG being significantly in your favor. Not realizing this is simply ignorance of luck.
"But it should continue to strive to be more balanced."
A game being more balanced doesnt make it competitive tho. Yes, the game should be more balanced, regardless of what type of game it is.
"so that it is fun for all players involved."
For DBD to ensure fun for all players, it would need to block killers from hooking survivors more than twice untill all survivors are hooked twice or untill more than 2 generators are finished. Yet that would not be fun for a lot of killers who sometimes need to get rid of a player quickly due to the amount of problems they cause. This alone proves that dead by daylight can never truly be balanced to be fun for all players. UNLESS it's a party game that adds a seperate section for people who DO want to play super sweaty.
-
@MrSmashem said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081737#Comment_2081737
You made my point, "both sides have similar or equal skill." RNG has to do with balance and fairness, not competition, when skill is factored in.
And dude, you don't need the same objective to compete:
com·pete
/kəmˈpēt/
verb
- strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others who are trying to do the same.
That applies to DBD, regardless of subjective objectives. You have 2 opposing sides, acting directly against each-other using skill, wit and tactics to secure a victory over the other side. Its a competion.
"strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others who are trying to do the same."
Tell me, what do you gain? What do you win? Nothing.
-
@VonCrow said:
If a killer 3 gen the game it is because survivors weren't smart enough to repair using their head.
Most of them just run from a gen to gen without thinking about that. The rush meta hurts some brains...
"He basically chose his 3 gen at the start of the match and did nothing but glue himself to it, we all tried to break it at the start."
Guess you cannot read. If you cannot break a 3-gen from the start of the match because a killer forces it, it's not because the survivors gave him a 3gen. He literally forced it.
-
@NoOneKnowsNova said:
I wonder if that could count as holding the game hostage...
Not really, he defended his gens and prevented survivors from escaping. He was a massive #########, but you could exit the game by running into him. If he were preventing you from doing gens at all by keeping you injured but never downing you, while having a 3-gen with ruin active, then yes, he would be holding the game hostage.
-
"The one game mechanic changed against survivors in all the time I've been playing is no longer getting free chase points from and AFK killer."
So you're new here. Did you know that from 2016 all the way up to early 2018, the devs almost only nerfed survivors? Now killers are simply being addressed.
Lets step back in time:
Back in the day, it was possible for a survivor to have literal infinites, to force a killer to face camp the hatch while they had the power to finish gens and keep a killer second guessing whether they should leave the hatch allowing the survivor to jump in it or if they should search the survivor who might have gone for the exit gate instead. It was possible for survivors to literally basekit dead-hard if there was a palletm being invincible to hits. It was possible for survivors to remove hooks from the game, permanently. It was possible to insta finish generators. There was no medium vaulting, only slow and fast vaulting, let alone that vaulting as a killer was not a feasible manouvre as it was much slower than killer vaulting is right now. Exhaustion didnt exist as a mechanic, all exhaustion perks that existed up untill the exhaustion mechanic had their own cooldown, which went down even if you were running. Meaning you could run Sprintburst, Adrenaline and Balanced Landing at the same time, in succession, up to a total of 11 seconds of sprinttime, run for 40 seconds and use Sprintburst and Balanced Landing AGAIN. Once Exhaustion was added, you could only use 1 exhaustion perk at a time and like before, it went down while you were running, at best using Sprintburst and Adrenaline in quick succession(which you can still do now), but you could crouch and have a 33% increased reduction on your exhaustion, meaning you could run Urban Evasion to crouch mid-chase and crouch everytime you vaulted a window or a pallet to decrease your exhaustion much quicker.
All this has been NERFED.
What has changed for killers in the same amount of time? Trapper was no longer able to place traps in front of hooks as survivors could unhook from the sides, and Mori had been nerfed to require 1 hook state.
You know what was added in the meantime? Dying Light, which at the time, if you killed the obsession, you would reduce gen speeds by 25% for all remaining survivors. So not only do you cut survivor power down by 1/4th, you reduce individual power by 1/4th aswell, meaning if you just rushed out the obsession first thing in the game, you would effectively remove 1.75 survivors from the game. Add in the fact that old Tinkerer affected charge addons, and you have machine gun huntress and instarev Billy downing the obsession in less than a second, hook them and then mori them out of the game. Thanatophobia also affecting gens, meaning every injured survivor meant an even bigger decrease in speed. And you have a game where you can remove 2.5 survivors from the game with 2 perks, by rushing 1 kill and injuring the rest. This is one of the reasons why Thana no longer affects healing nowadays, because of some killers already giving a debuff on healing.
So yeah, killers have it rough right now, but that's simply because there are a lot of killer mechanics that are simply unfair gameplay. The same reason that survivors had it rough back then, because a lot of survivor mechanics used to be unfair gameplay.
-
@EvilJoshy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081767#Comment_2081767
I think the real issue is the devs haven't set a clear "what is a win and what is a loss". The pip system is an absolute joke if your killer. I've had matches where I hooked someone in the basement as trapper. People kept coming to me and stepping in my traps. I hooked everyone 3 times but my chaser was non existent because they didn't lead me on a chase. We're arguing over what's a win/loss in a broken system when we should be trying to fix it. Instead of trying to make a faulty machine work.
Even further proving my point that DBD is not a competitive game. You can act if it is, which is fine. But in the end, if your "win" condition causes you to derank, then it's not a defined wincondition.
All these problems disappear tho, when we simply follow the evidence and come to the conclusion of DBD being a party game, where winning doesnt really matter as long as people had fun. Which the pip system backs up aswell. Seems like all the frustrations about losing rank disappear once you realize the game was never a competitive one in the first place.
-
@EvilJoshy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081742#Comment_2081742
"Competitive games are those in which players play against one another and where one player winning means another player loses."
First thing that pops up when you google "Define competitive game". I don't know your definition of competitive but I think we have different ideas of what that is.
And you cannot even read the sentence you posted: "where one player winning means another player loses."
In DBD, there is no defined win condition. If you go off on post-game results, every single player can gain a pip, meaning EVERY SINGLE PLAYER WINS. In fact, there are cases where everyone can lose a pip, meaning every single player loses.
In DBD, one player winning does not cause their opponent to lose. Your own definition literally proves you wrong.
And yes, I am going by the pip system, because there is no other set wincondition. 4k being a win? Sure, but you can derank from rank 1 all the way to rank 9 even if you have a 100% killrate on the killers you play. 0k being a loss? Sure, but you can rank up all the way to rank 1 having 0 kills on your name. Since you actively derank, we can all agree that a 4k is not a defined win. That is just your personal win condition.
-
@EvilJoshy said:
There are 2 sides pitted against one another. That is the definition of competitive. It may not be "as" competitive as other games but it is.
No, that is opposition. Competition exists when 2 sides either have the same objectives to complete, or gain something from completing their objectives post-game. Dead By Daylight has neither, it is an oppositionary game.
-
@MrSmashem said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081240#Comment_2081240
Mario Party, outside of the mini-games, is almost completely RNG-based. When the victor is determined solely by RNG, that's when you can make the argument that a game is not truly competitive. The reality is that RNG does not determine the victor in DBD, skill does. If RNG lines up for Survivors, but they can't take advantage of it(I.E. skill), they lose.
And there is something that is competed over in DBD. The Killer is competing to kill, the Survivors are competing to survive. Their objectives arent the same, but they literally revolve around each other and are in direct opposition to one another. In order for the Killer to succeed at his objective, he has to directly interact with the Survivors and vice-versa(or rather, avoid interaction, which still involves playing against).
In baseball, one team is batting and running bases, the other is catching and trying to stop them. Is baseball not competitive because each team is responsible for a different objective? No, their objectives are intertwined and in direct opposition to each other.
You can try to spin it however you want to, but this is a competitive game.
"The reality is that RNG does not determine the victor in DBD, skill does. If RNG lines up for Survivors, but they can't take advantage of it(I.E. skill), they lose."
My point is assuming both sides to be capable. AKA both sides have a similar or equal skill level. In fact, in the majority of Mario Party games, they allows you to win based on skill if the others are lacking because winning all the minigames essentially allows you to win the game. My point is more that assuming both killer and survivors are equally skilled, RNG dictates the win. The difference is that often you dont realize it did because you were having fun along the way. But ever since I made this post, I have been playing purely looking at what the games have offered me and how players were playing, and you'd be surprised how often a 3k is made purely due to a lack of pallets/structures spawning in, and how often 3 people escape due to too many pallets/structures spawning in. Regardless of the skill on either side, people lose despite objectively being the better player, and people win despite being objectively worse.
"And there is something that is competed over in DBD. The Killer is competing to kill, the Survivors are competing to survive. "
And you are confusing opposition with competition. "The Killer is competing to kill" against other killers? "the Survivors are competing to survive" against other survivors? or against their teammates?
"Is baseball not competitive because each team is responsible for a different objective? No, their objectives are intertwined and in direct opposition to each other."
Except, that in baseball, YOU SWITCH SIDES, THEN COMPARE SCORES. So yes, their objectives are EXACTLY THE SAME.
-
@Mr_K said:
Sorry the game doesn't fit your narrow definition of winning and competition.
I guess the game was designed for killers and survivors to get along to escape. We've been playing wrong this whole time. Entity Displeased was the goal all along.
It's not narrow at all. It's literally THE definition of competition. You're simply pushing oppostion into competition.
Survivors and killers oppose each other, but they are not competing against each other. You do not get a higher killer rank for rushing your objective, in fact, you get punished for rushing your objective. As a survivor, you do not get a higher rank for rushing your objectives, you get punished for rushing. If the game were truly competitive, wouldnt you get rewarded for finishing your objective regardless of how you got to that state? Seriously, if the game were competitive, why is there no evidence of the game rewarding competition and even punishing people who get too competitive?
So no, just because YOU are competitive in a party game, doesnt make the party game competitive. Its an opposition, but the goal is to have fun.
-
@PotatoPlayer said:
The real competition is DbD vs other asymmetric 1v4s.
Without genre competition, I doubt DbD would be any sort of experimental outside of this formula.
There are some good competitions growing now tho, Monstrum 2 and Home Sweet Home: Survive are quite solid games. Monstrum 2 just needs to advertise itself better, but HSH:S has practically the same concept as DBD except different map mechanics.
DBD having a silver tongue and gaining access to licenses other horror genres would only dare to dream implement in their game is what keeps DBD ahead of competition.
-
@Mr_K said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2081600#Comment_2081600
The community is what makes a game competitive.
Objectively false:
Competition - noun - the activity or condition of STRIVING TO GAIN OR WIN SOMETHING by defeating or establishing superiority over others.
You do not gain something from the game by killing all survivors or rushing gens. You do not win something from the game by establishing superiority. This makes the game not competitive.
A third party competitive scene does not make the game competitive, it just makes that third party create a competitive scene where there is none. I never denounced tournaments nor did I say there is no competition anywhere in DBD.
But Dead By Daylight itself is not a competitive game. You do not prepare every single game as if you were to lose ELO. You do not prepare every single game as if you were to face someone who potentially has greater or equal skill. That fact alone proves DBD is not a competitive game.
Regardless of what the competitive players in DBD love to think, Dead By Daylight is not a competitive game. All evidence points away from competitions. There are no exclusive cosmetics you gain from being competitive. There is no increase in BP if you play competitive. There is no cash rewards if you play competitive. There is no ELO to gain or lose by playing competitive.
The only competition competitive players have, is amongst themselves, which they can explore in third-party tournaments, but not in the game itself.