Pulsar
Pulsar
About
- Username
- Pulsar
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@XtremeDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3865020#Comment_3865020
This would be the collective kill rates of all killer players yes? More than half of the games playerbase doesn't know how to play already. This the reason most people who do play consistently dc for what stats have to say, cus they're literally useless and don't represent their avg kill rate
Games with DC's are not counted.
The actual average Kill Rate in matches is likely MUCH higher because of that.
Like I said though, imagine the outrage if Killers only killed 40% of the time.
-
@XtremeDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3865016#Comment_3865016
Im just gonna awnser these aqap since you've been typing this up for half an hour.
Idk what backfilling is but 4 survs joining a lonby at the exact same time typically means; same ms, therefore same server, and very likely a team.
Friendly Competition can be gained from finishing a gen, not the equivalent of one, u can just duo for the last few seconds to proc it easily. Also efficiency penalty? Id have to say anything else to say, that has nothing to do with action boosts, just item effectiveness.
Quick gambit is 5% for 3 other people on 3 different gens, that is around a minute of time being saved. Also injuring a survivor is based on the killer you're playing and the perks in play. Finesse drama being very popular atm being a main cause for such long chases before first hit.
Wake up has a simple effect that is very powerful for saving time and giving hits. In a swf this perk is super useful.
Prove becomes especially prevalent when 2 gens are left like not even 3 minutes into the game. And its impossible to defend the gen and chase one of two doubling survs.
Adrenaline helps for getting a quick free heal and taking hits right away. Also i didn't mention before but ds and adren are a very popular combo in which either wa u can't avoid one. They'll just wait to pop the last gen or if they know you know, pop it instantly when the survivor is under a pallet and you've just lost all your pressure.
Also just for added context since u think im like a beginner or smth, i play comp dbd, i have thousands of hours. I know what is fair and whats not, thats the whole reason i get pissed off when i see this in pubs, its not fun for either sides anyway, so why do it? It'll die down when breaks over, but its still gonna be an annoying rare occurrence.
Friendly Competition is a measly 5% bonus for having two Survivors on the same gen. It's a bad perk, even if you don't need to do a whole gen. It is more efficient to have two Survivors on different gens. The efficiency bonus slows down generators when two or more Survivors are working on them, so I'd say it's pretty important.
Your math on QG is completely wrong. QG saves around 4.5 seconds, iirc. At most, that is giving the Survivor team a total of 13.5 seconds, which isn't significant and are FAR cry from this minute you keep raving about. Also, are your Survivors gen rushing by stacking up on gens or by splitting up? You can't seem to decide which is what you want to complain about.
Wake Up lets you open Gates 15% faster. Can't see how that lets you take hits or how it's any more useful to a SWF.
If you are losing three gens in 3 minutes, that's completely on you. Prove does essentially nothing in that scenario, as you are clearly outmatched.
Now you've expanded your complaint list again. Adrenaline is fine, like I said, but it's not something I would personally take. It's not guaranteed value. DS is completely fine, have you considered spreading pressure at all instead of tunnel-visioning on the person who wants to be chased?
I highly doubt that you play comp or have thousands of hours. Pretty much everything you've listed is a standard new-ish player complaint. Basically, seems like you're at the point where you've actually got to learn how to play as Killer and you've started to get opponents better than you.
I think you might've watched comp, but I doubt you've played in it. Thinking those perks are good and the reason for you losing, not knowing what gen efficiency is and the efficiency penalty are all giveaways.
Like I said though, I'm down to give you pointers
-
@XtremeDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3865013#Comment_3865013
Well i mean if it is thats a good thing since its kinda the whole premise of the game. And again, kill rates are very very irrelevant
I imagine we would be having a different discussion if it was revealed that the Kill Rates were 30%
-
Instead, how about this:
Faster bleedout if on the ground for 45+ seconds by holding a button.
Survivors have intangibility and invisibility off of the hook indefinitely until they progress the game in some manner. They are given a form of Incapacitated to prevent them from camping for saves.
Anti-Facecamp will now build up slightly faster at the beginning. I think the grace period is a little too long.
-
@XtremeDBD said:
Its pr obvious when theres a whole team of duplicate items, 4 people join an empty lobby at once. Also maybe you dk what friendly competition does, its only bad in solo queue, but coordinated to essentially get deja vu again for 70 seconds is actually pretty busted. All other perks i listed are also very strong idk what ur waffling abt half of them sucking. Obviously i know to just leave a chase and defend one of 4 actively progressed gens, not that its gonna do anything since they don't heal until end game and they're all running QG. And no as i said previously in the paragraph, none of these perks are in anyway weak. They all play a part in making the match faster and saving time to bomb rush a hook camp in end game. And wdym killers "kill enough"? Thats every game but these ones, idc abt individual kill rates, thats Irelevant information. lastly cus for some reason u had smth to say abt a personal preference the balance of doing a generator ties in heavily to the immersion. Its not realistic, but its also not fair.
That means literally nothing. They could've been backfilled into your lobby and you would've accused them of being a SWF. How dare they all join at the same time, ig?
I am well aware of what that perk does. It grants you a measly 5% bonus when you play EXTREMELY inefficiently by grouping up on a gen. You are realistically not getting 70 seconds of value. You are probably looking at 30 seconds. You are saving something like 3 seconds off of a gen. That's not even accounting for the efficiency penalty you incur by teaming up on a gen.
Quick Gambit is another measly 5%, and only when you are healthy. It's EXTREMELY easy to injure Survivors.
Deja Vu is fine, not great but it's okay.
Wake Up is #########. It's a perk that relies on you getting to the EndGame, which is hard enough, but it gives you zero value til then. It is objectively an extremely weak perk.
Prove is absolute garbage. It always has been, always will be. All it does is act as a scapegoat for people. Grouping up on gens is NEVER the more efficient option. You want to see gen rush? Have four people on four different gens.
Adrenaline is okay. It's not nearly as good as it used to be, but it's still fine.
I say this in the kindest way possible. You are managing to lose a game to people who have one health state, who are running bad perks, zero chase perks, no anti-tunnel or anti-slug, who are using resources inefficiently AND you think that's THEY are OP? I can give you tips, but I can't make you see the truth of the matter.
-
@XtremeDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3865007#Comment_3865007
What? Tell me im living in 2022 rn. Did bro just say dbd is killer sided? Surv is not unfun, but the perks killer scan run in unison is. Also you should be SWFing with people on comms, then you'll see how strong survivor really is. Its been and always will be the better faction.
Even four man high-mmr SWF's can't manage a 50% escape rate.
The game is Killer-sided. Whether or not that's a good thing is an opinion.
-
How do you know they are a four man?
Half of those perks are bad.
I don't know that most maps have enough pallets to pre-drop and win. Have you considered not chasing the person who obviously wishes to be chased?
Nerfing perks that are already bad or niche is a bad idea.
Deadlock isn't basekit because Killers already kill enough. Survivors shouldn't be able to get up after being cut down with a chainsaw, yet here we are, so much for immersion.
-
I'm going to say it.
Tunneling and slugging are unhealthy mechanics that are taken to extremes by portions of the playerbase.
There should be safeguards against these extremes.
-
@I_Cant_Loop said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863719#Comment_3863719
So are you going to check the political affiliations and viewpoints of the owners and employees of every single business that you ever patronize to make sure they don't hold any views that you find objectionable? That seems incredibly exhausting.
Do what you can where you can.
None of us can stop pollution. None of us can bring our own to zero, it's just not feasible in this modern world. Doesn't mean I can't do my best to do what I can when it is feasible.
Lucky for me, I don't need DBD. Ergo, it's feasible for me to not support them.
-
@Chilli_man2400 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863691#Comment_3863691
morals don’t keep the lights on
BHVR will choose money over morals they don’t care about your feelings. FNAF is a multi million dollar brand BHVR will not give up a deal this big cause of some personal donations
You have to have some kind of standard.
I had hoped BHVR standards would include protecting LGBTQ people from others who'd wish them harm, either by negligence, apathy or malice, but it seems that is not the case.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863804#Comment_3863804
I don't really think this is that big an issue tbh. FNAF jumpscares aren't just strobe light shows, and honestly it kinda annoys me how you say it can't be done right because of this when I see tons of concepts without this all the time.
My own personal idea was to express the notion of a Jumpscare through the gameplay mechanics, giving the FNAF killer stealth and Instadown abilities to create a Ghost face like playstyle where you stalk around undetected for surprise attacks. In my mind, a "Bite" M2 ability for Springtrap that functions as a short range lunge and Instadown attack would be a fun callback to the series most memorable moments and would be completely devoid of the issue you mention.
Yes, faithfulness to the source material is key, but the devs have absolutely not been afraid to rework, recontextualize, or scrap iconic abilities from killers if they think it isn't working gameplay wise. A good example would be Xeno's original wall run power and lack of Facehuggers/Chestbursters.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863835#Comment_3863835
I've seen this said a couple amount around the forums, and it kinda confuses me. Are you referring to the singular Slender Stabbing in 2014? Even I remembered that when it happened but I see lot of people describe it like multiple people died when there was actually only one girl who got seriously injured, and thankfully ended up making it in the end.
Yeah, my bad, I was pretty young at the time, but I remember it being all over the news.
Definitely fueled that whole "Video games cause violence" thing that was going on. After that point, that franchise didn't have a chance, too much bad press around it.
-
@JudgingYourMind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863802#Comment_3863802
you missed the point.
original six fnaf games (no, not including fnaf world) are horror, whether you like it or not.
Unlike new fnaf, that is directed at children, Scott wantet old fnaf to be represented in a good way, that's why he didn't choose fortnite for the collab (which is funny, because we have alien, evild dead, halloween and others there). Your entire complain is you not liking new media because it's new. in another 20, 30 years fnaf will have the same status as halloween or friday the 13th, again whether you like it or not. Also Chambers needs more recognition.I highly doubt it.
It'll probably be remembered like Slender, if Slender hadn't had those killings.
Also, yes, Chambers needs more love.
-
@DancewithmeKate said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863645#Comment_3863645
Thank you for explain but how FNAF will affect your DbD exp. Probably FNAF characters will be super popular first weeks but it will back to normal after that.
I further elaborated in the replies below your original question
-
@JudgingYourMind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863666#Comment_3863666
I am sorry, but if you think Psycho, Alien, The Thing, F13 etc. etc. are anywhere near something like strange case of dr jekyll and mr hyde, dracula, frankenstein or even something like Lovecraft's stories or Chamber's the repairer of reputation or the yellow sign, you're crazy.
There aren't any surveys conducted, but I think it's pretty obvious who they are marketing towards.
I'd say Alien and The Thing are up there.
I'd really like some good and faithful modern adaptations of those stories though, we could really use them.
-
@Sandt1985 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863706#Comment_3863706
Regarding Scott, i completely understand and fully agree. With that being said, Springtrap is still the undisputed most requested Killer in DBD history, with only Jason Voorhees standing a chance at being more requested, and even then, I still think Springtrap beats him. The overwhelming majority of DBD fans, including those in the LGBTQIA+ community, want Springtrap in the game. I'm guessing that Behavior weighed the pros and cons, and decided that the pros outweighed the cons by leaps and bounds.
Which is a sign to me that it's time for me to dip out of DBD, so to speak.
If BHVR is willing to throw LGBTQ+ people under the bus for more money, then I'm not interested in supporting them. I really should have seen this coming during the NFT debacle, but I had hope that it was an exec decision and not a reflection of the company as a whole.
-
@Sandt1985 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863691#Comment_3863691
Okay, NOW I feel like your having this argument in good faith. :-)
I have a feeling that you and I have differing opinions on what constitutes the meaning of what "children" are. I get the feeling that you think children are 12 and under, while i believe that children are tweens are two different demographics. SO I say we leave that differing opinion by the wayside, ad I doubt we'll come to an agreement there.
I wasn't trying to convey your disbelief. However, I can definitely understand how what I wrote can be interpreted as such, so I apologise for that. IT was quite snarky of me, and was uncalled for. However, I do stand by my statement that I still believe that FNAF is one of the best horror properties out there. However, I feel I need to draw a line where FNAF kinda stopped being one of the best horror properties out there. Everything from FNAF one to Pizzeria Simulator is mostly what I'm referring to, and is (more likely then not) what DBD's FNAF chapter will exclusively be based on. Now, while I still enjoy the FNAF franchise for what it as after Steel Wool took over, I'll be the first to admit that it simply doesnt compare to the horror and lore that the first 6 games gave us. Funnily enough, all the photos you posted to show that FNAF is marketed for kids were exclusively from the post Afton era of FNAF, after Pizzeria Simulator. So I ask you, in good faith, how well would your argument hold up during the day's of FNAF's prime, The Afton Era? I honestly believe that there likely can be some agreement somewhere between us on the subject of FNAF. With that said, i again contend that FNAF is not as great as it was during those dark grittier times, so no argument here on that part. I do, however, still get enjoyment in the post Afton Era games.
As for the political leanings of Scott………totally agree. Screw that guy.:)
Possibly. I think once you get to be in the mid-teens (able to get a job in the US and thereby have your own income), that you are official not a "child".
I still think that early game benefited from being accessible to kids whilst not being overly horror. However, it does have the benefit of not overtly marketing towards a younger audience. Its veneer is at least consistent with what people say.
As for the last point, you understand why I am so endlessly upset that BHVR, who has long championed LGBTQ+ causes even to their own detriment, has seemingly sold out to someone who shares the opposite view.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863666#Comment_3863666
This is actually why I'm disappointed. I have nothing against FNAF itself. My kids (9 and 7) are actually massive fans, and I have spent alot of money on merchandise for them (and most of the merchandising is marketed for children, not adults), and that there is the problem for me. My concern is that the license will attract kids to this game. And before anyone points out the game is 18+, we know that doesn't matter to alot of parents. I don't think a young and immature influx of players will benefit the game. Just my personal view. I also think most games, for the longest time, will be against Springtrap. And I think it will get old fast. In terms of player numbers, this license will be a windfall for BHVR. But I can't say I don't think it will be to the detriment of the game. At least for awhile.
Like I said, it's the ethical or moral side of it for me.
I already do not like DBD's monetization. However, we are all (should be) adults. FOMO sucks, and it's scummy, but at the very least it isn't being used against kids.
-
@Sandt1985 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863666#Comment_3863666
First off, is it for children, or is it for young teens? There are two very different marketing demographics. I ask because the post you made that I originally commented to said "FNAF is marketed towards children. Not upper teens or young adult, but genuine children." I'm willing to have this conversation in good faith, but only if you do the same.
Second, I never once implied that FNAF was on par with the all time juggernauts of horror. I only brought up said juggernauts to say that we as kids watched horror we weren't supposed to, and children of the modern age do the same.
Third, I'll respectfully request that you keep the insults to a minimum. (Crazy, huh?) Again, I'm having this conversation in good faith.
Fourth, I'm actually curious what point you were trying to make with the photos you posted? Something that looks kid friendly can still be used in a horror setting quite effectively. Childs Play, Annabelle, Gremlins, Children of the Corn, and any horror media based of clowns are great examples of this. I actually think this is what FNAF does best: Take something kid friendly and make it scary. Add in a touch of child murder, and BOOM, you have FNAF in a nutshell.
Finally, if FNAF isn't your cup of tea, more power to you. I'll admit that its an acquired taste. You don't have to like FNAF, and thats okay. But the majority of us do, and thats also okay. I wasn't a fan of Castlevania making its way into DBD, the fact that it did didn't make my life any worse by any stretch.Not sure what you mean there. I have been consistent. FNAF is not targeted towards upper teens or young adults, it is targeted towards children. Young teens and under.
"…as one of the best horror properties out there (Yeah, I said it, and its a hill I'll die on)"
It's an expression meant to convey my disbelief at the hill you are willing to die on.
Bright flashy hyper-stimulating colors aren't the usual market pattern for older audiences. They are almost always indicative of games geared towards the 9-13 range. This does not mean you can't enjoy those games if you are older. However, there is a STARK contrast of the original games design and the newer games design.
I have noticed this hasn't gone uncontested in the FNAF community, with many bemoaning the departure from a darker/gritty design and the attempt to endear itself towards a modern generation of children. I suspect we are not going to get anywhere unless Scott himself says something. It would be like arguing over Fortnite's marketing.
There is a difference between not liking something and objecting to it being included. I do not like the Resident Evil games; I've never enjoyed their gameplay. I have no objection to them, however.
This is because I do not feel the games are marketed towards children, and their direct creator did not donate money to people trying to erase LGBTQ+ people.
-
@H2H said:
I’ve previously proposed a shared hook state pool that would only take 12 hooks to kill all four survivors if the killer spreads out the hooks, but would take 19 hooks on a single person to tunnel them out. I think a period of intangibility after being unhooked would be fair too, as long as it has the conspicuous action restriction.
I would go as far as to add a version of the Incapacitated effect as well, so that no one can use the Intangible to go for a save.
-
@OrangeBear said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863664#Comment_3863664
He was not sorry at all, he made a reddit post explaining his decisions at the time of the controversy
Perhaps I am being too kind then
-
@Sandt1985 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863645#Comment_3863645
I mean, your entitled to your opinions and I respect that. However, in regards to FNAF being marketed to children, I'm going to push back on that. While yes, this game does have a large fanbase of children. the core series itself was NEVER marketed to that demographic specifically, and frankly, I'm kinda sick of that myth being pushed out there into the world. Similar to how must of us current DBD players grew up watching Jason Voorhees, Freddy Kruegar, and Michael Meyers, we loved them sure, but it was NEVER marketed to us when we were kids. IT was for adults exclusively, but that didnt stop use kids from loving it, and its the same with FNAF.
But lets ignore all of that for just a moment. I ask you to keep in mind that a great many of those FNAF kids who loved it as youngsters ten years ago are now FNAF adults, who still love it just as much as one of the best horror properties out there (Yeah, I said it, and its a hill I'll die on.) So even implying that the majority of FNAF fan are children isn't just factually incorrect. Its downright insulting
This is a game for children. It is marketed towards young teens.
I am sorry, but if you think that FNAF is anywhere near something like Psycho, Alien, The Thing etc. etc. or even something like Dead Space, early Resident Evil titles or Outlast, you're crazy.
There aren't any surveys conducted, but I think it's pretty obvious who they are marketing towards.
-
@dbd900bach said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863645#Comment_3863645
The foundation of Fnaf is child murder, but thats also not the point. Scott did make a donation, but he didn't make it because he was against the lgbtq. He made it because he supported the military views at the time, and never made a another similar donation after. I'm pretty sure he was unaware as well.
On your second point, there are plenty games and services that are way worse than Behavior. Roblox was certainly guilty of it and Fortnite is way way worse. Kids shouldn't even be playing Dead by Daylight, yet they still do. Behavior can't be blamed for whats exposed to kids on an 18+ not meant for them.
Maybe it wasn't once, but it certainly is now.
The game is for children.
Okay, so now the choices are that he's either woefully incompetent and somehow missed MASSIVE red flags in the people he was donating his money to (unlikely) or he just didn't care (possible). You can't claim ignorance in this day and in age and certainly not about the people he supported.
More likely, he's only sorry he got caught, which to be fair, is most people.
Your argument here is that…. there's others worse so it's okay? BHVR can't stop children, no, but they can also not directly market towards them either by bringing in a game that is almost exclusively marketed towards people 13 and under. The game isn't even F2P either, every Killer costs money and kids are gonna buy them. It's extremely predatory, imo.
-
I do think that DC penalities should be removed, but we'd need a lot more changes with it.
-
@DancewithmeKate said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863612#Comment_3863612
I asked you before but i did not see your reply because post removed i think.
Why you hate FNAF? I am not fan of this ip but i don't mind if they add it or not.
I don't enjoy the IP, I've always found it to be childish and woefully uncreative. It's taken horror backwards, imo. That's not really the issue though.
FNAF's license is owned by a man who donates money to people who, at the very least, are intent on silencing LGBTQ+ people's voices in our world. If BHVR are intent on supporting that sort of thing financially, I cannot in good conscience continue to support them.
Likewise, although moderately less immediately serious, FNAF is marketed towards children. Not upper teens or young adult, but genuine children. I don't support exposing children to the predatory pricing BHVR does. It's bad enough some skins are 20 USD, but when you're bringing in a whole bunch of kids as potential buyers? Yeah, not a fan.
-
@WolfyWood said:
It's cancellation.
Praise be
-
He could get a little time off of his reload and missed shot animation.
Make him 115% or reduce his TR.
That's probably what I'd do.
-
@Jay_Whyask said:
I'm really hoping they just give us original Freddy back.
BHVR's strategy of making an obvious mistake & then committing to it for years is mind numbingly upsetting.
The only issue Original Freddy had was the 50% gen repair slowdown while asleep. All they had to do was decrease that to make survs stop complaining.
Wouldn't mind keeping the teleport though.
Permanent wallhacks was also pretty bad, even on old maps.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
I just kinda stopped reading after the exaggeration of Overcharge and the complaints about tunneling.
The only way in which that patch was a failure is that it wasn't upheld. It brought amazing changes for the game. But basically every killer buff except for the very miniscule kick/attack cooldown speed buffs have been reverted. In essence, killers got crumbs, and survivors got crumbs taken away. Dead Hard, OTR, and all that still being meta kind of speaks for itself.
Pretty much the only reason the patch gets hated so much is because killers got lots of buffs and survivors got lots of nerfs. But like I said, it's all been reversed pretty much. So it's very petty that, to this day, people call it the patch that killed the game/made it killer sided. Notice how the survivors who knew how to play were barely affected, and didn't complain.
There's a certain kind of tension that two people create towards one another, where they misinterpreted one comment or multiple comments, or heard secondhand that the person said something about them, and that kind of sits in their minds, feeds confirmation bias, feeds paranoia, until finally they have an almost religious-level belief in the idea that this person hates them, or should be a target of reciprocal hate. I think a majority of players have done the same thing in this game, except instead of a person they've set their sights on the killer role, people who play the role effectively, and anything that makes that role/those players stronger. If you look at the facts, and the bigger picture, killers really aren't that powerful, and haven't had much in the way of buffs. The power difference between them and survivors, when both sides play effectively, and the difference in power between each's buffs as well, are worlds apart.
Wasn't the overall KR 60%, even at high MMR?
I really do question if you play the same game as the rest of the community because the game you describe sounds miserable constantly for you.
-
Yeah, the game got markedly less enjoyable and far more competitive as a result.
Game went from being reasonably balanced to Killer-sided quick lol
-
You know, you used to be able to 99 hooks, iirc.
-
@Portalvision said:
Why not give everyone here who provided tons of feedback and participations Auric Cell rewards? This just shows favoritsm.
Have you all forgotten about the largest topic @Pulsar has ever created or are you still going to ignore the biggest feedback given in the history of DbD? Your optimizations are lacking for years and counting.
These fake love letters pisses me off more than anything.
I'm surprised more than a handful remember that.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
So it's Bah Humbug to every forum member besides 3 people. Cool thanks.
It's nice they started doing something at all, we really aren't important in the grand scheme of DBD
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859265#Comment_3859265
It would be a cute anniversary event or something, but…I dunno about modern killers.
Dracula is strong. Sadako? Post nerfs Chucky? Trickster?
Maybe like a remastered version of older maps with the classic lighting.
I think new maps are a mixed bag. Borgo is still fairly strong for survivor I find. Ditto Toba. Nostromo is a mess - it feels huge and mazey but tiles are mediocre. Vecna's map is just ick for everyone. Reworked Midwich feels okay. Eyrie is an abomination for killer but it's better than it was (old Eyrie was one of the most miserable maps ever made). Haddonfield is very killer sided…mostly, but GoJ still has a defacto infinite possible with that one god window in main where you can always break LOS. Greenville…I still don't know but I get absolutely pantsed there as killer sometimes. Ditto the new MD.
Sadako teleports and plays a pressure game with Condemn.
Chucky has more issues than maps right now. He got dunked on for some reason.
Trickster is insanely lethal in open spaces and low walls. If you play on certain maps with him, you just die.
Almost every map you listed is straight up cheeks
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859252#Comment_3859252
Why?
Like…a remastered retro version as an event would be fine, but you'd have to revert so many things to that era otherwise the balance is super borked now.
Why?
I want to try it. I think it'd help the current version of the game a lot. Plenty of modern Killers can keep up, like Dracula or Houndmaster, for example.
Many older Killers already played on those maps and did fine. Like, old Fractured Cowshed? Probably something we're gonna want to adjust a bit still, but old MacMillan or old Aazarov's Realms? They'll still play fine outside of fixing bugs.
The new maps and tiles are just straight up garbage. I don't even think they can get fixed due to how small most maps are. Having better loops with more/better pallets just raises the density and hurts Killers exponentially.
-
@SasakIN said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859252#Comment_3859252
I don't think bhvr wants to enlarge the maps again. What they should do is fix the map generation and make better loops for survivors. Fix totem spawns, hook spawns, props, w.e. because I just had a rock in Yamaoka block an entire loop or a tree blocking entrance to killer shack in forgotten ruins.
Besides m1 or slow killers struggled a lot on big maps.
If you give Survivors better loops on smaller maps though, you end up with high density of loops.
Larger maps means you can keep the dead areas and the good loops, but you don't have to have the high pallet density.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
It's terribly survivor sided. Too big, too many strong pallets, that underground area is bound to waste tons of time when a survivor you really need to get runs there, dumb breakable wall and near-god window at main, and there's way too many spots where you can just see the killer coming from miles away and get a 20-second lead on him every time.
What do you think about new Haddonfield, out of curiosity? Is it still as Survivor-sided as the old map was?
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859165#Comment_3859165
It was still an absolutely ridiculous loop.
It was, but I think a lot of the post-Nemesis Killers can handle what the old maps have just fine.
-
@SasakIN said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859131#Comment_3859131
2019 was a whole different ball game where you had dead hard for distance and so much more broken and unbalanced stuff. I think you could outright facecamp a survivor as bubba and still have corrupt intervention online at first down. That time was a mess.
Which is why I did not say, "Hey, let's just revert DBD to 2019" what I did say was, "Hey, we should try the maps from 2019 with some common-sense fixes"
-
@joel84 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859212#Comment_3859212
I have to agree with you. Who likes to lose? Nobody does. I'm just saying that anti-perks have a right to exist and deserve to be used.
They can be used and do deserve to be a bit better than they currently are.
However, designing a meta in which slugging is so prevalent that people feel like they need to use the perk isn't a great idea, because slugging is such an unpleasant way to have a match go as a Survivor.
Ultimately, even if you did bring the best anti-slug perk, Unbreakable, you can only use it once.
-
@joel84 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859148#Comment_3859148
"""Change my mind' is generally shorthand for 'I feel like arguing for the sake of arguing"""
That's a terrible argument and I reject it. This is not about whether I am right or wrong !
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859131#Comment_3859131
""People do not play DBD to be on the floor for 4 minutes, just like they don't play DBD to be blinded or stunned for a whole game""
What kind of stupid comparison is that? One has nothing to do with the other.
"""As Survivor you NEED"""
"""As Killer you NEED"""
No, just no. You don't need anything: play the way you want to, not how other ppl want.
….and don't tell me about MMR or players who play to win. They can't see their own numbers, and I find it amusing how much some players sweat just to look good on the internet. They do it for their ego, that's all. Wins and losses mean nothing in DBD. It would be different if there was a leaderboard. But that's another topic.
Anti-slug and Anti-tunnel perks are there. Not just for fun, they have a purpose.
""The game is meant to be fun for both sides, not just whatever side you happen to play"""
simply not true. Thats not the Design of DBD.
Do you seriously believe that if I, as a murderer, hit someone on the ground, the other person will enjoy it?
Do you seriously believe that if I, as a survivor, hit the murderer on the head with a pallet, the murderer will enjoy it?
I don't think so. Both parties have fun in general, but when it comes to the details, only one side has fun.
It is a comparison of fun. Killers do not enjoy being blinded or stunned the entire game. Survivors do not enjoy being on the ground the entire game. They are both unpleasant experiences that make the player question why they queued up to play. Hopefully that clears it up for you.
I would almost agree, except that in DBD, your opponent often dictates how much fun you have. As a Killer, if you play into a big time "bully" team, you probably aren't going to have fun. As a Survivor, if you play against a Knockout slugging Billy, probably not gonna have a good time.
People will always play to win, because winning is usually fun in DBD, but losing is almost always unpleasant due to the snowball nature of the game. There is rarely a close loss and more often than not, a blowout.
I have no idea what the last point means. There is an ebb and flow to gameplay, that's what makes the game competitive. There is fun in a challenge, else people probably wouldn't play Soulsborne games. There is enjoyment to be found in overcoming adversity.
-
@joel84 said:
So anti-tunnel and anti-slug perks are there for fun and as a gimmick, have I got that right?
Who are you responding to
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859150#Comment_3859150
Haddonfield HOP was an actual infinite against 110 killers (and near as dammit against some others). I'd have to find the video, but…I think it was Ayrun did a demonstration of it. You could break LOS long enough against 110 killers to drop chase so they'd never get bloodlust and there's that one of Otzdarva on Nemesis getting run there for about 5 bloody minutes - it's in his win streak video.
Yeah I see what you mean and there's a good reason those don't stack, as it would turn the unhooked survivor into an unstoppable body blocking monster.
Change basekit BT to just be intangibility for eight seconds or so.
The only reason that happened was due to Claudette popping a Styptic, which used to be longer AND because Otz messed up and didn't bait out DH.
He also completely dominated the game until that point.
-
@Equinox_One said:
'Change my mind' is generally shorthand for 'I feel like arguing for the sake of arguing'.
The problem is that there is an impasse at present. Survivors can do some really gross things on losing games to stall it out forever. The only way to 100% stop a duo who wants to play hide and seek for 20 minutes to be BM, or to try and force the killer to DC is to slug camp. It would be wonderful if it wasn't needed.
On the other hand, anti-slug perks are pretty universally bad. You've got a one use recovery, you've got a situational boon and I think that's about it.
Perks should not be a bandaid for problems like this.
Slugging is on the radar but it's a hard problem to fix. I wish hide and seek was, even if it's only fixing the idiotic number of ways you can bypass AFK crows.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859131#Comment_3859131
DH is not an anti-tunnel perk though. It's just an exhaustion tool, like Lithe.
Honestly, the only universally effective anti tunnel perk is your teammates spreading hook states.
Maps from 2019…no. Just no. Actual infinites, at least one or two spots on each map where survivors could glitch into doodads or terrain to be unhittable or impossible to pick up.
Maps in 2019 did not have actual infinites, as someone who played them extensively. They had god loops, yes, but not real infinites. You'll also notice I said, "With some common-sense adjustments, of course".
DH is a perk that allows you to take an extra health state after being unhooked, it is most often used as an anti-tunnel perk, in my experience. Regardless, BT and OTR do not stack, despite both of them being anti-tunnel. Hell, even the basekit BT doesn't stack and will eat any use of DH or OTR.
The only true anti-tunnel is your teammates doing gens so fast that it doesn't matter.
-
People do not play DBD to be on the floor for 4 minutes, just like they don't play DBD to be blinded or stunned for a whole game.
The game is meant to be fun for both sides, not just whatever side you happen to play. It doesn't take a genius to understand why being on the ground for so long might not be the ideal DBD experience.
Likewise, I think people don't want to bring anti-slug perks because they already feel they need to bring certain perks already. It's one of my greatest issues with DBD, which is that through the elimination of variability in both Killers, maps and RNG; the game has forced players to take certain types of perks.
As a Survivor, you NEED to have anti-tunnel perks else you're liable to be removed from the match, but a lot of these perks have negative synergy, ie, you cannot use OTR and DH. You also need a chase perk to help with some of the more oppressive Killer powers, since maps cannot be relied on anymore. You'll also likely need an information perk, either to keep tabs on the Killer or your teammates. That leaves you ONE perk slot of your own choosing, which you are now saying Survivors must give up in order to counter slugging.
As a Killer, you NEED to bring at least one gen regression perk. These perks, unlike anti-tunnel, usually have synergy together, which leads to them being stacked. Most Killers do not need chase perks anymore, due to maps being FAR weaker than they used to be and FAR FAR smaller. Information, however, is still useful; but as I said earlier, with maps being smaller, information is less valuable. Still, Killers usually end up with just two perk slots free in order to have a good experience.
That is less than ideal. I would be interested to see how many of the current Killers play on maps from say, 2019, with some common-sense adjustments, of course.
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859062#Comment_3859062
Yes, but this is a case of raw statistics being misleading. I think Otz explained this in detail, but from how I understood it, the way the game is built creates an inflated kill rate when you factor in that 4o is way rarer than 1k, the game is really snowbally and there is an incredibly high rate of quitting on one side but not the other.
Just blueskying, but I'd guess a 55% kill rate against high MMR SWFs translates to something very close to 50%, factoring in the prevalence of 25% kill rate even in losing games (1k).
i'd argue that 1K's are even less likely in 4-man games due to Altruism.
-
Her gameplay at pallets seems to horrific.
She doesn't seem to be slowed when pulling out her whistle, meaning she creates lose-lose scenario's at pallets, unless you hyper pre-drop, which isn't very fun for either side, imo
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858997#Comment_3858997
Please stop trying to shoehorn stats into your arguments like that. The game mechanics are not in killer's favor specifically because overall statistics put them in a higher than 50% win ratio. That does not apply to individual players or any kind of precise measure on how much or little skill variables affect that outcome. Part of why some bad killers have high kill ratios is because they are only really played by specialists, not because those killers are OP.
the 60/40 thing is not saying you will survive 40% of your matches, nor is it saying any killer "wins majority of games by default." You are trying to dilute as many variables as you can to try to weaponize a statistic. Rather than actually basing arguments around the amount of said variables, you're trying to use outcome bias to try to rewrite people's experiences.
Yes, killers overall are more likely to win than lose. How that statistic is weighted by skill matchups/builds/maps/swf/killer viability/survivors going next/etc is something that always comes along with such broad statements.
Edit: Its wild to me how this community in particular has so many people who try to force this mistake. In many fighting games you can almost always be at a 60/40 split or worse (Some can go as low as 80/20) and people still soldier through those matches.
Actually, High MMR 4-man SWF stats show they aren't even escaping 50% of the time.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858726#Comment_3858726
What exactly is DBD oh wise one? 😂🤣
Not FNAF, RE or ST
Once the novelty factor wears off, those people usually just dip out
-
@BuffHoundmaster said:
The playercount skyrockets when FNAF arrives.
And will likely return to around 35K when people realize what DBD is