RainehDaze
RainehDaze
About
- Username
- RainehDaze
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,539
- Last Active
Comments
-
Spine Chill, honestly. Like most Survivor perks, you can't remotely tell it's there except by inference, it minutely screws up timing, and ruins all stealth play. "Walk sideways at your destination" is a dumb counterplay.
-
@Voodoo_Thirsty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2827082#Comment_2827082
That's an absolutely terrible logic.
If 99.9% of the population use the word "greedy" as a means to gain selfish advantage in any cost, it's never wrong to point out that the word should be used for its intended purpose. Just because the remaining 0.1% of the DBD community uses it uniquely doesn't give them a pass for using the wrong term that means something completely different.
It's like calling you, RainehDaze, a piece of s but sugarcoating it as "oh, I don't mean it as a bad thing". It logically doesn't make any sense. Following your logic, everybody should respect what word we say and how we mean it since it's what the speaker "intends" to say right?
Well in that case... Everyone is gutter trash that deserves to rot in the deepest part of hell with all your parents and children along with you. Oh! But don't take it literally, I meant it in a good way! You see how weird it sounds?
It's not terrible logic, it's how English works and how things get added to the dictionary in the first place. If enough people within a group use a word to mean something, then that's an acceptable use of the word, and no matter how much people will insist that it shouldn't be used this way. And enough DBD streamers and players will use greed to stand in for risk-taking that it's an understood term within the DBD player base. Will it spread to other games? Did it start in another game? I don't know or really care, but it is what it is.
The point I'm making is that this is a change that has already happened, there's no point fighting it to try and stop linguistic drift. It's going to happen no matter how insistent you are that it's the wrong use of the word. That's what they meant, enough players know what it means that it's not exactly uncommon, if someone says you made a greedy play or whatever in future you know what they mean.
-
@Voodoo_Thirsty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826574#Comment_2826574
Any language is descriptive in that manner. The word "gay" meant "joyful and happy" before and now it means something completely different.
But in this case, you're literally changing the meaning of the word, not adding a definition which mean the people who're using it are using it wrong.
And like you said, if "overly risky plays & lack of caution" is the main context for using the word "greedy" then you're better off with words such as "reckless" which literally means the very context.
So instead of using the wrong terminology over and over again, why don't you start using the correct word that was made for situations like this? Saves all of us time and our last two brain cells we have left.
I'm not using any words, I'm just pointing out how other people are already using them, and you're not going to get anywhere by railing against inaccurate terminology.
Literally your entire thread is based around this idea that we need to use the dictionary definition of greed and if we do then you can't have been greedy, so look at how this doesn't make sense.
Or we can use the weird colloquial DBD meaning, which means the Killer's kind of a jerk but there's nothing confusing going on.
-
@Voodoo_Thirsty said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2826446#Comment_2826446
You see, I think people are using the word wrong or don't know the actual meaning behind the word itself.
I think the word they're looking for is "reckless" or smth along the lines on that, but definitely not "greedy". Unless I was farming BP, an altruistic save isn't "greedy" as there's nothing going for me personally.
I use WGLF for protection hits, cuz if I'm going to play altruistically anyway might as well get some BP out of it. But my main priority is not to farm, it's to play like an actual team. That's why I never use selfish perks like Dead Hard or Decisive Strike, perks that revolve around me and my playstyle.
Sorry, English is descriptive, not prescriptive. If DBD players use greedy to mean making overly-risky plays for an extra pallet or an extra save or finishing a gen, then that's a valid meaning. :T
-
TL;DR: "greed" is going for something more than the safe option.
Yes, altruism can be greedy, in that definition, if you go for a risky save rather than just leaving.
-
@Nathan13 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2823863#Comment_2823863
“OP medkit” why don’t we just get rid of every single survivor item?? Are survivors not allowed to have items??
Bubba says no.
-
@Munqaxus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2824133#Comment_2824133
Yes, I have played Blight myself and yes, he's easy. Billy is one of my mains and Nurse is so difficult to learn, that I understand why she's allowed to be one of the top killers. I tried her for a while and just got fed up. So believe me when I say that comparing Blight to Billy and Nurse, there's absolutely no competition on how easy Blight is.
I also noticed you mentioned Billy and Plague, both killers I main, and they definitely don't punish dead zones as much as Blight, because their micro is harder. Blight, I just run into a wall or tree or barrel or rock and I'm going to hit you. With Billy, it's extremely difficult, when compared to Blight, to hit someone in a dead-zone, just because his hit box is smaller and he has less control of his chainsaw sprint. Blight's sprint doesn't zig-zag like crazy when he activates it.
Plague, you slow down when you projectile vomit and a survivor zig-zagging is very effective against her projectile vomit at any amount of distance that is more than 5 to 8 meters out. Plus you have to be on target for a while before survivors get the broken status from her vomit. Again, Blight's hit box is crazy big compared to Plague.
I've not a novice with Huntress either and even though her hit-boxes are as big as Blight, she still has to charge up her hatchet and makes a groaning sound when she does it and slows down. Blight never slows down. I would be hard-pressed to say Huntress is easier to use than Blight on Dead-Zones.
"It has to be hard to play to be allowed to be good" is a ridiculous sentiment, though.
-
@TotemSeeker91 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2819174#Comment_2819174
Yeah but if you're gonna tunnel one guy out, might as well tunnel the rest out
Eh, but why? There's no need. And at that point, may as well avoid BT/DS.
-
@TotemSeeker91 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2818952#Comment_2818952
Great, so that's BS for that one survivor
Sucks to be that one guy, but it makes way more sense to do it that way. Total survivor actions are cut by 25%, hooking someone else means that you can get EVERYONE off gens (someone needs to unhook and you chase the third). It gives the Killer the opportunity to take control and thus win.
Spreading hooks around on a full team without some way to pressure multiple people at once is a really bad idea.
-
How do you have so many line breaks in every post? It's mind-boggling.
-
@SleepyWillo said:
If they made hooks work like pyramid head cages you could effectively delete DS and BT and it shouldn't matter...
Would love to see a good shake up but don't think I'll see it in my lifetime.
That, every time it comes up, is a garbage suggestion that forgets that Killers need to be near hooks when they happen to have any kind of pressure. Not every unhook being risk-free and perfectly safe.
-
@landromat said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2818138#Comment_2818138
Literally what was made to deathslinger. He was changed so people can react with ping in mind. As i said Deathslinger still needs more love but it was the right change
Deathslinger was because people were complaining about not being able to react even with good ping. There is zero precedence for going around kneecapping every Killer so Survivors with bad ping can dodge them.
Not least because, as was pointed out in your other thread on the topic, Survivors aren't meant to be able to dodge everything a Killer does. The game falls apart if you assume indefinite 1v1's are acceptable.
-
The problem is that you want to make everyone else's experience worse to accommodate your connection.
-
You're going to have to be more precise than "nuke". That could mean anything.
-
Carpentry Simulator 2020!
Or whenever it was reworked.
-
@ukenicky said:
Just don't pay any mind to the doom posters. Only time will truly tell us where the Onryō lies on the overall tier list / how she plays out.
I personally can't wait to play as her and use jump scare / stealth builds to just, have fun. I wish more people played to have fun and didn't mald over the fact that they aren't getting an easy 4k every single match. It's really sad because it's looking to be a really amazing chapter but all everyone cares about is overall viability in the competitive atmosphere.
Because people aren't thinking about 4k's, they're thinking about getting stuck in a loop of 1-2 hook games and then playing against total potatoes where winning is boring.
-
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2816178#Comment_2816178
Far more goes into the equation than merely the cost to run the game locally on a computer, but that is an important factor too. Computer games don’t just puff out of thin air as I’m sure you’re aware :)
Alright. So you’re willing to overlook the supposed environmental damage so long as the damaging factors provide entertainment. That’s fair enough. I wouldn’t exactly call you a crusader for environmental causes if you’re willing to overlook 600,000,000 kg CO2 emissions from just one video game, all because people get enjoyment out of it, which is why I find it interesting that you seem to be so opposed to NFTs, which while providing less value, also generate significantly less emissions.
Could it be that you just don’t like NFTs? There’s no need to use the environment as a Trojan horse to justify your likes/dislikes. I see many people here doing that and it’s disingenuous.
NFTs provide entertainment to many people too, and whether you like them or not, they do provide value. This is why it’s subjective. When it comes to this topic, you value your values more than the values of others, and that’s human nature for many people and I won’t hold it against you, but your argument is not consistent with an argument of environmental concern, but more so “the ends justify the means.”
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2816190#Comment_2816190
My argument does not concern hypotheticals. I find it ironic that my real-world numbers based argument of total CO2 emissions in a discussion regarding CO2 emissions is being framed as “silly” and “hollow,” yet the nonsensical hypothetical fantasy of “but if every gamer made their own NFTs it would be even worse” is somehow being framed as valid.
I’m sensing some straw clutching.
NFTs are literally just an overly complicated way to say "you totally own this digital asset", except in no way preventing them from being copied endlessly. They're an expensive, wasteful scam.
They do not provide anything novel and if they were all removed from the world immediately, we would lose out on absolutely zero content. Nothing they're used for needs them. Ergo, they're 100% waste, completely without value, unless you really think the ability to fleece gullible morons out of money is somehow a valuable contribution.
-
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2816147#Comment_2816147
So you’re saying that basing an argument about total CO2 emissions on total CO2 emissions is silly?
That’s an interesting take.
I don't think anyone else has said total CO2 emissions, only relative CO2 emissions. Ergo, they're saying "basing an argument about relative CO2 emissions on total CO2 emissions is silly", which it is. Because the only argument that applies there is "why are we worrying about this thing since it's still small", which inevitably runs into "people are trying to make it common so we'd rather nip it in the bud now".
-
@tester said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2816092#Comment_2816092
Your best argument is a logical fallacy?
My argument is the simple one that tier lists aren't constructed around the entire scale of a game, they're constructed around what's meta and assume competent play.
In an RTS, a strategy with a particular faction might be incredibly powerful at lower MMR, but it could be easily countered by a more skilled player, and otherwise lack the tools to win once that strategy is negated. Therefore, people will rightfully say that this faction is low-tier, because of its poor performance in competitive play.
Or in a fighting game, it might be reaaaally easy to spam one attack at low play, and if you don't know how to counter it well, you get stunlocked and lose. But if that move sets you up to lose badly once countered, overreliance on it would still make it a low-tier character.
Taking the kill rate across the entire playerbase would be the same as saying the above two examples are high tier purely because they beat new players that don't know how to counter them. But that's not what tier lists are made around or how competitive games are balanced, so it's ridiculous to introduce it here and claim that a character is high tier because of the overall kill rates.
Pulling out (incorrect) links to fallacies is lazy.
-
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2816012#Comment_2816012
Well as I said earlier, one game (a mere120 hours playtime) of Minecraft is roughly equivalent to putting 3 vehicles on the road, however we are talking about the supposed environmental impact of the gaming industry vs the NFT industry, therefore the only important data point is the total CO2 emissions, which are significantly higher for the gaming industry.
There are over 2.5 billion gamers globally. In the US alone, it’s estimated that gamers and their luxury products consume 34 terawatt-hours of energy per year, equivalent to around 5 million cars on the road.
Can you really justify that?
The value/bad faith argument just seems like a cop out to me. I thought the concern was the environmental impact? Video games are a luxury and the value of luxury items/services are subjective. I could see the value argument holding some kind of weight if playing Minecraft was a necessity, but it’s just a video game.
I'm really curious where you're pulling your numbers from. 120 hours of MC = 3 vehicles? A PC is ~1 kilowatt at the absolute most and many people don't have computers anywhere near that powerful (nor are they under 100% load even if they are). So, 120kwh for playing locally. Most servers only have a few cores of a CPU dedicated to them, if they're even online all the time, and then you need to split the load between everyone playing on it (and account for low CPU utilisation if everyone's offline etc.)
And yes, you can indeed justify that. There is value gained from it, which is the enjoyment of the people involved. You can denigrate anything by pointing out that it's an unnecessary luxury; that's a total cop-out. If you took games away, then the environment might be better, but the human experience would be worse. Sure, it's subjective but that doesn't mean it's invalid, it's objective to state that people are getting enjoyment from this. Plus the economic effects etc.
NFTs don't add anything. They're literally an inherently inefficient pyramid scheme that offer literally nothing new, nor the ability to make anything new that we couldn't do beforehand. It's taking every form of art in existence and then saying "what if we added a layer that does nothing but consume extra electricity so we can pretend that these things are scarce and sell them one by one, and require further energy for every future transaction that would otherwise not be used".
They're inherently just waste except for the scammers behind them.
-
@tester said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2816019#Comment_2816019
"people who don't know how to deal with them" - you know it's not true, but good attempt at pushing your narrative. It's based on all people playing DBD, not just those who don't know how to deal with killers.
No, I mean who in their right mind would construct a tier list based on overall kill rates and therefore include all the people who don't know how to play against a particular Killer? That's utterly incompetent. Because, as I said, this runs into the problem of being meaningless for anyone who gets reasonably good at it.
Tier lists are generally made with above-average play in mind, just because that actually tells you something useful.
-
@tester said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2814512#Comment_2814512
For average player Artist is better than Nurse and Pinhead is S tier. He was obviously not talking about exceptional Nurse players who have 5k hours playing just her. For most players Artist would be better than Nurse. Look at official stats from devs. Notice that Cenobite is at the very top?
Who the ######### ranks Killers based on their ability to kill people who don't know how to deal with them? That's the most useless ranking system in existence. "If you play this Killer a lot, and get good with them, this is how they won't perform because you'll be against players who do know! :)"
That'd be like ranking Survivor perks based on how good they are if you don't know how to use them.
-
@El_Gingero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2815981#Comment_2815981
That’s your interpretation and you’re welcome to it.
My point is more the hypocrisy. The environmental impact of the NFT industry pales in comparison to the gaming industry, so I find it ironic when gamers get up in arms about NFTs.
Because the aim of other servers and people playing games is to not make the software run in the most complicated, inefficient manner as possible entirely for its own sake. What you're completely ignoring is the environmental impact per person and per instance of the object in question. NFT's, and crypto in general, are utter garbage about this: they take huge amounts of power and energy to do very little, entirely so a small group of people can crow about how this virtual token is totally worth a lot, or this link says they "own" this PNG even if everyone and their mother has copied it to annoy them.
Seeing as crypto mining has actually caused issues with increases in energy prices, intermittently buggers over the entire GPU industry, and in general wastes power, getting up in arms at the environmental impact of NFTs before they reach the same stage is entirely reasonable!
This is, of course, before we get to the other objections, in that NFTs don't actually add anything of value to the world except for a way for a small group of people to sell the same thing multiple times and create artificial scarcity (which, of course, is the most [BAD WORD] ridiculous use of large amounts of energy in existence) even though it's an infinitely dirt-cheap replicable digital file, and the large amount of people who're actually just stealing other people's art to sell this way. The entire concept is mired in bad faith and environmental wastefulness, and nothing comes of it except a few people get links saying they "own" something. Wow.
-
It's fine for Killers to be weak, it's not fine for the game's definition of weak to be "intended playstyle can be almost entirely negated by the right perks and an inkling of common sense".
It's not fine for powersets to have such glaring issues you're at risk of spending more time playing M1 killer without much power usage.
-
Scourge Hook RNG needs to be a bit less potato--there's already risk in carrying someone to a more distant hook (and taking the time to do so), you don't need perks that can do nothing because the bulk of the game happened to take place on the wrong side of the map. Also, Pinhead's is pretty mediocre.
Boons still need some sort of actual counterplay or to take into account highly vertical maps. And CoH still needs changes.
-
@JonahsTablet said:
My integrated GPU would appreciate this a lot. Seriously though, I hope Behavior really lessens the GPU intensity of this game, Graphics Cards are insanely expensive at the moment and I can't afford to buy a dedicated one.
... the minimum spec is a 12 year old midrange card. There's not really any further down to go without penalising everyone else.
-
It's overhyped, not scary†, the only character that has wider awareness from it isn't the thing people keep proposing, and has [BAD WORD] all to turn into a power. Just for reasons that it could easily not be.
† No, I don't consider jumpscares as counting, and all the stuff that fits in with the whole gore and violence thing is relegated to second-hand background info.
-
There's a lot of things like this which really need to be revisited but probably won't.
For instance, the way Prove Thyself and gens work is backwards: the perkless state should encourage working on one gen for efficiency, because that makes the risky behaviour (clump up) more rewarding (faster gens). Instead, the safe behaviour (split up) makes for the fastest progress.
-
Soma's just way too depressing.
-
Your enter key broken, mate?
-
@fogdonkey said:
Not sure why are people upset about BT. If you don't hit the unhooked person you don't even notice BT. If you hit the unhooked person, they will have to waste 12 seconds mending.
Maybe the mending could be increased slightly but it has various implications for various killers and their add-ons.
Bodyblocking letting people get away with unsafe hooks, presumably.
-
@Yatol said:
you can just buy the skin, how is a "prestige" going to change anything?
Blood.
-
The other thing about the hitboxes is that they need to be spherical and janky, because survivors lean over etc. when they're injured but the hitbox doesn't change (so they don't start going through or colliding with bits of scenery they shouldn't). If the hitbox was ovoid like the hatchets look, then a square hit on an injured Survivor's head would miss, which isn't good. Consequently, hatchets have round hitboxes--so even if they're a bit behind a Survivor, they'll hit.
This is compounded by latency (i.e., the "I'm further ahead on my screen than on the Killer's" part), so that what looks like a clear miss on the Survivor screen is actually a hit on the Killer end.
Official dev explanation has pictures to illustrate all this, IIRC.
-
@Tr1nity said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2787509#Comment_2787509
The number ten is 1010 in binary
Starting from the left, give each an exponent, ultimately going to 0 on the last.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/Y8X9QAXWCRL6/image.jpg
In the instance of 1010 it looks like this.
Next, multiply each number by 2, then apply the exponent, if the number is 0, ignore it
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/ZKCBGXG8ZSEV/image.jpg
2^3 = 8
2^1 = 2
8+2=10
at least that’s how I’m able to comprehend it.
Powers of 2 are easy enough to remember/extrapolate that I wind up doing it that way, i.e. 1010 is 8+2. Or if you're writing out along the top, 8, 4, 2, 1 (working from right to left). Same thing, just rearranging the steps to convert. Then at some point I just memorised it for the values liable to be converted by hand.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
If killer can see you have this perk, still garbage. At least, it is not abusable anymore.
But why killer is seeing you have this perk, i never understand.
Consistency? If a perk is affecting you (on either side), you tend to get to see it somehow. Though for Killers this is mostly Boil Over and DS.
-
@Laluzi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2787525#Comment_2787525
Ah, right. I spent a comparatively large amount of time working with assembly, so I got in the habit of using all space available unless there was a pressing need for it to be otherwise.
Bit of a derp moment on my part. I'm enough of a Civ fan to know what happens when you let the underflow roll over. :P
Our words are backed with NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
-
@Laluzi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2787315#Comment_2787315
...Wait, bloodpoints can go negative?
Is this some kind of error safety net? Or is this a clever scheme to put me in DBD debt after I fail to pay my bloodpoint loans?
Unless you really, really need to use an unsigned integer for some reason (e.g. in old 8-bit games for space saving! 7 bits can only got to 128, so if you wanted a higher max than that), a signed integer means that if something slips through and it goes below 0, it just goes below 0.
As opposed to rolling over to the highest applicable value, which would in this case mean some 4 billion BP.
-
Primarily? Take into account team results over individual ones.
If we were completely revisiting it, start with the question of "what makes for a fun game?" Kills and escapes are nice, but what makes the game actually exciting for people to play? Don't just go straight to the emblems, but the fact there are so many scoring events is a nice starting point. Is a fun game one where both sides are scoring lots of BP consistently over the course of a match?
People are going to work out and game your MMR system either way, you might as well use it as a tool to encourage fun gameplay.
-
Boil Over makes for a better horror story than most of the actual games do.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2784884#Comment_2784884
Yes, but those aren't abusable spots by Boil Over, they're just bad areas in general. The abusable spots for Boil Over are the library spot in RPD, and kinda-sorta the main structure in Eyrie of Crows- because no matter what, regardless of how you play or what the hook spawn RNG is, you cannot get a hook. It's not abusing Boil Over to just have it equipped and get lucky with hook spawns.
I absolutely see why they did it. I also see why it was unnecessary and petty. Their actions make logical sense, that doesn't mean they were right and justified.
Bottom line: Boil Over doing something is not proof of it being OP nor is it proof the survivors were abusing it. I do think the perk could use some minor tweaks, but the reaction shown in this thread was an overreaction, plain and simple.
Thompson House if the hook doesn't spawn?
Anyway, I still feel like people are reading way too much into it to decide it must be spiteful. Honestly, I keep forgetting Boil Over also hides nearby hook auras, so I can imagine that would trip people up regularly enough--no aura seen = no hook, back to the floor you go.
-
@ThanksForDaily said:
Yes, rework a licenced map because of 1 perk. 😭
Instead of 4 slowdowns, use IG, Agi for a few games.
Library can be godawful even without Boil Over. It needs some sort of change.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2783649#Comment_2783649
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2784781#Comment_2784781
Main hall with the big stairs on both sides. To the left is the library
When facing away from the exit gate/towards the stairs.
-
A lot of people are absolutely convinced that the thing that they had pointed out to them, seen from the Survivor's perspective, must've stuck out as much to the Killer in the middle of the game, huh?
Good grief, how many times have people watched someone else play a game and noticed something the person playing missed? People miss "obvious" stuff a ton. Assuming it's spite and malice with no evidence other than an assumption of the other person's attentiveness to a single decision is ridiculous.
-
@ShinobuSK said:
Does it need to be killswitched though?
I am not against RPD being gone for a while but Boil over clearly works as intended. However annoying it can be
Every map with exploitable 2 floor structures, or the one perk.
Pretty sure removing half the maps from the game would be the bigger reaction.
-
@feng_min_main2003 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2784567#Comment_2784567
It was within actual eye view
Never overestimate people's perceptive ability. It's not lit up like a christmas tree? Must be scenery. Looking for hook aura... oh, all the auras are far away, bleeding you out it is.
Hanlon's razor: "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"
-
@feng_min_main2003 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2784550#Comment_2784550
Because he could've hooked me on the obvious hook that he should've saw without an aura
Hooks not having an aura for Killers could easily throw someone off and they'd miss it, because normally hooks are super obvious.
-
I load into a game. RCPD and oak offerings. Perhaps it will be okay, I think to myself, I brought Agitation for my Scourge Hooks. Perhaps I will escape the tyranny of the library. Maybe they aren't fully committed.
A Dwight. I give chase, and where to? The library, of course. In the distance, a gen pops. Do I commit? No, not in this hellish room. I flee the powerless Survivor, seeking out of position prey that could be downed and sacrificed for the Entity. But they seem to know where I am with ease, communicating with something beyond sight or sound. Feng Min leads me back to the library. Another gen pops.
This time, I pick up. Perhaps we can get to the hook in the lobby. Boil Over, of course, and I get forced to take the stairs. I have no chance to make it all that way, not with the new skill checks. Feng Min escapes, and a third gen lights up. I might be losing, but I haven't given up playing yet.
This time, Claudette elects to send me back to the library. I find myself starting to hate it, despite all the books. I down her and go off to seek another survivor; maybe I can simply slug them all, or catch them coming for a rescue. A fourth generator finishes, and the sound of a boon going up echoes throughout the police department. Claudette climbs back to her feet and flees.
Meg is my last opportunity. Like her compatriots, she leads me back to the library. I down her and stand guard, watching over her dying body amongst the dusty tomes. Maybe now, the last generator will be repaired and the others will escape. Meg tries to get up, and I knock her down once again.
Time passes. All around, I hear the sound of fast vault after fast vault. The last generator lies uncompleted, and Meg keeps attempting to escape. I am imprisoned in this room as surely as she is, my mind forced to watch over the library lest we be reset once again. Her defiant glare looks at me from the ground, knowing that her plan is working.
I wish I was Meg. I, then, could bleed to death on the ground and be freed from this torment. Meg dies, bleeding out on the ground, and I seek out the next victim. The sound of a boon comes around again: they are prepared, and no target could free me from this torment.
I slip up on Claudette, looking away for just a second too long, my mind dazed by the tedium of standing guard over an unmoving body. It takes more than a minute to find Dwight and we return to the library's inescapable second floor. I resolve to not fail again. Aeons pass, and Dwight moves out of this realm. Feng Min follows, though my muscles start to atrophy from lack of use. Only Claudette remains.
I find her, my twice-escapee, standing over a hatch. For reasons unknown to my tedium-destroyed brain, Claudette rhythmically crouches before dropping away, free from my clutches.
Escaped from the Entity's cruel game, I look at my opponent's preparations. Rearing horse after rearing horse, boon after boon. Everything planned, everything prepared. And as I behold, my eyes drift over, seeing what last horror has been visited upon me:
"gg ez"
-
@SmarulKusia said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2784452#Comment_2784452
Except you are ignoring that the example you provided literally falls under what I’ve been saying.
Refusing to take part in the game by hiding away from the killer is refusing the killer their objective which is why the game is taken hostage.
Players running a build that is meant to make hooking difficult, is not taking the game hostage because you are STILL able to complete your objective. I’m not defending those that run those builds, I’m just saying that what you’re describing is not only counter-able, but is also not what you’re describing it as.
If being forced to slug was taking the game hostage, then slugging as a mechanic would’ve been changed months if not years ago.
Flashlights are shown in lobby. No Mither shows at the start, unbreakable is usable once. Soul guard only works if they’re affected by a hex and most of the hexes require a criteria. Boil over is literally shown if used by the person.
are these games tedious to deal with? Without a doubt. Is it mean to run builds like this? Yes. But don’t call it what it isn’t.
Literally the only thing you can see in the lobby is flashlights. You don't know that it's going to be a locker flashlight squad--and that's not very counterable; if you take the things to counter it, you're probably forfeiting the game by default.
You can't do anything about SWF sabo squads or the Boil Over abuse because by the time you know they're in play, it's too late. You've picked a Killer, you've picked a set of perks that aren't based around countering this highly specific tactic, you've seen the addons saying it's going to be impossible to get hooks.
So once you're in the game, then what? You can't get to hooks, so hooking is out. You might be able to camp a slug until they die, then the next, then the next etc. If you can keep them slugged. If you're willing to spend 20 minutes not playing the game after downing someone--if you do anything but stop actually taking part and trying, you can't possibly end it. So, the game is held hostage. The other three Survivors could win at any time if they wanted. And if they want to waste your time even more, and they can pick themselves up, then you're going to be spending ages on it. If you can even keep them down and they won't just manage to cycle someone else in.
You can't counter it to prevent a hostage situation, because there's no "counter" that will force the game to end in a reasonable time. Same way people playing hide and seek doesn't have a counter but you can still win.
You're overly fixating on the notion that because the objective is theoretically completable over the length of 4 normal games, it's not been taken hostage. But it has, because dragging it out that long without making any effort to complete the objective is the exact thing that has been suggested to be reportable behaviour: you're not letting someone actively play the game, and you're not letting the game end. They can't leave to go on to the next game, and they can't get in chases and try to hook without being stuck even longer without progress.
You can insist it's not your definition of taking the game hostage, but it lines up perfectly well with what we've already been told is reportable. Arguing that it's "just" tedious and mean is a completely bizarre defence.
-
@SmarulKusia said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2784423#Comment_2784423
Eh, yes it is.
I'm not playing at semantics. Reasons that mechanics have been brought into the game is because the game was made unplayable for the opposing side. The old hatch mechanic meant that either side couldn't complete their objective. Playing 'hide and seek' meant that the killers couldn't complete their objective.
You aren't held hostage if you can still complete your objective. I don't know why you're resorting to changing the focus of the argument instead of countering what I'm saying to you.
The issue that is being brought up - is SWFs bringing builds that make hooking difficult. I'm telling you that you aren't being held hostage by that because those survivors can still bleed out. You can bring offerings that bring hooks closer. You can play Pyramid Head, who completely voids the mechanic of picking a survivor up. You can play Tombstone Myers which doesn't even involve hooking.
There are ways to play around this, and trying to displace it as 'the game being held hostage' is just a weak excuse.
You're playing at semantics by insisting that holding the game hostage means "the other person physically cannot complete it" and nothing else counts.
But BHVR has said that Survivors hiding for half an hour (but not going AFK to get the crows) and never approaching the generators counts and can be reportable for same.
You're trying to define the term as something that it isn't by ignoring the developers' own statement on what can be reported, and then saying that, therefore, boil over is fine. But it isn't, because the official definition appears to be more along the lines of "unreasonably extending the game time by not completing your objective and denying the other side the opportunity to complete theirs". Being physically impossible is the simplest way, but sabo builds and boil over use with addons and even locker flashlight squads? All count.
-
@SmarulKusia said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2784372#Comment_2784372
You can not physically make a build to prevent bleeding out.
That is literally impossible, as the only thing that STOPS the bleed out meter is being picked up by the killer. You can't be looped forever either, and there are ways to decrease stagnation if a survivor is to wiggle off. All the survivors can do, is prolong bleeding out - but they can't physically prevent it from happening.
Soul Guard only works if they are actively affected by a hex.
No Mither literally is indicated at the start of the match.
Unbreakable is usable only once.
Exponential can be seen/heard.
Stand over their bodies if you can't take them to a hook. Bring offerings that bring hooks closer. Bring perks that decrease stun duration or wiggle effects. Bring offerings that take you to a map that you prefer.
The survivors CANNOT hold the game hostage by doing a build that makes hooking more difficult because it is STILL possible. The implication that a game is taken hostage, is that you physically cannot do anything against the situation - which isn't true.
... yes, you can't stop it, but you can prolong it unacceptably far by combining perks and abilities (and SWF teamwork), which is still--as indicated by the devs' own response on a much simpler activity--counted as taking the game hostage.
If the game will only end after half an hour, most of which is spent stood camping one slugged Survivor at a time and knocking them down again when they get back up, that counts.