Reinami
Reinami
About
- Username
- Reinami
- Joined
- Visits
- 6,317
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Toblerone007 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2015775#Comment_2015775
I think you're off track here. I'm not an advocate for scarce items/offerings/add-ons that are overpowered.
I don't see how my comment relates to this. You haven't quoted me at all in your response.
I said increasing gen time makes camping more viable. Which it does. If you cannot complete gens in the time it takes to camp someone out, why should the killer not camp?
I might have quoted the wrong person, i was replying to someone who said that "tournament squads are rare so its fine".
-
@Shoottokill_Shinsou said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2014531#Comment_2014531
Imagine thinking that tournament squads make up more than .0001 percent of the playerbase.
Imagine thinking that just because something is rare means it is balanced:
Let's imagine for a second there is a killer offering that exists. This offering does the following:
- All survivors are permanently exposed
- The killer automatically gets 32k bloodpoints maxed at the start of the match
- All survivors auras are permanently revealed.
- The killer's movement speed is increased to 200%.
- Survivors now have to repair every generator instead of just 5.
Now let's imagine that the offering had a rarity that only made it appear with a 0.1% chance in the bloodweb. This means it can only be used in ~1 out of every 1000 games for a killer.
Would that offering be balanced?
-
@Toblerone007 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2013796#Comment_2013796
Which part?
I just proof read everything and I can't flaunt anything.
Sorry you're tired of hearing it but it's true. You even said camping is terrible and needs to be fixed. Gen time increase will definitely indirectly make it a more viable tactic you can't deny that. What does that do to the health/integrity of the game?
The argument of "not that many people are that good" or "its rare" its a terrible way to balance a game.
Let's imagine for a second there is a killer offering that exists. This offering does the following:
- All survivors are permanently exposed
- The killer automatically gets 32k bloodpoints maxed at the start of the match
- All survivors auras are permanently revealed.
- The killer's movement speed is increased to 200%.
- Survivors now have to repair every generator instead of just 5.
Now let's imagine that the offering had a rarity that only made it appear with a 1% chance in the bloodweb. This means it can only be used in ~1 out of every 100 games for a killer.
Would that offering be balanced?
-
@LeatherFeather said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2014545#Comment_2014545
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2014540#Comment_2014540
Ah, the killers are biased as always. The majority of this whole forum is killers patting themselves at the back.
Tournament squads prove that this game is survivor sided. I want to see an average 2K/2E every game at my MMR, but it doesn't happen.
-
@sluc16 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2014545#Comment_2014545
Not everyone is high rank. You cant make an argument considering only a small part of the players base
And this is where your opinion on the matter is no longer valid. Games should be balanced for high level play, but made fairer for low level play. Tournament squads already prove this game is extremely survivor sided unless you play nurse, and even then it only becomes someone more balanced.
I do think there are things that the devs should do to address how strong killers are in low level play. But making it takes longer than 10 seconds to find the first survivor is not it.
-
@sluc16 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2014540#Comment_2014540
How is that fair?
Because the early game is when the killer is weakest. It is extremely common at high ranks to lose 3 gens during the first chase.
-
@Shoottokill_Shinsou said:
Because a single survivor is 25% of their team. Meaning that they should only have the difficulty of killer divided by 4. It isn't fair to have a killer that doesn't take skill, when killer is more powerful than the survivors and doesn't take extra skill to compensate. A powerful character that doesn't take skill is never fair. It's fine if a braindead killer is like wraith or doctor, because they are weaker to compensate.
Imagine thinking that killers are more powerful than survivors when tournament squads exist.
-
@SilentPill said:
Yeah, that’s what happens if survivors hold M1. Do the math. It’s 3 gens done in 80 seconds probably 90-100 if you factor in them traveling to a gen because of you dropping a whole perk slot on corrupt intervention.
Pop goes the weasel is 20 seconds off a gen which is 6.3~ seconds cumulatively done by 3 survivors. It’s only good when someone is already dead.
Tunnel/camp/slug, play broken builds, or lose. Those are your options against good survivors. It’s hilarious the most famous advocate of 12 hooks (true talent) wants an undying ruin in his tournament. That’s like admitting gen speeds are busted for the majority of killers.
You don't even have to complicate the math that way. Think of it more this way.
4 Survivors,
5 gens, 80 seconds each.
Every survivor spends the first 10 seconds of the match finding a gen, and hops on.
Killer spends the first 15-20 seconds of the match looking for the first survivor.
Killer finds the first survivor, the survivor literally just holds w. No looping, no pallets, just hold w in the opposite direction. It takes the killer 28 seconds to catch up.
Killer hits the survivor, they get a speed boost, and keep holding w. Killer takes 23 seconds to catch up, downs the survivor.
Killer picks up the survivor and walks to a hook and hooks them, the combination of which takes about 15 seconds.
Killer now spend 20 + 28 + 23 + 15 seconds on the first down/hook = 86 seconds. Survivors spend 10-20 seconds getting on gens. This means 3 gens are now done before you can even figure out where to go.
Now factor in pallets. You don't even have to play the game well and do any mindgames as a survivor. Just throw a pallet down immediately, no mind games, no playing around and a killer can't win against a team that actually works on gens.
-
@Toblerone007 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2012196#Comment_2012196
Still have to be careful about increasing generator completion times. Reason being is camping and tunnelling is much more effective if the survivors can't finish all the generators in time and escape then there is no reason for the killer to leave the hook.
This is why I suggest instead of increasing the time, put instant regression for kicking the generator in the game. This way an early game camp is still punished the same and the killer has real incentive to leave the hook and real incentive to kick generators with survivors around that generator.
As for three gens popping at the start I suggest properly learning spawn points for survivor. With the timing of generators popping according to above comments, knowing survivor spawns will help identifying generators they're likely on. Corrupt is also a great perk to stop terrible early game and allow the killer to commit on their first chase more.
These arguments are stupid, i'm sorry but i'm tired of hearing it.
Camping and tunneling are both terrible and need to be fixed too. This game is a ######### mess.
-
@Kirkylad said:
Seems like a SWF issue more than gen speed honestly. SWF's on comms are just way more efficient so the gens fly.
Not really, its a basic math problem. You don't even need coms to do it. Takes 80 seconds to do a gen, if all 4 survivors hop on a gen immediately when match starts and the killer finds one within 10 seconds. The survivor can literally just hold w in the opposite direction of the killer. It'll take them 25-30 seconds to catch up. They get hit, hold w more (don't even bother looping) takes the killer 23 seconds to catch up. Picking them up and walking to a hook wastes 15 seconds. You just spend, 10 + 25 + 23 + 15 = 73 seconds. Welcome to 3 gens popping.
If survivors just work on gens, and don't even bother doing any mindgames and just throw pallets down early, forget about it.
If killer drops chase, just hop on a gen and rinse and repeat with every survivor.
-
@chadbeastofprey said:
swf with comms.
we're just gonna ignore the fact that solo q exists and slowing down gens would be a huge detriment to them?
The point is that this "gameplay" isn't fun for anyone. Survivors are just holding m1 down on a gen, and killer can't actually play the game. This means the game is just not fun for any of the 5 people. The best part of the game is the chase, and mindgaming each other.
-
@chadbeastofprey said:
swf with comms.
we're just gonna ignore the fact that solo q exists and slowing down gens would be a huge detriment to them?
We're just going to ignore the fact that there are things you can do to balance the game that nerf SWF and buff solos? Like, giving solos more information for free, letting them do pings:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPukUi7Oz3gAnd then, you can slow down gens somehow.
-
@CryptFriend said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2006854#Comment_2006854
I mean, I, a person who plays killer, wants a Spirit nerf, so I feel what they're asking isn't unreasonable.
I mean, it's mostly so I can stop feeling unclean whenever I play her
, but, uh.A direct nerf is not what she needs though. She needs counterplay added that both sides can use. My personal favorite, is to make her phase in and out while using her power (similar to her passive phase) during which both spirit and the survivor are able to see. This creates some more counterplay on both sides to be able to bait each other out.
-
@bubbabrotha said:
Everyone has one. For me, its that deathslinger is op.
The following idea:
It is a fact that tournament level survivors (even solos) are able to basically destroy any killer with the exception on nurse (who still has to try very hard compared to them). However, so few survivors are at that level, so we shouldn't balance for that in mind, and should instead balance around the average player.
This idea is terrible. Regardless of how rare something its, it shouldn't be balanced around that. Nurse is by far the best killer in the game, but her kill rate is the only one below 50%, based on this logic, we should be buffing nurse. The fact is, you can balance a game in a way changes things to be better for all levels of players. The reality is though, as long as the game is not balance at a high level play, it will never grow beyond a casual game. And casual games eventually die off. If they instead cultivate the top level players, balance the game for them, and make positive changes that encourage healthier gameplay and more fun gameplay for lower levels at the same time, this game will last decades.
-
@trashgame said:
I played this game a week now. When it says “killer stunned” and you still get knocked... imagine fix your trash game #########
@UncleStabby said:
That only happens when you camp the pallet for the stun (something bad survivors do.) If you're actually in full sprint when you toss the pallet, it creates a vaccum that stops the killer.
Imagine fix your trash gameplay.
I feel like these new accounts that have 1 post that make these threads with broken english are some kind of troll from another company trying to make this game seem worse (which isn't hard)
-
@Saltjar34 said:
So it's been a while and currently, all the killers have been pointing their fingers at Dead Hard. Along with the occasional Nurse complaint threads, I noticed a weird theme... People actually think Spirit Fury + Enduring is as broken as Dead Hard and they use it as argument for why Dead Hard shouldn't be nerfed. So for today's thread, I'll try my best to defend this combo.
So one of the things people complain the most about this combo is that it allows a killer to bypass a well-timed pallet stun and essentially, be rewarded for failing. While this is a good point, how often have you managed to stun the killer with a pallet? There are 3 situations where I've managed to consistently stun the killer, 1. I camp the pallet, 2. The killer lunges near the pallet, 3. I loop the killer into the almighty God pallet. Point 1 and 3 aren't even that impressive for a survivor, you're just standing still and getting lucky. At least point 2 is punishing the killer's mistake. Many times it is simply best to drop the pallet early or even just vault or run.
Alright here's the second argument... I guess. It gives the killer a secondary power which takes away a portion of survivor's counterplay. So here's a fun fact, the most success I've ever gotten out of that combo is on Trapper and Legion. Essentially killers whose power doesn't help in chase. The reason is because on pallet destroying killers, I would typically rather run Bamboozle (And in Oni's case, anti-heal) on most of them due to their already strong anti-pallet game.
Anyway the biggest pitfall this perk has is that it's downright useless on some killers. Everyone drops pallets early against Doctor, Clown, and Slinger. Huntress and Nurse laughs at your pallets. Hag has already touched that loop. That just leaves M1 killers who lack mobility. Yes, the killers who are C tier and lower and can probably be looped easily at the shack. And since it's essentially a secondary power, you can just treat it like Doctor's or Clown's. Remember, this combo does nothing if you don't try to STUN the killer. You can still do your sick pallet break flashlight blind to Iron Will 9000 IQ escape sequence even against Spirit Fury + Enduring.
Anyway that's my defense. Spirit Fury + Enduring is mostly balanced. Also please don't move this to Feedback, I don't have the word buff in the title this time and I have no ideas for these perks
Personally i think the difference is that you can actually outplay the spirit fury + enduring by dropping the pallet a little earlier. Dead harding an attack, yes you can bait that. Dead harding for distance has no counter.
-
@Munqaxus said:
Since DS is getting nerfed to make sure it's an anti-tunneling only perk. How about balancing the nerf out with a buff that goes in line with making a straight anti-tunneling perk. Let DS give you it's regular ability to stun a killer or also have the option to fully recover from a dying state (Using either deactivates DS for the match). That will keep killers from tunneling you and slugging you.
That's what unbreakable does.
-
@Lochnload_exe said:
After seeing so many people suggest the Trickster should be 115%, I decided to go back and read things around the release of deathslinger and huntress, and the same things were said about them. I guess I just don't get how people thought these people needed to be 115%. If we want to talk buffs for the Trickster, there are much better ways to do it, but making a ranged killer 115% isn't the solution to the flaws.
Honestly what i would like to see is something more interesting, where his m1 requires like 3-4 hits to down, but he has 120% movement speed. Tweak numbers, but this would actually make him unique in some way.
-
@JediWithASniper said:
Totems should not be lit and dull, they should all just be dull. Why do survivors need the alert that a totem is lit?
When RUIN is active, you have an affect icon showing onscreen in your HUD. So then you have to do bones to find it, or live with it.
This also buffs surprise Hexes like haunted ground.
Personally i'd like to see all hexes not light totems, and then all hexes to be reworked to be like thrill of the hunt, where it's power depends on how many dull totems are up. This evens out the RNG aspect so that if you can't find the hex it isn't extremely OP, but also means the killer won't lose their hex 20 seconds after the match starts. They could also rework undying to actually be "undying" and make the hex stay in effect at level 1 the entire game or something. Obviously this would require numbers tweaks on some hexes and some reworks to others, but i think it would make hexes a bit healthier.
-
@GannTM said:
BBQ and Chili is the epitome of a balanced while also being viable perk. It rewards killers for doing their objective and there are plenty of counters to it.
If survivor mains say BBQ and Chili is unfair and needs a nerf, I might as well say that Adrenaline also needs a nerf because it also rewards survivors for doing their objective and is actually way less counterable than BBQ. How about quit asking for every viable thing to be nerfed? This question applies to both sides. Soon enough we’re going to get everything nerfed to the point where Lucky Break becomes the best survivor perk and Dead Man’s Switch becomes the best killer perk.
Devs like BBQ because it actually promotes healthy gameplay. It encourages you to not tunnel to get stacks for bloodpoints, and encourages you to leave the hook to go after someone 40+ meters away.
-
@LeatherFeather said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2005570#Comment_2005570
Yea location reveal is nothing xD I love how for killers all their perks are mediocre, what do you even consider good? I wonder If bbq additional blood points would be added instead to some weak perk, spoiler alert, it wouldn't be played
Depends on the perk. The reason people use it though is because it basically doubles your bloodpoints, unless you are playing terribly, you are almost always going to hook every survivor once.
I'm not saying that it isn't good, its "ok" but it has so many counters at this point. If it still worked like it used to, like showing the auras in lockers and such, then i would agree, but at this point it only shows you people really far away, the auras are often hard to see on the new gen auras, on top of that between lockers, hiding your aura behind the generator and perks survivors now have that prevent you from being seen it is much much weaker.
On the flip side, thrilling tremors is a far better perk. It's cooldown is basically irrelevant because by the time you walk to where you want to go, find and chase the survivor, the cooldown is probably up. It shows you the EXACT generator you want to go to, and on top of that, blocks all the other generators from being worked on. It too, has a counter in that you can stop working on the gen, but it's counter means you stop working on that gen for 16 seconds which is more time wasted than simply hiding your aura behind the generator for 4 seconds against BBQ.
-
@Sluzzy said:
It doesn't take long to notice the elephant of all perks on either side: BBQ. A pay-to-win perk on a licensed DLC. Used on every killer for the tremendous advantage and value. This perk is literally spammed in every game. It should be a HEX perk or nerfed to lose the aura reading.
BBQ was released when survivors were much stronger along with maps. Maps were also easier to hide. Survivor perks are always nerfed only when considered being used on a good SWF. The same logic and fair balancing should apply to killers. To beat a good killer you must work on gens for every second possible. You cannot spend your entire match looking and hiding in lockers because the killer will have a huge upper hand as this is the only counterplay provided to stop the aura. He most likely has Ruin so the gen is losing progress when you leave it. Too much advantage for a perk.
There is another reason why being a HEX would be an excellent change to BBQ. A killer that camps can still be awarded BBQ stacks if he uses NOED or when saves occur. He is awarded for the thing the perk was originally designed to prevent in the first place! If the perk is a HEX perk the killer will be in a race to hook as many different survivors as possible before the totem is destroyed. This will create pressure on the killer to guard totems, gens, and hook survivors in the process instead of camping and being awarded for it with a perk.
If it is not a HEX perk it needs to lose the aura reading because it gives too much value for one perk alone. This perk has been overpowered and abused by high mobility killers way too long.
BBQ is mediocre at best. Everyone runs it for the extra bloodpoints. Thrilling is better than bbq on almost every way.
-
@Baby_Victor said:
I dunno, unlike other exhaustion perks, you have to be injured, which ups the ante. I feel it deserves more options because of the consequences for a miss play. If you mess up sprint burst, then take the hit and get a second burst, you can afford it, but DH? Your going down if you prompt too early or too late.
Seems fair enough, it just sucks that survivors don’t use it to outplay a killers power or swing, they use it to reach pallets or windows they didn’t deserve, after being outplayed at a loop. A literal insta-fix to a mess up they made.
You actually have it backwards. It's the only exhaustion perk that doesn't have a downside.
Sprint Burst requires you to walk everywhere in order to have it ready when you want it. Alternatively, you can "99" it, but then it requires you to be constantly running, meaning you can't stop to reapir a gen. It also doesn't extend a chase because it basically can only be used at the beginning of a chase, giving the killer the option to abandon when they see sprint burst go off.
Lithe requires you to vault something, but it isn't optional, once you vault something, it goes off. This means you can't extend a chase with it, but it can be used to get to a safer place if you find that a pallet is gone.
Head On requires you to be in a locker and can't really be used in a chase outside of some luck, deception, and potentially stacking over perks. Additionally, it doesn't really extend a chase either as it only buys you a few seconds.
Balanced Landing is the only other one that can actually extend a chase, however, it is very hard to use, and they are very few spots on many maps that you can use it, additionally it can go off when you don't want it to if you drop at the wrong time.
The pallet stun one (i forgot the name but the new one coming) has some counterplay. You generally don't want to get stunned by a pallet as a killer anyway. And, often, unless it is not a safe pallet, you are going to break it most of the time. This basically allows the survivor to force you to abandon chase, or take a long time catching up. I see it as a sprint burst with extra steps, but requires some more skill to activate, by stunning the killer. It also has a downside as pallet stunning can sometimes be risky.
Then we come to dead hard. It can't accidentally be used, because you have to activate it, meaning that you are able to save it for the exact moment you want to use it. It's only downside, is that you must be injured, although, not really, because at some point in every chase, you ARE going to be injured. It also can be used to "dead hard for distance" which is its biggest problem and the thing that makes it so strong. You can effectively edge yourself around a loop an additional time, dead hard for distance to a pallet, drop the pallet and now you have reset the chase. It is the only exhaustion perk that you can reliably extend a chase with, and not just for a few seconds, but you can effectively reset the entire chase by dead harding to a pallet that you wouldn't normally be able to hit.
Ideally, i would work deadhard to either make you broken when using it for a long period of time (like 120+ seconds, perhaps even the rest of the match) or, more preferably:
Rework it so you get an extra sprint burst when you are hit (think sprint burst + getting hit), that way you can't just stay injured and be safe with a "extra" health state effectively. You can only use it when you are full health and then get hit, you also telegraph to the killer that you used it, meaning they now have the choice of abandoning chase and going after a different survivor or they can continue on and now know that you are in a weaker spot once they catch up.
-
@kamisen said:
I remember the devs talking about Freddy overperforming in terms of kill ratio. Are they going to look at him in terms of balance?
Do you think he should be tweaked, and if so, how?
Against solos? Probably.
Against teams and/or survivors with 1k hours? Every killer is garbage except for nurse.
-
@Toblerone007 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1986240#Comment_1986240
Yes balance shouldn't be based on scarcity. No other pvp games do this and dbd has had this issue since it's started.
Back to the DH argument how do you balance it and keep it fun to use? I think perhaps it shouldn't be an exhaustion perk but rather something you have to earn like MoM but with a criteria actually feasible. Sometimes you do hit a really well timed dead hard and deserve to extend a chase.
It needs to carry an actual downside. When you use it, you become broken for 2 minutes, this timer is paused if you are hooked.
-
@Jasix said:
I truly hate hyperbole. The times an entire group of 4 survivors have DH is miniscule at best.
As a Doctor main - I am not affected by DH any more than Lithe for example. As a survivor I have NEVER ran DH in a public lobby (Tested in KYF) because I actually think it is the second worst exhaustion perk (Balanced Landing being the worst imo). I can escape a loop way easier with Lithe than DH any day as a survivor.
As a killer I just bait out DH - and then down the survivor.
These arguments are terrible, especially when top streamers make them.
It does not matter how rare something is. It should not be balanced based on rarity. For example, i am a nurse main with 1.5k hours. I think she is overpowered and needs a nerf, i also recognize shes basically the only viable killer in tournament level play (maybe spirit too but barely). Just because good nurses are rare doesn't mean she is balanced when i can win 50 games in a row as her without breaking a sweat.
As a hyperbolic example. Imagine there was a killer offering that did the following for a killer:
- All survivors are permanently exposed.
- You permanently see the aura of all survivors.
- You can mori them without any hooks.
- Your movement speed is doubled.
Now imagine that offering only could be used once every 500 games. That means only 0.5% of games will see this offering happen in them. Does that mean the offering is balanced because it is rare? No, that offering is overpowered and should be dealt with.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SI8VLeZtfeE@LeatherFeather said:
I can only say xD
NOED is a bad perk.
-
@Bond4ever said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1981670#Comment_1981670
exactly my opinion lol, a mature streamer wouldn't blame their looses on other and cry about every problem the game has.
This is a terrible take to have. People don't "cry about every problem the game has" because they are complaining. People talk about those things because they like the game and want to see it get better for everyone.
-
@WishIcouldmain said:
Some killers are better with PGTW and some are better with Ruin. Here's the list
Trapper: Pop Goes the Weasel Trapper has a to setup traps so he won't go across the map to pressure. And he doesn't want to leave his trap area so if Ruin is across that map you can't do much.
Wraith: Hex:Ruin with his hit and run playstyle and spreading pressure Ruin is better since he can't hook as easily
Hillbilly: Either depends you can go either way and get good results you can snowball quickly and Ruin regress the gens because people have to leave the gen or zoom across the map and PGTW the gen usually unreachable. Ruin+Tinkerer or Pop+Thrilling.
Nurse: Hex:Ruin she can still snowball as good but her mobility isn't the way it used to be so she can't Pop that far away gen
Shape(Michael): Pop Goes The Weasel He can snowball not as efficently and can't get around the map and with his stealth it's better to get defensive with PGTW
Hag: Pop Goes The Weasel same as Trapper shouldn't leave her trap area and if Ruin is across the map it's gone
Doctor: Either he can down quickly but still work in a zone he can have a skill check build with PGTW or with madness waste time with Ruin
Huntress: Hex:Ruin with her ability to quickly down and her aggressive playstyle not having time to stop
Cannibal (Bubba): PGTW he can down easily but can't go zooming like Billy and snowball isn't as guaranteed since people fear the Bubba.
Pig: Hex:Ruin with her RBTs more for slowdown then kills and generally not needing to chase those survivors Ruin is better since survivors can't risk wasting time on totems or gens unless they want their heads to pop
Nightmare (Freddy): Either this is preference of the player since he's great with both
Clown: PGTW he can down easily but not really snowball so Pop is better for the defense
Spirit: Either she can down quickly and Ruin regress or get to rather hard to reach gens with Pop player preference
Legion: Hex:Ruin with his ability to waste time with Frenzy it's easier to gen gens regressing with Ruin since downs are harder.
Plague: Hex:Ruin with people who'll waste time with cleansing or people who don't cleanse quickly downed by Corrupt purge
Ghostface: PGTW he can down some easy but not really snowball so downing and kicking the gen is the way to go.
Demogorgon: Pop Goes The Weasel his portals allow him to get to any gen so Pop is the way
Oni: Hex:Ruin he can down quickly snowball but can't waste time kicking gens so Ruin is the way.
Deathslinger: Either he can be aggressive and down quickly hence Ruin. Or with his slow mobility and more stealthy option PGTW
Executioner (Pyramidhead): Hex:Ruin with his power cages not registering as a hook and hence no PGTW Ruin is better.
Blight: Either is ability to down quickly and reach any gen preference of the player
Twins: Hex: Ruin with their slugging playstyle and ability to defend a totem easily Ruin
I agree with most of those except:
Legion: Ruin shouldn't really be used on legion because the survivors end up running to different parts of the map to mend, meaning they are more likely to stumble across the totem. Thanataphobia is probably the best here to encourage them to heal (which you don't really want to do against a legion)
Plague: Similar to Legion, you are going to be running around the map looking for places to cleanse meaning you might just accidentally find the totem. Also, Thanataphobia is really good because it encourages people to use the fountains, which gives you your true power.
Twins: Pop and Ruin are both terrible on this killer, although the twins are just bad in general. Slugging perks are generally better rather than wasting slots on gen regression. Better to use Sloppy and keep people from healing and to slug constantly.
-
@SirCracken said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977243#Comment_1977243
So Tracer's power basically?
Yeah, that's a good way to put it.
-
@SirCracken said:
I think everyone has seen the teaser video by this point. In case you haven't: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRqRGQ8jD_4
It features a track of music getting rewound, which a lot of people are assuming it relates to the killer's ability to possibly rewind time. It's an interesting idea to be sure. But sadly interesting ideas have a habit of getting scrapped due to development time... (Demogorgon was going to walk around in the upsidedown with lights in the real world to signal where they were. And Deathslinger was considered to use his harpoon gun as a grapping hook to traverse the map).
So place your bets now. Assuming the next killer's power is time related, how will it be grossly simplified once actually in the game?
Reverse spirit. You basically phase back to some location you were 5 seconds (or some other time period) ago.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977203#Comment_1977203
All I did was point out that you mostly hear about the bad examples. I am literally recognizing that you heard a lot of bad examples, while telling you that there are also good examples. Sorry if you expected me to just agree with you without thinking about my own experience.
Please stop replying as i don't want to be tagged in this thread anymore. I'd like to just agree to disagree and move on with our lives. Thanks and good luck.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977189#Comment_1977189
"The squeaky wheel gets the grease", have you heard that expression before? There are good examples of LGBT representation, but those don't generate the same clickbait-y headlines and articles we're all used to seeing being spread around by people with questionable motives. I could use those to extrapolate how DbD will be if and when BHVR adds the first explicitly non-heterosexual character, but I'm not, because BHVR is not the same company that created those other characters.
I'm just gonna go ahead and disengage now, there really isn't a point in continuing this conversation anymore as it is clear that you don't really care about my point of view and we aren't really getting anywhere on either side. Good luck, and Good bye!
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977167#Comment_1977167
You could go off of this game's history, though. Instead, you're choosing to extrapolate from the worst examples. Why is that?
because i go by what history has shown. And history show the vast majority of companies do it poorly.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977146#Comment_1977146
You just demonstrated that DbD handles it quite well.
Not exactly, those other games i mention do what DBD does now for straight people, but when they get their gay character, they do the things i said. History has show that many companies do that and pander and create the "token" character. I'm not saying that is what BHVR is going to do, but since we don't have evidence of it, i can only go off of history, and other companies that seem to handle straight relationships well, don't handle other ones well.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977086#Comment_1977086
After a casual look I'll give you Sally although, after her husband died is there any mention of her taking another man, if not thats slightly presumptuous but fair.
Listen, I'm not gonna pretend that heterosexual people are a minority, so I would appreciate it if you (and everyone else) would also not pretend that you actually think a character who was in an opposite-sex relationship (or one with no explicit relationships) might not be heterosexual. We're all adults here, presumably, so let's act like it.
I couldnt find any reference on the main wiki page that indicates Ace or David though.
Ace is obviously a stereotypical "ladies man" (funny how that stereotype doesn't cause this many complaints, whereas even the possibility of a stereotypical LGBT character is apparently too big a risk to even include LGBT characters, but I digress). However, I will concede that there's no explicit mention of him being with a woman. I've already quoted where David's ex is mentioned, though.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977090#Comment_1977090
So you do understand why people would care about "the sexual orientation of pixels". Why were you saying you didn't?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977096#Comment_1977096
No LGBT lore has been added to the game, so your argument is moot because it boils down to "it could be anything, so it will be bad". My argument is based on what the devs have written previously, which you yourself so perfectly demonstrated is quite effective at keeping the readers focused on things besides exes and loved ones.
I'll give you that, my problem is that most other games don't handle it well.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977081#Comment_1977081
His ex has moved on and she doesn't want to see his face.
From Memory 341. The fact that you completely glossed over it proves that the devs know how to keep the focus on the more important tidbits, which is what I've been saying all along.
Ok, so, we are trying to have a civil discussion so let's try to stay civil, yeah?
I misread that as being one of the other people not David King. But this brings up my point perfectly. This is the only mention of him being straight in the lore. It is a single, throwaway line that isn't really a big deal. They don't call out his straightness.
But when other games tend to make a gay character for example, they make a point to call it out, constantly. When it would be better served to have a line for our hypothetical male character that in the lore talks about "his husband" rather than constantly talking about how he is gay.
THAT is the point i'm making.
With the way these people keep asking for this representation, they aren't going to do that. They are going to make it a big focal part of the character. Probably make some big announcement like "we have a gay character now yay", the character will have the offensive and stereotypical "gay lisp" and maybe even throw in a rainbow cosmetic for good measure. All of which is worse then doing nothing.
-
@kingcarl2012 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977042#Comment_1977042
After a casual look I'll give you Sally although, after her husband died is there any mention of her taking another man, if not thats slightly presumptuous but fair.
I couldnt find any reference on the main wiki page that indicates Ace or David though.
@Orion This is generally what i mean. No characters really explicitly call it out, and those that do, it isn't really central to their character. Sure Sally had a husband, but is her "straightness" a main part of her character? No. But my point is, when they make someone NOT straight, it's going to be some huge part of their character, rather than just being another fact about them.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977038#Comment_1977038
Off the top of my head? Sally, David, Ace.
Ok perfect, let's take a look at David's main lore (not the tome) first. For reference, i'm using the wiki: https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/David_King
The single child of a wealthy family, David King seemed destined for greatness. While growing up in Manchester, he demonstrated serious potential in both sports and academics, and with his family connections, all doors were open to him. He could have succeeded at anything, if it weren't for his combative nature. David lived for the adrenaline rush of a good fight and would go out of his way to get into one.
His robustness and athletic abilities led him to rugby, where he could cut loose and really cause a ruckus. King excelled and gained a reputation as a promising, if somewhat reckless, rookie. His meteoric rise came to an abrupt end when he lost his temper and assaulted a referee, earning himself a lifetime ban from the league and cutting short what most people assumed was going to be a long, successful career. King was unconcerned; money was no issue, so he took it as an early retirement and focused on other fun things to do.
Free from the constraints of a career and enabled by the wealth of his family, David King spent most of his time at the pub, drinking, watching games, and getting into fights. Some might say he was wasting his life away. Not many people knew that he was an occasional "debt collector" or that he fought in clandestine bare-knuckle fight clubs.
When David King stopped showing up at the pub, the few friends he still had were not surprised. They figured he had finally picked a fight with someone stronger than he was. In a way, they were right.
Nothing here indicates that he is straight, it comes from the tomes here: https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Tome_II_-_Reckoning#David_King:_Manchester_Mash-Up
Now, looking at the short bit of lore above, what do we know about David?:
- He doesn't have any brothers or sisters
- He comes from a wealthy family.
- He is from Manchester.
- He is very athletic and also smart.
- He is aggressive and has an anger problem.
- He is an adrenaline junkie.
- He played rugby.
- He once assaulted a ref during a game and because of that ended his career
- Afterwards he started getting into fights on the street and in clubs.
now, unless i'm missing it, i don't see anything that indicates that he is straight, either here, or in the tome.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977029#Comment_1977029
So you prefer headcanon to real canon. That's fine, but it's not everyone's cup of tea.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977030#Comment_1977030
But the point i'm making is they don't really "handle" heterosexual relationships, because they aren't really part of the game in any way.
They're a part of the lore, just like non-heterosexual relationships will be. Seem to me they're handling everything just fine.
Let me put it this way. I don't actually know because i don't follow the lore closely enough so i'm asking so we can start a discussion, not as like a "gotcha"
Can you name one character that has lore that specifically calls out that they are heterosexual?
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977026#Comment_1977026
The fact that everyone just ASSUMES that we don't have an LGBT character because it isn't explicitly called out is literally problematic. You are ASSUMING the default status of everyone unless otherwise stated is straight.
It's not problematic to assume something based on statistics. The vast majority of fictional characters are heterosexual. As for your "worry", don't worry. If the devs can handle heterosexual relationships, they can handle non-heterosexual relationships. That won't stop bad faith actors from pretending that the non-heterosexual relationships are "the defining feature" of the characters, but then again, nothing stops them from complaining.
Like, if the character they make says anything in their lore other than (He had a Husband named James) or something, then it's going to be the sole focal point of their personality, rather than just being part of it. Which to me, is worse than not calling it out specifically.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1977026#Comment_1977026
The fact that everyone just ASSUMES that we don't have an LGBT character because it isn't explicitly called out is literally problematic. You are ASSUMING the default status of everyone unless otherwise stated is straight.
It's not problematic to assume something based on statistics. The vast majority of fictional characters are heterosexual. As for your "worry", don't worry. If the devs can handle heterosexual relationships, they can handle non-heterosexual relationships. That won't stop bad faith actors from pretending that the non-heterosexual relationships are "the defining feature" of the characters, but then again, nothing stops them from complaining.
That's not what a certain type of person might say.
But the point i'm making is they don't really "handle" heterosexual relationships, because they aren't really part of the game in any way.
-
@TheClownIsKing said:
Yo, Community.
Those opposed to this representation in this game, geez, there are better, more pressing things to be obsessing your doughy little brains on.
Do you know how large a part of this player base is LGBTIQ+? I guarantee that every single time you log into play this game, you are regularly being matched with other players from the LQBTIQ+ community. In some cases, probably almost every single match.
You’re in denial otherwise if this is not accepted.
ONE character providing representation of the LQBTIQ+ community from a roster of DOZENS doesn’t break the game, doesn’t change the rules, and isn’t going to corrupt you with its gay conversion laser beams through your screen.
Chill.
Or do you need to come out of the closet too?
For me, its that i don't think they will do it well based on how people are asking for it.
The reality of the situation, is that this is a game where the lore is about an evil entity (godlike being) kidnapping people and torturing them over and over again. Sexual orientation doesn't really play into that. And other than a handful of characters that are explicitly stated to be so where it talks about a man having a wife or vice versa, we don't actually know the status of most of the other characters in the game. The fact of the matter is, we might already have an LGBT character but just not know it because the lore doesn't explicitly call it out.
The fact that everyone just ASSUMES that we don't have an LGBT character because it isn't explicitly called out is literally problematic. You are ASSUMING the default status of everyone unless otherwise stated is straight. My worry is that when they finally do make an LGBT character (or announce a current one as being so) in a way that the "progressive" people are going to want, it is going to be some ridiculous hyperbolic version of that character where for no reason other than pandering they have to broadcast like a beacon their sexual orientation. Rather than it just being one part of the character, it is going to become the ONLY part of the character.
People are a not a singular thing, they are a large cross section of many different things all combined together to create a unique individual that is not like anyone else in the world.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAA1xgTTw9w@Zenro said:
Okay so I think I have cracked the code on the new survivor and the hints they have been dropping. So they have yet to reveal the face of the new survivor? Why is that? But they reveal the body and not the face. I believe the face will be somewhat masculine. Also lets go on to the coloring of the Mightee 1 entertainment banner on their twitter. It is blue and pink fading together. Blue representing boy and pink representing girl. Mighty one. Like both coming together to be one. I really feel very strongly that this is the case. The killer on the other hand I have no idea about... Thoughts!?
Ok
-
@CheesenChill said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1971568#Comment_1971568
I am new to the forum completely, just thought I saw something there and wanted to share
And mysteriously every time someone mentions FNAF it's always from a new account with 5 posts.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1971455#Comment_1971455
That by definition would mean a lot of people do want it....
No, because it's the same 5 people spamming threads. And most comments say we don't want it.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
The sIcK jUk3 montages have already begun. So kewl d00d. Totally makes the game look worthwhile to prospective buyers.
For comparison here is Super Mario 64. This game is almost 25 years old. It has better turning animation for the character than DBD does 25 years later.
Your game is a joke.
The problem with 360s, is that they only actually work because of auto aim not because of any actual skill the survivor did that the killer couldn't counter. They don't work most of the time, but sometimes the autoaim kicks in and says "nope, you are going to hit this rock over here instead"
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV-0pZVfXHI&t=9@GhostMaceNotCrusty said:
I didnt start playing until a few weeks after slinger was released. From my understanding, old Bnp just completely finished a gen? And if that's true, how did they think that was a good idea to begin with
Here is a video that shows it.
-
@PeaceNGrease said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1964757#Comment_1964757
Dude, I don't know if you missed the point of what I was saying, but I meant that BHVR does not WANT to take the game in a strictly competitive direction. It has NOTHING to do with whether I think it should be able to or not, I'm for competitive balance.
Like I said, it's a problem because competitive games tend not to have a mass appeal.. most people don't want to get really good at games. SF 5 was pretty much in a loss for years, and yea that had somewhat to do with mechanical changes people didn't like, but remember, this was a game that even had a period of commercials between fights in order to sure up profits, and SF is a big dog in the fighting game community, so imagine all the other hyper competitive fighters that don't have nearly the profile of and SF. I defy you to go find a fighting game that isn't SF, Tekken , or MK and find an active lobby with any consistency.
TLDR; BHVR does not have a great financial incentive to make the game a competitive first game. Therefore they will likely never go in that direction over balancing for the middle.
And you are missing my point.
It is a terrible financial decision for them to ignore this aspect of the game. Competitive play is what keeps games alive for a long time. If they don't do it, a competitor will. And games are already trying to do the asymmetrical thing again. It is only a matter of time until one succeeds and this game dies.
-
@PeaceNGrease said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1964262#Comment_1964262
Unfortunately what you just said only magnifies the issue.
If a killer is good enough to at least 2k/2e against the highest team when played at an equal level, that same killer will destroy a lower level team, leading that team and others like it to see killer as OP. Now if the best of the best are in the top, let's say, 15%, and you're about even with them, that means anyone in the 85% will feel like the killer role is OP.
The other side of that coin is unfortunately for a tourney viable setting (if that's what we want to achieve) is it would kind of necessitate balancing in that way - after all, if you put in the work to get good, shouldn't you be wrecking the vast majority of players? And it isn't your fault they refuse to get better...
But the thing is,ost competitive games kill off a huge amount of their player base going competitive. There isn't a great financial incentive to make the game competitive leaning, even IF they knew by what criteria they would need to modify the game in order to achieve this goal.
Most fighting games, for instance, do not enjoy the long lifespan that say, a LoL enjoys. That's why you see expansions as quickly as you do for games that add maybe a character or two and ask you to pay at least half the admission price again (although fighters today benefit way more from the fact most gamers are always online and they can endlessly expand the roster like Tekken 7, Street fighter 5, and even Mortal Kombat 11)
Dbd COULD probably go that way if it wanted to, but as the one exclusive successful game of BHVR, I understand their reluctance to gamble. I just take the game for what it is, I've been playing.so long I win or break even on the vast majority of games and that's just fine.
Few things:
If a killer is good enough to at least 2k/2e against the highest team when played at an equal level, that same killer will destroy a lower level team, leading that team and others like it to see killer as OP. Now if the best of the best are in the top, let's say, 15%, and you're about even with them, that means anyone in the 85% will feel like the killer role is OP.
It's almost like... It's almost like, that's the point.
If i am playing chess as a 1500 against a 1500, i should win 50% of the time and lose 50% of the time. If me as a 1500 plays against someone rated 2500, i should lose 99.99% of the time. That doesn't mean the game is unbalanced, it means that the person is way better than me. To bring it back to DbD. If a rank 20 killer plays against rank 20 survivors, they should on average kill 200 survivors during the course of 100 games. Same goes for the rank 1 killer against rank 1 survivors. Some games end in a 4k, some end in a 0k, some end in a draw. But on average it should even out to that 2k/2e.
The other side of that coin is unfortunately for a tourney viable setting (if that's what we want to achieve) is it would kind of necessitate balancing in that way - after all, if you put in the work to get good, shouldn't you be wrecking the vast majority of players? And it isn't your fault they refuse to get better...
This is untrue, there are ways you can balance a game around high level players while keeping lower skilled players in mind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1p42KtZOCwOne example of something that is holding back lower skilled players but has 0 impact on high skilled players is skill checks. There are also things that high level players do, like loop around great loops like jungle gyms and killer shacks with perfect efficiency, that low skill survivors aren't doing.
Something that could help this is to make all of the loops mindgameable (AKA no god loops) but put more of them in a map. This would mean higher skilled survivors are going to have more opportunities to showcase that skill by winning chases through mindgames rather than through brute forcing god pallets, and lower skilled survivors are going to have more pallets to work with. The more pallets won't effect low skilled killers too negatively because those survivors aren't playing very efficiently, and it won't hurt high level players because now mindgames are more effective and able to be dealt with.
Or totems: Like high skill survivors memorizing totem placements, so Hexes aren't as good against them, but low skill survivors don't know the spawns so they can't cleanse them as fast, making hex perks much stronger against them. You can do things that make it so hexes aren't as powerful against low skilled players, but better against higher skilled players (one idea i have is that all hexs should work like thrill of the hunt and decrease in power as totems are cleansed rather than being one and done, and when a hex is in the game all totems become lit, this would mean that the perks are more effective against higher skilled players who now have to cleanse more totems, but if a low skilled survivor stumbles across a totem they can slightly weaken the perk rather than just being unlucky and finding a dull totem.)
These are just a few examples.
Most fighting games, for instance, do not enjoy the long lifespan that say, a LoL enjoys. That's why you see expansions as quickly as you do for games that add maybe a character or two and ask you to pay at least half the admission price again (although fighters today benefit way more from the fact most gamers are always online and they can endlessly expand the roster like Tekken 7, Street fighter 5, and even Mortal Kombat 11)
How is this any different then what DbD does? All of these games (even LoL) constantly add new characters to the game that spice things up or shift the balance. That's how a game works in general, if you don't add new content eventually people leave regardless. But not having a competitive scene, not having something to strive toward isn't going to help either. 2 things can be true at the same time.
Also, SF5 is going on into year 5, so is DbD. Again, i don't understand the argument here about longevity.