Reinami
Reinami
About
- Username
- Reinami
- Joined
- Visits
- 6,317
- Last Active
Comments
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3969557#Comment_3969557
Over the years they've said repeatedly they always planned for SWF, just that it wasn't ready at launch in 2016. Back then the game was only on Steam, and survs wishing to team up would mad dodge lobbies until they found each other, which worked because of the small player pool and things like Discord. But not long after they added in SWF.
There's no doubt they considered lack of information a big chunk of the game's appeal and design, particularly with many of the perks. But once they ported the game over to the consoles (most with built-in comms) they stepped though a door there was no coming back from. And even now around half of all survs are in some form of SWF, mostly duos.
Not considering comms in all they do has bitten them in the rear lots of times that's true. But there's not much that they can realistically do about it either.
So mccote lied in that interview?
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3969336#Comment_3969336
That would be covered in my opinion of them underestimating comms.
Not really, the interview i mention is specifically him talking about the point of the game is and i quote: "you don't know who the killer is, what their power is, or who you are playing with and what abilities they have" specifically he is talking about your teammates as a survivor, as in, you do not know who they are.
That is heavily implying that the game was designed with solo queue as the only option in mind, and SWF was later added after.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3968676#Comment_3968676
They always intended for SWF it just wasn't ready for launch back in 2016. They could have either finished KYF mode or SWF in time and went with KYF, with SWF added in not long afterwards.
Imo they underestimated the effects of comms, but teaming up with a friend or two was always planned.
You're gonna need to explain why mccote specifically said that part of the fun of the game is not knowing the people you are playing with.
-
@DBD2025MakesMeSad said:
You're still completely missing the point of why tunnelling is a problem.
Yes there is the aspect of it making the game an easy win if you tunnel someone out early but the main problem is the game ruining aspect of it for the person being tunneled.
This person in your scenario has been tunnelled off the hook multiple times now. Their points have already maxed out in that category. They have absolutely no reason to carry on running. They are getting nothing from the game all because the killer is pathetic af and still insists on trying to ruin the game for people
Thats less of a problem with tunneling and more of a problem with the points system. It can easily be fixed by giving you a higher percentage of the other things your teammates are doing when you are being chased in general, or even for that long.
-
@DBD2025MakesMeSad said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3968612#Comment_3968612
Sharing the first hook won't really achieve anything anyway? People make out like it will revolutionise the game but it won't.
That injured survivor that just got unhooked is still a 1 hit down, the killer is still going to opt to tunnel that person off the hook as it is a down in one hit, rather than having to hit the healthy unhooker twice to achieve the same number of shared hooks used.
In fact it will further encourage tunnelling to blaze through everyone's first hook as quickly as possible.
So, imagine you hard tunnel that same person for 6 hooks to kill them, think about how much time that takes, just assuming that the survivors go down in even 20 seconds the amount of time it takes to. Down the person, wait for the cooldown, pick them up, walk to a hook, hook them, walk away, wait for a survivor to come and then do the same thing 6 times. You are talking about each hook being:
20 + 2.7 + 3 + 8 + 1.5 = 35.2 seconds.
Multiply that by 6 times, and thats 211.2 seconds. That is 2 survivors being able to be on gens uninterrupted, and a 3rd with probably half or 30% of that time. That's enough to finish 5 gens.
And thats assuming that every chase lasts 20 seconds, which like, that's the bare minimum, assuming they just run into a straight line straight to the corner of the map.
It'll be much better as the killer at that point to spread pressure to multiple survivors ,and activate your perks like pain res/DMS/grim etc.
-
@DBD2025MakesMeSad said:
You lot need to stop demonising the idea of people playing with friends.
I play regularly with someone who has played the game for years and they are the worst survivor. Not all SWF is a sweat team, some people are just hanging out with friends having a laugh. In fact that will be the majority of SWF you face. The majority of teams who batter you and you cry about being a 4 man SWF more than likely aren't. I have been accused of being in a 4 man SWF regularly when I am playing solo. You don't just lose to 4 man SWF, stop letting people fill your head with that.
The game should not be focused on the killer having an easy ride and having fun every match. There are 5 people in every round. Many killers have spent years saying "It isn't my responsibility for you to have fun" when they use unfun "tactics" to win the game. You can't now make it everyone else's responsibility to ensure you have fun as the killer
Its not demonizing. Its just a fact that the game was fundamentally designed from the ground up to be about not having information. McCote said in an early interview part of the fun is "queueing up, not knowing what killer you go against, not knowing their power, not knowing the people you are teamed up with or their abilities".
SWF was an afterthought, and it has created problems ever since it was added.
Nobody is mad at the players for playing with friends. But if you want the game to truly be balanced, something must be done to fix that.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3968612#Comment_3968612
Therein lies the problem. Players want solos and SWFs to be more aligned, while getting upset over external comms and simultaneously stonewalling the idea of in-game comms. I think they're long overdue.
That being said, BHVR has tried to bring the two halves closer together via kill rates but it doesn't seem like it's quelled any of the upset.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3968616#Comment_3968616
Like everything with DBD, it was anecdotal. I've never had a queue that long on either side in my region. But that's not to say that it never happened to anyone (granted, I'm sure I'd experience that if I played 2v8 as Killer).
I would argue solos likely make up the majority and it's the same for them as well. I play during events, maybe do my weeklies when the new rift tier unlocks, and that's it. I feel like DBD occupies a not-so-healthy place in a lot of player's lives, mine included. Best to keep it limited.
I personally think it is a losing battle. The only thing that makes sense to me honestly is to create 2 separate queues, and balance them differently.
For example, they can finally create that hardcore "ranked mode" and make it be 1 killer vs guaranteed 4 SWFs.
Then in the "normal queue" you only allow people to queue up with 1 other person, and set up matchmaking so the match is always 4 solos, or 1 duo and 2 solos.
Yeah, you lose out on the 3-man, but, the idea there is the duos can meet up with new people and potentially queue up for ranked. And its not much different than other games like League or DotA which need a team of 5 and one of the modes is relegated to ranked play and the other is solo.
Then you balance the modes differently. For example, in the normal mode, survivors get all their basekit stuff, maybe throw in basekit kindred, or even DS or whatever else, make the gens 80 seconds instead of 90 etc. And in the SWF mode, you throw in a bunch of basekit stuff for killer, like pain res, or corrupt, make gens take 100 seconds etc. The numbers and ideas aren't relevant, but the idea is you can just balance each mode differently.
Either that, or just accept that this game can't be balanced when its fundamentally designed around "lack of information" and you give a way for one group of people to communicate and share information, and don't give it to the other people for some reason.
-
@DBD2025MakesMeSad said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/451761/when-are-we-getting-phase-2-info
Pointless really, the PTB will have killers crying that it is too effective and it will get nerfed to oblivion before live. The usual survivor treatment.
The problem is and always has been SWFs, If the mechanic is setup in a way that SWFs with free discord communication are able to exploit it to gain an advantage, then is a problem. Its tough to create an anti-tunnel/anti-slug system that isn't abusable. The only thing i can think of is just fundamentally rebalancing the game around hooks and chases instead of kills, and then just make tunneling impossible from a gameplay perspective (I.E. my often suggested idea of survivors sharing the first hook state)
-
@Coffee2Go said:
So help me understand since dead by daylight is an asymmetrical game or tries to be and is marketed as one, why do you people hate when people suggest reworking M1 killers with no mobility to have an ability that helps them have hybrid mobility to match up equally with M2 Killers who rely on their abilities to have an edge on both large and small maps.
I see people down voting posts left and right without even inputting their opinion why the post is so bad why is it so bad that some killers get reworked to have the ability that wont injure survivors for them but to help locate them easier to make up for the mobility M2 Killers have.
I would like to understand it better again since the people that do comment on reworks say stuff like:
"This is totally off what the licensed character does in movies"
"So you want to re-work killers with stable playrate pickrate"
Like this has to stop this is a very toxic mindset that does not help the game go in right direction.
Either the people who are like this are aware of the killers are a joke to them because they still want to have games where they can loop them finite amount of times
Or people are in general oblivious and say that the killer does not need a rework because the killer just does fine by running "certain addons + perks".
So just because 1 playstyle almost always guarantes a win on M1 killers the killers dont deserve a rework that can help the game feel more asymmetrical than just a meta chaser game?
Again i just want someone to explain to me the logic because logic is not logic apperently and people just seem to settle for what has been in the game for few years now and it just "worked'.
My best assumption is that im just in minority of people that refuse to play myers with tombstone because its not fun but it does make it very lethal it can turn tables in favor for myers.
Im more of a variety build myers myself but everyone seems to just take him for granted whenever you are not playing the meta build for him.
I'm not against it per se. But i think that at a systemic level, it needs to be adressed that like, half the killer roster is just unviable, with only like 3-4 viable at the highest level.
I don't think you need to just "buff m1 killers" you need to basically buff killers as a whole, while nerfing the top tier killers that will benefit most from those buffs.
-
@Rapid99 said:
This post just screams of "I just watched the most recent Scott Jund video"
Yeah, usually when him or otz make a video suddenly there's posts on the forums being like "i have this great thought that nobody else has ever thought before"
-
@jasonq500 said:
In my opinion clown just got a straight up nerf if you played from his current state with the nerf to purple bottles
and with the direction it's going, spamming yellow bottles now with haste perks and addons might be miserable to go against and a bit brainless with how quick the activation starts
What do you think, was his change a buff, nerf or a side grade
Its a nerf with a dumbing down of his gameplay.
They basically lowered the skill floor and the ceiling at the same time. So at the highest level he is weaker, but at the lower levels he is stronger. Kinda the opposite of what they should be doing.
-
@SpringMyTrap said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3966070#Comment_3966070
you dont solve this by blanket buffing killers.
you solve this by either acknowledging that "unhealthy" strategies still need to be viable and that the way you address them is by giving survivors more ways of coordination or acknowledging that the only killers you want to be viable are 1v1 chasers with meta forever remaining to be billy, blight and nurse.
you wont ever solve this issue by continuously patching out strategic gameplay and thus indirectly and disproportionately nerfing every killer whose power doesnt allow to bruteforce the game by winning every chase, while giving blanket buffs like stronger slowdown perks (that work when you win those chases) or nerfing survivor gen speeds / ability to hold chase.
you will only create a bigger gap between already disproportionately powerful killers because every buff to chasepower you could give to killers that dont fit in the aforementioned stereotype will be twice as good on killers that do.
I'm not saying blanket buff killers, i expicitly said not to do that. The problem should not be fixed via bandaid fixes and perks and done in a way that doesn't harm low skill survivors.
For an example i like to give. Lets look at killer shack. In the hands of a high skill survivor, who does things like "shift tech" to prevent a chase from starting, and using check spots that they can use due to the holes in the shack walls that let them see where the killer is. Killer shack becomes one of the most powerful structures in the game for these survivors, and can actually be a literal infinite if they play it perfectly against certain killers.
Imagine they nerfed shack. They removed the holes in the walls, so that they can't see through it, they nerfed "Shift tech" by making it not possible, and maybe added some short LoS blockers that make the check spots a bit weaker.
What would this do to the highest level play? Well it would significantly nerf the shack and make it less strong for those high skill survivors.
What about in low level "bad" survivor players? It wouldn't do anything, because those players aren't using check spots, and they aren't using shift tech. Those survivors don't even realize that "Tiles" are a thing, and are just running around. You aren't going to hurt those players by doing that, because they are just predropping the shack pallet anyway.
This is just an example, and not something that i think needs to be done at every loop or anything. I'm just illustrating that there are these types of changes you can do, where you are "nerfing" survivors, but not acutally hurting the low skill survivors.
In the meantime, you do things like, make tunneling and camping impossible (not just nerfed, but just flat out impossible) and in doing so you'll actually BUFF those low skill survivors, who fall apart when facing these strategies.
So you will simultaneously be nerfing high skill survivors, while buffing low skill survivors.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
Gen kick and 3 gen metas are literally proof that even when given game-breaking levels of slowdown, killers will camp and tunnel harder.
We're more than 3 years into this "just buff killers and people will stop tunneling" experiment. It doesn't work: the carrot doesn't work here.
Because SWFs are just as powerful if not more powerful than they have been in a while.
What needs to be done is to buff killers as a whole because therea re like 4 viable ones (but it needs to be done in a way that isn't just numbers tweaks, it needs a systemic change that doesn't hurt low level survivor players), and also at a systemic level fix tunneling and camping so they fundamentally are not possible.
-
@Legion_S_Tier said:
I just want to start by saying that right now I think this perk is in a fine spot and for the most part, well balanced. However, just for discussion purposes, would it be too much of a nerf if it deactivated when a person dies? I feel like for most games this wouldn’t be a huge deal and mainly affect killers who hard tunnel. I understand that on occasions this could punish someone who isn’t hard tunneling but hasn’t had many opportunities to hook on a scourge hook for whatever reasons. That’s why I want to know other peoples opinions. Perhaps as compensation increase the regression rate to 25% again?
Why? It already has a limit to usages, and if the killer is hard tunneling someone out the other 3 survivors should be on gens. And 3rdly, anti-tunnel is coming. Its a problem that should be adresses systemically, not with bandaids.
-
@PatchNoir said:
Basically, chain blinding is shining again after the first got blinded once, to earn value from the previous blind, leading to a faster and longer blinding.
Some chain blindings personally feel detrimental to the game overall
Case A: Hooks, if the Killer hooks someone, you're able to blind him from behind the hook with no counterplay 2 times, enabling a safe rescue for a 3 survivor.
Reasoning: I think this is unhealthy because it abuses the interactivity of hooking while punishing the hooking action wich should be encouraged, it's not the same case like blinding on pallets or window animations since those are chase scenarios. Also this encourages hook farming to abuse the basekit bt protection hit since the savior will not have to trade the hook.
Case B: Saves, after doing a flashlight save you can chainblind to deepen the gap between the killer and the injured survivor.
Reasoning: after performing a save if you chain blind theres also no counterplay since the killer is stuck on the stun animation (wich by itself its a mechanic to create space to the injured survivor), the problem with the chain blind is that it also allows the healthy survivor to create a big distance too and apply perks like champion off light ,residual manifest, while charging exhaustion.
Worst case scenario vigil,champion,sprint burst, fixated.
Mechanically, the blinding feels like an invisible meter that fills with the shining of the light and decays overtime, chaining blinds is refilling this meter before it depletes too much. The big problem is that after one blinding is succesfull the meter doesnt go back to 0 instantly, and thats why in SOME cases grenades are healthier. Chain blinding also isnt a problem for low-skilled players, but if the increased blinding duration for the second blind is so meaningful maybe the addons should to that job, instead of cheesing the game code. Also it isnt a problem on chases that much, just on uncounterable scenarios like the previous mentioned where you cant move your head as a killer.
Given the risk of potentially giving someone a seizure and accessibility issues. It would be reasonable i think to give being blinded a short 2-3 second cooldown before you can be blinded again.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3964822#Comment_3964822
That would be nice, although might need some testing. You'd essentially be able to hook them on any hook you want with that. Planting Charlotte in basement before picking up with Victor would be a thing.
Make it work in the reverse, give a "Swap places" button, where you can have victor and charlotte swap places during switching to one of them. So if you say, leave Charlotte somewhere, down a survivor with victor, swap them, and now you are charlotte and near the downed survivor.
Could also be used the other way for some interesting setups, and actually be able to function as "2 killers in 1"
-
@thrawn3054 said:
Their power doesn't revolve around slugging. That's just how alot of Twins players like to play.
I would suggest you try playing twins sometime.
-
@SimpWoo said:
Hello! I'm someone thats been maining unknown since their launch and while I do love unknown, he's very frustrating alot of the times due to him not being very good against better survivors.
My Goal for these suggestions is to NOT make him an A+ tier killer, but to make him feel less frustarting to play while also still bringing fair counterplay to the survivor side
There will be 3 sections I'm gonna talk about and I encourage anybody reading this to give back feedback and please don't be aggressive about it. Thanks ^^
Buffs that are needed:
-Make the weakened meter fill up FULLY when damaging survivors with a successful UVX: This almost feels like an oversight since you just can't take advantage of the new meter built up because your power just cannot recover in time and it makes the unknown have to hit the survivor 2 times again when they damaged the survivor with the UVX. This causes alot of frustrations since you are essentially punished for using power and ofc that should never happen.
-UVX cooldown reduced by 1 second: In my opinion, unknown's current cooldown is just way too long and punishing for something that can be avoided very easily. This could even be shortened to 2 seconds or perhaps introduce a system where the more people are weakened the less time cooldown on your power. This change would make unknown more attractive to play as well as reduce the frustrations of not being able to play the game while having the survivors get weakened off for completely free.
-Make the weakened meter fill up FULLY when interupting a survivor during mid teleport: Similar to my first point. A little bit silly the survivor doesn't get punished for messing up.
Buffs that I would like to see but not all of them implemented:
-Lingering effect reduced: A survivor can peak the unknown for a split second and have nealry 1 1/2 seconds of weakened reduced. Now while I might understand why they did this for low sensitivty gamers, it's still very frustrating playing a tile with a survivor and them having their weakened being all the way depleted with them BARLEY looking at me.
-UVX recovery cooldown reduced slightly: There are moments where I hit a survivor with UVX and I would not get the double tap because my recovery is too long and they just vault a window regardless of me hitting my UVX. This is very frustrating as again, I'm not being rewarded for my skillful play.
-Weakened dispeal effect is weaker when looking at the unknown from farther away: Right now, it's actually impossible for the unknown to hit a survior from farther away and you can see the little spit fired and can react very easily to it. I'm hoping with this change this encourages unknown players to go for longer shots as well as make it less frusrating for the unknown player trying to catch up to the survivor running away.
-Have sketch attempt basekit: Sketch Attempt has the survivor effected with oblivious when hit with UVX. I just think it would be funny since he's a very scary monster
Buffs I do NOT wanna see:
Direct UVX hit: I do not want this as this takes way alot of its identity away as it will just become a springtrap or huntress revving your back with projectile and thats boring for both sides.
Being able to look up and down with no restrictions: I think looking up might be ok but looking down I do not want as this takes away the counterplay of survivors being able to run up to you to avoid power.
Nerf to Unknown:
Unknow cannot teleport to a hallucination that is 8 meters near him. I think if these buffs were implemented, we can take away the pretty cheese chase ender of just putting up a clone near a loop and just hitting the survivor for free as theres really no counterplay to that on most loops.
Anyways that about it! I of coarse could suggest more stuff but these are the ones I mostly wanted to talk about and I believe would make unknown so much better. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions or have an opinion on any one of these points. Let's pray for unknown buffs soon!
I always thought what he needed to be interesting was to swap his power around.
When a survivor is weakened, to remove the weakness, they have to actively NOT look at the killer. Looking at the killer will paus the meter.
This would mean that in chase, the survivor would have to actively not look in the direction of the killer, which gives the killer a chance to mindgame better. So its a price you pay. Either, you look away, potentially losing sight of the killer and open yourself up to getting mindgamed, or you look at the killer so you know where they are, but you can now be hit with the power.
To deal with this outside of chase, i would make it work something like. Weakness has say 100 charges to remove it. While in a chase, you reduce charges at 10 per second (10 seconds). Whereas outside of a chase it gets reduced by 2.5 charges per second (40 seconds)
-
@PolarBear said:
Both 2v1 and 3v1 situations desperately need to be looked at. This is going to sound unpopular but there needs to be a catch up mechanic for when a survivor dies early to keeps survivors engaged instead of what we have now where the game grinds to a halt and the survivors eventually all die. For me this is the biggest pain point in the game, before it was manageable since you could just die on hook but now that its removed you are forced to stay in the match for several more minutes than before. Complete misery for everyone involved, even as a killer because now if you want an actual interesting match you need to play worse to give the other side a chance.
You have to be careful with catchup mechanics, because if not done properly or carefully, you just end up rewarding someone for playing badly. You should not be punished for playing well and have your opponent be rewarded for playing badly.
Ideally instead of a "Catchup mechanic" the game should just fundamentally be designed at a core level to not snowball as hard. For example if survivors shared the 1st hook state, then you couldn't be eliminated from them atch until the 6 hook at the absolute earliest. That would help solve much of that snowball potential.
On the other side of things, adding in more basekit gen defense that is gained through more rewarding gameplay like hooking survivors would go a long way to helping out the killer side.
-
@Volcz said:
IMO, all he needs is to not be able to cancel swings (you shouldn't be able to rectify mistakes to the point where the mistake is non existent).
Its worse than Legion but with all the downsides of Legion nullified.
If you did that, he would just be a slightly better legion with map mobility. If anything legion needs to be changed and buffed in some meaningful way. The skill of the power is being able to use it to swing around and cancel it while blocking people.
-
@bleep275 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961812#Comment_3961812
Your straws are starting to take the shape of a man
You're gonna need to explain how what i said didn't address this then:
Even in symmetric games, it's generally considered at least poor sportsmanship to take advantage of power imbalance, e
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961784#Comment_3961784
Once again, you (along with many others) misunderstand the issue Survivors take with slugging. It's not just that it's a "cheap win" for the Killer, it wastes everyone's time. In Street Fighter, regardless of what "cheap moves" you use to win, you simply knock out your opponent. "YOU WIN." Next match. Even on the flipside, "YOU LOSE." Next match.
But here, the Killer is just dragging it out for no reason, rubbing their victory in the Survivors face. Isn't this why you have such an issue with Survivors teabagging at the exit gate? Why is it okay for the Killer to waste the Survivors' time, but it's not okay for Survivors to waste the Killer's time? Talk about a double standard.
If you are gonna be disingenous and bring up year old pots i have made and take them out of context and say i'm saying one thing when you are literally talking to the person who made those statements and is clarifying, then i can't help you. You are probably the kind of person who goes and digs up 10 year old tweets to "cancel" someone for saying something wrong when they were a teenager too.
No point in engaging anymore if you are going to so from bad faith.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961836#Comment_3961836
Last September. And, for the record, this is literally like the 5th result on these forums when I just search your username. I didn't "hunt for this". This is your stance.
Also, since you're hard set on this behavior just being "playing the game" as you've forcefully defended several times now… why would a stream or video of playing the game be a problem? Are you just against DbD content? How bizarre.
(Hint: it's because it's toxic behavior that shouldn't be celebrated, lauded, or elevated. Especially not put on display for people to reproduce or replicate. But you've backed yourself into a corner where you can't actually say that generally right now. You are actually of the opinion, right now, that survivors are toxic, but killers can't be. That's ridiculous, and you know it.)
C.O.N.T.E.N.T. C.R.E.A.T.O.R.S.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961836#Comment_3961836
So is it fine to make people DC or is it just posting it that's bad?
Again, that post is specifically talking about content creators specificaly.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961812#Comment_3961812
This you?
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792742#Comment_3792742
Because, apparently, you do understand that toxicity occurs and can be problematic. At least when survivors do it. Which was my point.
This is talking about content creators specifically. But good job taking it out of context.
Also if you find something i posted years ago that is something i may or may not believe anymore that also won't help you much.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961808#Comment_3961808
We've seemingly entered the same era for Survivor.
So, what's to be done about it, I wonder.
You don't think:
- Anti-camp
- Anti-tunnel
- Anti-slug
- Anti-go next
Are not part of that?
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961784#Comment_3961784
Sounds like an awful lot of defense of a poor position.
But hey, you've shown excellently who the reasonable party is. We have Side A, which believes there is no toxicity in Ba Sing Se and Side B, who acknowledges said toxicity and tries, if misguidedly, to do something about it.
Got it so, i purchased the video game, which means you are allowed to tell me how i should play said video game.
Can you tell me what perks i'm allowed to use too?
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961784#Comment_3961784
Everything you just said can also be applied to "gen rushing". Maybe killers are just bad at applying pressure.
I'm guessing there's some special circumstance in your mind where that doesn't apply.
This is just the hockey analogy all over again, btw. Even if I agreed here, which I don't, taking a symmetric game and trying to apply those ideas to an asymmetric doesn't hold up.
There's no "power role" in street fighter. There's no default game mode where only one player can take damage and the other is immune.
Even in symmetric games, it's generally considered at least poor sportsmanship to take advantage of power imbalance, even when that balance isn't just handed out by the devs like it is in DbD. Smurfing in any game is generally considered BM (or in DbD terms "toxic"). Shoot, even DbD has had issues in the past with people deranking to stomp new players.
There's basically nothing to support you here. Not even past DbD, which is where your arguments fall the hardest. And I genuinely doubt that you'd be ok with reverting, say, dead hard for distance, balanced landing, mettle of man, and circle of healing, just as a few examples, and just chalk it up to "skill issue" if people can't handle it. Please.
I don't understand why you all keep thinking you are gonna "get me" because of "gen rushing" or "teabagging at the gates"
I don't think those things are good at the game, but i don't blame survivors for doing them.
Also, no its not, in Street Fighter again, if i know my opponent mains Zangief, and i know that Sagat has an amazingly good matchup against him (a 7-3 usually) i might counterpick him by playing Sagat. This is all part of the game. It doesn't make me toxic for counter picking them because i know they only play Zangief.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961742#Comment_3961742
4 man slugging til bleedout isn't toxic apparently.
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961742#Comment_3961742
Neither is teabagging at the exit gate. They're just playing a video game. Playing the video game is not toxic.
BTW, you sound like a bot.
Let me put it this way.
If i'm playing say, street fighter, and playing against my opponent, and i find out that my opponent is really bad at dealing with throws. And so i throw them 10 times in a row. Some might call that "cheap" some might say its "unfair" some might say i'm "spamming" or "being toxic". But is it really? The point is, what if slugging all 4 survivors, what if throwing 10 times in a row, what if throwing 100 fireballs in a row is strategically the thing that optimizes my chances for winning?
What if, as a killer, i see that my opponents are really bad at dealing with being slugged. Maybe i realize they didn't bring perks to counter it, maybe i realized that they just don't know how to counter the strategy. Why would i not do that thing? Why would i play a game that is about winning and losing in a way that makes it so i have less of a chance of winning, if winning is what my goal is?
Now maybe someone might have a goal that is different from winning or losing, sure, that is entirely possible. But someone might have that goal. If they do, who are you to say how they should work toward achieveing that victory?
Thinking that person is toxic, is a "Scrub" mindset. Not the word "scrub" as an insult, but as a description. I suggest reading the free e-book by game designer David Sirlin, Playing to Win:
Here is an excerpt from that book:
The derogatory term “scrub” means several different things. One definition is someone (especially a game player) who is not good at something (especially a game). By this definition, we all start out as scrubs, and there is certainly no shame in that. I mean the term differently, though. A scrub is a player who is handicapped by self-imposed rules that the game knows nothing about. A scrub does not play to win.
Now, everyone begins as a poor player—it takes time to learn a game to get to a point where you know what you’re doing. There is the mistaken notion, though, that by merely continuing to play or “learn” the game, one can become a top player. In reality, the “scrub” has many more mental obstacles to overcome than anything actually going on during the game. The scrub has lost the game even before it starts. He’s lost the game even before deciding which game to play. His problem? He does not play to win.
The scrub would take great issue with this statement for he usually believes that he is playing to win, but he is bound up by an intricate construct of fictitious rules that prevents him from ever truly competing. These made-up rules vary from game to game, of course, but their character remains constant. Let’s take a fighting game off of which I’ve made my gaming career: Street Fighter.
In Street Fighter, the scrub labels a wide variety of tactics and situations “cheap.” This “cheapness” is truly the mantra of the scrub. Performing a throw on someone is often called cheap. A throw is a special kind of move that grabs an opponent and damages him, even when the opponent is defending against all other kinds of attacks. The entire purpose of the throw is to be able to damage an opponent who sits and blocks and doesn’t attack. As far as the game is concerned, throwing is an integral part of the design—it’s meant to be there—yet the scrub has constructed his own set of principles in his mind that state he should be totally impervious to all attacks while blocking. The scrub thinks of blocking as a kind of magic shield that will protect him indefinitely. Why? Exploring the reasoning is futile since the notion is ridiculous from the start.
You will not see a classic scrub throw his opponent five times in a row. But why not? What if doing so is strategically the sequence of moves that optimizes his chances of winning? Here we’ve encountered our first clash: the scrub is only willing to play to win within his own made-up mental set of rules. These rules can be staggeringly arbitrary. If you beat a scrub by throwing projectile attacks at him, keeping your distance and preventing him from getting near you—that’s cheap. If you throw him repeatedly, that’s cheap, too. We’ve covered that one. If you block for fifty seconds doing no moves, that’s cheap. Nearly anything you do that ends up making you win is a prime candidate for being called cheap. Street Fighter was just one example; I could have picked any competitive game at all.
Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is a tactic close to my heart that often elicits the call of the scrub. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can’t counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn’t I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. That is true by definition of playing to win. The game knows no rules of “honor” or of “cheapness.” The game only knows winning and losing.
A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which one tries to win at all costs is “boring” or “not fun.” Who knows what objective the scrub has, but we know his objective is not truly to win. Yours is. Your objective is good and right and true, and let no one tell you otherwise. You have the power to dispatch those who would tell you otherwise, anyway. Simply beat them.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3961655#Comment_3961655
You're calling "standing there and watching someone bleed out" as "playing the game?" It's not. It's just... Standing there. Doing nothing. I wonder if you'd say the same for a Survivor who was just standing there watching someone bleed out. They're just "playing the game," so it's perfectly fine.
Playing the video game is not toxic.
-
@thrawn3054 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3960858#Comment_3960858
There is no way you're actually defending the Huntress here. That was absolutely toxic and the player deserves to be called out for it. Just because trash behavior is possible doesn't make it any less trash.
Playing the game is not toxic.
-
@LordGlint said:
While I get where you're coming from since I ALSO find it annoying to have to wait while I can SEE the Survivors with Lethal, I get why they dont want him to have it right away. Unlike other killers, he would be in the middle of 4 Survivors in 3 seconds of the match starting before anyone can even THINK of locking a locker. Its similar to why Onryo has to wait too. This is way faster than anyone else that has their power immediately.
IDK, there are plenty of killers who are able to be there that fast these days.
- Ghoul
- Lich
- Springtrap
- Nurse
- Blight
-
@I_Cant_Loop said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3960858#Comment_3960858
I disagree. No matter how many controls the devs put in place to prevent toxicity, there will always be something that players find that they can do that is completely unnecessary and they only do it to be toxic. It would be impossible for the devs to engineer out every possible toxic action.
Playing a game is not toxic, full stop. You can't tell other people how to play the game that they pay for. If you don't like it, you need to be complaining to the developers, not the players.
-
@I_Cant_Loop said:
Slugging isn’t reportable, but it can be toxic depending on the situation. I’ve slugged survivors and let them bleed out, but only in response to displays of toxicity on their side like constantly t-bagging every time they drop a pallet or vault a window. Aside from situations like that, I agree that the killer is at fault for being overly toxic to let survivor bleed out like that.
This is why BHVR needs to allow survivors to abandon if they are slugged as one of the last two remaining. At that point, the match is effectively over. People on these forums have pointed this out to the devs/mods repeatedly, but nothing has been done yet. It would be nice if they didn’t take so long to make what should be a very simple, straightforward and logical change.Playing the game is not toxic, if you don't like what a player is doing, you need to blame the developers for allowing it, rather than the player doing it.
-
@crogers271 said:
The first thing to do is to identify what makes the game "lost" at that point for the survivors, and the point is simple, survivors have 3 hook states and then they are out. Once the game is a 1v3, its effectively over at that point unless there's only 1, or MAYBE 2 gens left (if the killer massively messes up).We're getting a little bit away from the the original concept of first chase. The killer getting a survivor out before the gens get to a certain point does radically increase their chances of victory, absolutely true, but that's not just a first chase thing. We're more in anti-tunnel territory which BHVR says they have something coming for (and I'll save speculation on it until it comes).
Survivors share the 1st hook state.This makes it so the earliest you can remove a survivor is on your 6th hook, assuming you have hooked that person the 5th and 6th time.Removing a survivor early isn't really possible, you'll have to get at least 6 hooks, which is half of your total goal, by then the game should be well on its way toward the 2nd half of the match.I say only the first, because i think if all hooks were shared, and you only could start killing survivors when you got 8 hooks it would feel really bad as a survivor player to be doing well, but my team "burns through all the hook stages" and then you have 1 bad chase and just immediately die.
I ended my post by saying to fix it we would need to get into radical overhaul ideas, and this sounds like a pretty radical change. But I'll jump in as a hypothetical that BHVR would consider it and would be willing to rebalance/change all of the things/perks it would impact:
This would be a pretty massive buff for survivors. You have suggestions for killer side coming but we're looking at a very different game. Not only would the tunnel out be impossible, survivors have no incentive to get off gens and prioritize protecting each other until after the 5th hook. If a survivor gets hooked twice in a row, instead of playing cautious they can just play normally and still attack the gens that most need to be done.
The bigger issue though is fun and game theme. One of the things that makes survivor exciting is that you're never that far from an elimination. I feel like it would really tamp down on the tension, especially in the early game. As is, the survivor role doesn't have a ton of engagement factors, needing to be cautious and avoid elimination is one of the biggest elements.
This is a general danger when trying to 'correct' game design. Yes, you can smooth out the lows, the worst games, but you risk losing the best games as well. DbD gains a lot of its fun from its elimination nature and elimination style games, by their very nature, have the potential to be lopsided, but the eliminations also add a huge element of the excitement.
So basically, it could be done, it would require a lot of rebalancing, you'd take out the worst of the game outcomes, but I feel like the game might lose a lot of its appeal.
Killers need some way to either:Make hooking faster, in a way that doesn't break the gameSo no like, remote hooking like the event, because it takes away too muchNo "move faster while carrying" because that also breaks the game if they can chase with a survivor on their back.
Some basekit way to regress gens meaningfully after a hook
Again, it kind of feels like we're getting away from the original thread concept of the first chase and to just general balance issues.
Personally, I don't think the hook speed is a big issue. The survivor has a choice to make, run for the corner, or stay in the loop. If they get downed in the loop they are likely near a hook, if they run to the corner too quickly they've given up valuable time they could have spent looping the killer. If they pull it off perfectly that get rewarded, but good gameplay should result in rewards. Both sides can play around that element of gameplay.
Killers basekit regression is buffed, and the perks are nerfed. Things like:Basekit gen kick to 10% (nerf pop and the like)Basekit regression to 200%Basekit surge at 5% (that works on special attacks) or basekit pain res at 10% (nerf those perks)Basekit corrupt that lasts for say, 30 seconds.
Let's say all of this balances out (which I think could generally be done).
You're creating a slower, more methodical game. Except DbD is a sprint. The thing that makes it stand out is the feeling of tension and heart pumping excitement basically from the time the match starts.
I, personally, don't think a DbD trial has the depth for longer matches as the norm. The pressure of the decision making frequently comes from the 'you must act now!' element when posed with options (take for example comparing a real time strategy game vs a turn based strategy game).
Would some players enjoy such gameplay more? Absolutely, just as some would dislike it. We're now getting into subjective game design questions though.
Gen times (and potentially regression) are adjusted the following way:5 gens left: 130 seconds per gen4 gens left: 110 seconds per gen3 gens left: 90 seconds per gen2 gens left: 70 seconds per gen1 gen left: 50 seconds per gen
Given that gens are static I think you more mean you are impacting the survivors gen speed so
-5 gens: ~0.7 charges a second
-4 gens: ~0.8 chares a second
-3 gens: as is
-2 gens: ~1.2 charges a second
-1 gen: ~1.8 charges a second (this one is way too fast)
This is something I would love to see them test without anything else. I'm not sure if it would work or not, but I'd be very interested in the outcome. My gut reaction is that this would be a big survivor buff as higher speeds for the final gen is worth far more than taking longer early (the alternative possibility is that every game leads to a 3 gen as the killer has plenty of time to protect his most important gens early in the match).
These are just a handful of ideas that, would be hard to say how well they would work without actually testing them. But there are plenty of ideas and things they could do that could even out the early game for both sides in a way that is fun and engaging without breaking the rest of the game.There are always plenty of ideas. I suspect, just based on what I know of other game companies, that there are some ideas we would consider radical that have been batted around in discussion and potentially testing that never even make it to a public announcement because its decided they don't work.
Fixing issues is certainly something BHVR should try, a fix usually creates complex knock on effects especially in an asym that they have to worry about but can be overcome, but beyond that, there are far more subjective questions on overall game experience that they have to worry about.
These were examples of things that can be done with minimal effort by the devs that would potentially solve these problems. I was simply responding the message of "what can you even do" which was said in a somewhat accusatory way as if to say "there is nothing that can be done" and i was simply wanting to prove that statement wrong, as there are plenty of things that can be done.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
Finally, someone gets it! Though I'm not sure how much I agree with the Killer side, though. They already have all the basekit catchup mechanics, and endgame builds which can be highly oppressive. So it's way easier for them to come back from a bad start as opposed to Survivors.
I agree that something should be done about it, though I'm not sure what.
Please don't make this about sides, i'm trying to have a constructive conversation here about the early game that impacts ALL players here. If you make it about sides, then all that goes out the window.
-
@crogers271 said:
Something should be done to smooth out the state of the game so its not just all instant snowball at the sign of one thing going wrong for one side or the other.Okay, but what though?
The idea that the early game is massively important is pretty well established. I'll even add that lots of it is pretty random, as an example the killer has no idea if the first survivor they take chase with is the survivor with the full chase build or the guy who wants to go for gens.
Can it be fixed?
First there's a conceptual problem. Fixes would come off as a catch up mechanic like exists in 2v8 and that already has a mixed reception. It doesn't feel great to have something go well, especially if you feel like you made a great play/series of plays, and the game to give boosts to the other side.
Okay, let's say we aren't going to worry about that group of players and we'll just focus on the practical problems.
Slowing down the survivors from getting a great start seemingly isn't too hard on first look. You could just create a condition wherein the survivors do gens at a reduce rate until the first down, but also lower the overall time it takes to complete gens. As just an example, say survivors are slowed down by 25% of the current speed until the first down, but the overall charges needed for a gen go from 90 to 80.
Something like that would be doable, but it does still lead to a few problems. What happens if the survivors get a pallet/flashlight save, chase is back on, and the gens are now going, compared to the current game, even faster? You could make it hook instead of down, though that potentially makes slugging too strong, especially for killers like Twins. Okay, well you could write a more complex if statement: if no survivor has been hooked and no survivor is currently downed, survivors get a 25% penalty (this then needs a bit more of coding for the worries about No Mither + Plot Twist).
We then start to get into problems with killers. While giving additional time to set up killers like Trapper would be a good boost, it would be too strong of a boost to killers like Plague and Singularity.
And I have no idea how you'd handle something like a Tombstone Myers.
Let's say we figure out a way to correspondingly nerf the killers who would be too strong, let's get onto survivors. Survivors now adopt a code of 'no one drops a pallet on the first chase'. If the second chase is really long instead of the first, its not a huge change. The big issue for survivors is getting a really good chase in before someone is eliminated so they can maximize time getting gens done. That usually is the first chase, because there is no reason for it not to be, but it wouldn't be hard to evade a system by just using windows on the first chase and leaving pallets for later.
Let's say maybe I'm overthinking this and we just go with something like basekit corrupt. I think you take away an important early game decision making on the survivors for whether they stay where they spawned or spread out, and now its always spread out. Being its always going to happen it becomes something very easy for SWFs to game plan around. And again we still have the issue that basekit slowdown like that would be very lopsided on a killer by killer basis.
And of all of that is just smoothing out the survivor side for when they get too good of a start. What about when the killer gets too good of a start? I'm not even sure there is a workable path forward. If Billy chainsaws someone on the first down do we just apply a BNP to every gen to keep things balanced? Getting survivors into the old 'one on hook, one in chase, one rescue, one on gens' is basically the goal. It's much harder to come up with a solution here that is balanced without it just being 'bad killer, you did too well to start.'
You could, potentially, go killer by killer with the nerfs, as an example not allowing Billy to insta down for the first minute of a match or giving some S Tier killers slower charging powers at game start. Except things like this would be massive nerfs that would impact the game radically at different MMR levels. Even then you still have survivors who just lose all the guessing games early and still get off to a bad start.
Overall: it's an issue with the game, but trying to fix it it creates lots of difficulties. We could get into more radical game overhaul ideas, but that would take us far more into the hypothetical instead of potential.
It could be fixed actually, there are plenty of ways.
The first thing to do is to identify what makes the game "lost" at that point for the survivors, and the point is simple, survivors have 3 hook states and then they are out. Once the game is a 1v3, its effectively over at that point unless there's only 1, or MAYBE 2 gens left (if the killer massively messes up). So a solution would need to be made that makes it so you can't eliminate that survivor too early.
On the killer side of things, what makes the game "lost". Well if there's only 2 gens left at 1 hook, the survivors don'e really need resources, they can just hold m1 to corners of the map and the killer just simply can't move fast enough to deal with the survivors on the gens at that point. So something needs to be done there that slows the gens down in some way that makes sense, without punishing the survivors for "doing well"
Now ideally i want to think about these things without perks into consideration. I don't think we should bandaid these types of things with perks, because all it does is then make those perks the best perks in the game and everyone takes them. It should be fixed at a fundamental basekit level. So what can be done?
- Survivors share the 1st hook state.
- This makes it so the earliest you can remove a survivor is on your 6th hook, assuming you have hooked that person the 5th and 6th time.
- Removing a survivor early isn't really possible, you'll have to get at least 6 hooks, which is half of your total goal, by then the game should be well on its way toward the 2nd half of the match.
- I say only the first, because i think if all hooks were shared, and you only could start killing survivors when you got 8 hooks it would feel really bad as a survivor player to be doing well, but my team "burns through all the hook stages" and then you have 1 bad chase and just immediately die.
- Killers need some way to either:
- Make hooking faster, in a way that doesn't break the game
- So no like, remote hooking like the event, because it takes away too much
- No "move faster while carrying" because that also breaks the game if they can chase with a survivor on their back.
- Some basekit way to regress gens meaningfully after a hook
- Make hooking faster, in a way that doesn't break the game
- Even out the speeds of the gens in a way that makes sense.
So basically as a potential example, i would propose the following changes to the game:
- Survivors share the 1st (and only the 1st) hook state. This means that evne if you aren't hooked until late game you still always get at least 2 chances, and survivors can't be tunneled out.
- Killers basekit regression is buffed, and the perks are nerfed. Things like:
- Basekit gen kick to 10% (nerf pop and the like)
- Basekit regression to 200%
- Basekit surge at 5% (that works on special attacks) or basekit pain res at 10% (nerf those perks)
- Basekit corrupt that lasts for say, 30 seconds.
- Gen times (and potentially regression) are adjusted the following way:
- 5 gens left: 130 seconds per gen
- 4 gens left: 110 seconds per gen
- 3 gens left: 90 seconds per gen
- 2 gens left: 70 seconds per gen
- 1 gen left: 50 seconds per gen
There are other changes i would also propose as well such as tweaks to AFC to be more like PH cages, and survivors getting a "time out" after being unhooked, but then after that time out they are fully healed, that potentially could be added if toxic strategies emerge, or if survivors need to be slowed down a bit more.
For smoothing out the gens, the idea is that, when there are more gens left, they take longer, when there are less gens left, they are faster. They can be done in a way that it removes already "charged" charges on the generator first, to prevenet like, 5 gens popping instantly when 1 is finished. This also has a double effect of making the regression perks better earlier, but much weaker later, to help deal with 3 genning even more, while slowing the early game down a bit.
These are just a handful of ideas that, would be hard to say how well they would work without actually testing them. But there are plenty of ideas and things they could do that could even out the early game for both sides in a way that is fun and engaging without breaking the rest of the game.
- Survivors share the 1st hook state.
-
@PolarBear said:
As you might know, survivors are receiving a new item in the 9.1.0 PTB which is a smokebomb similar to the fog crystals that were present during the halloween event. I am excited to see how this new item can be used, but I also see a future where — just like other items — survivors will still end up using a medkit once the novelty wears off, simply due to the sheer usefulness of having a self heal on hand and the smokebomb will remain a filler bloodweb item.
Do you think people will regularly take the smokebomb into the trial, or will this item fade into obscurity?
Right now the best thing you can do is take a medkit with a syringe. Pop it and start working a gen for 24 seconds of efficiency. Pretty much nothing can get you that level of efficiency consistently in terms of items. Sure maybe this thing might sometimes get you out of a bind, but its not "every" time that it can work.
Generally perks and items and such are about consistently getting that value, some things might be able to get more value but if it is rare or hard to get that value it usually isn't worth taking over say, pain resonance, which is pretty simple, consistent value.
-
@ThatRyanB said:
I appreciate you grabbing footage of this! In the meantime, would you be able to elaborate on what you're specifically seeing in terms of the Survivor spawns? That would help us check if something odd's going on here.
I have a screenshot and footage of this happening today. Here is the screenshot of the spawns:
You can see 1 survivor off to the left way away by themselves, myself spawning near the middle of the map, and 3 survivors in front of me. I'd also say that the survivor in the dead center is probably more than 12 meters away from the other 2 because it looks like they spawned closer to the back corner, but its tough to say from this angle, 12 meters being about 2 lunges, should be quite a short range.
Here is the video, i included the loading screen to show that nobody brought offerings to change the spawn locations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbQ8PQZq-KcI also have the full match recorded if you need it for some reason, and went into the pause menu to see the map ID if that matters for map generation/spawn locations.
In general though, this is the kind of thing i'm seeing, sometimes the survivors spawn in pairs super far apart. I think 1 time i noticed them spawning all 4 in completely random places like it used to be and me in the middle, again with no offerings to change it.
-
@Lixadonna said:
But yet the game is balanced around these %.
If it was, then there would more than 3 viable killers when played at that level. Why do you think comp puts massive restrictions on survivors against pretty much any other killer?
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3957390#Comment_3957390
Here:
This is a video from a few days ago. The survivor is already on hook when the video starts, the killer is actively hitting them on hook for the 30s duration.
There is one gen remaining (so not end game, the mechanic is still active). And yet, the AFC does nothing.
This is FACE camping. Period.
The mechanic is useless. And it's useless for is intended purpose.
The video literally shows the option for the survivor to unhook, and this is after the game is effectively over at this point.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3957390#Comment_3957390
What was the point of AFC?
To prevent face camping.
-
@upsideinsanity said:
And we wonder why "we have done a real good job so far" is such a meme
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/0DFVIECB7J9N/screenshot-2025-07-04-115620.png
Notice the word "FACE"
-
-
Every game i played yesterday someone used the offering so i didn't get any clips of it, but i will try again today.
-
@calem said:
Opposite effect for me. I love running Lethal and I am seeing 3-4 survivors spawn in the same area consistently.
I'll screenshot/record some matches today.
-
@Hexbadboy23 said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/Z9H07K1KH19W/img-5849.jpeg
The killer slugged us and he didn’t even pick us up he was trying to find the last survivor and this kind of stuff is very annoying and needs to be fixed anti slugged should be talked about. Matches have been going too quickly because a killer wants to end us in seconds by slugging.
I had a thread on this before, i think when you are down to the last 2 survivors and you down someone, the slugged survivor should have the option to abandon at that point, so you can't "slug for the 4k" as easily.
-
@DNet89 said:
Did the developers intend for Survivors to use the security doors to travel frequently because I don't think I've seen a single survivor use them to travel. I barely see survivors use the camera feature also because I don't think the Aura read lasts longer and the killer can just go in a door to remove it. The camera should also reveal the auras of Survivors to other Survivors if spotted.
Maybe as an incentive to get Survivors to use the door would then have the door be disabled for X amount of seconds for all players. Similar to turning off Onryō TVs.
I think people underestimate how good the wallhacks it can give your team are. When a teammate is getting chased and you know which door they are roughly at, you should use it to spot him and give them wallhacks on the killer. This makes it super easy to loop.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3954106#Comment_3954106
Well, my friend, but if the rework turns her into another anti-loop "dash" killer, then I won't play her anymore because I hate those kinds of killers.
If I want to play SM, and I do, now is the time to do it.
Given the things they have shown us that is exactly where they are going. You are going to "Shoot" the drones out and they will attack survivors.
-
@GeneralV said:
Greetings, friends of the Fog! I hope this thread finds you doing well.
So, I am asking this question here because I recently got back to playing Skull Merchant, mostly because I am a little bit tired of playing current Freddy while knowing full well that he was and should be way more fun than he currently is.
But I am no Skull Merchant expert, so I am requesting assistance here to make sure I don't mess up my own games
For added context: I was only around for the very last days of her original design. I did play the version of her that we had immediately prior to her nerfs (which I still think were extremely unnecessary and shouldn't have happened at all, she was perfect as she was, but that is a discussion for another time) and I thought she was really, really fun. Now, I am aware of the severity of her nerfs, but I still think she is fun to play and I want to enjoy her before the next rework which, if it follows the route presented in the last two design previews, will be awful.
So, do you have any tips? Strategies? Build suggestions? Any help is appreciated here!
As someone who enjoyed her macro style gameplay before they gutted her, you just don't. She's really bad now unless you play hit and run. And at that point you may as well just play wraith, because her drones are only good to give her undetectable at this point.
Wait for the rework, and then be disappointed that they took away another interesting concept and turned it into another anti-loop "dash" killer.