RpTheHotrod
RpTheHotrod
About
- Username
- RpTheHotrod
- Joined
- Visits
- 3,824
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Man_of_triangles said:
It's mandatory on the weaker killers. Definitely really frustrating to see it on something like a Blight.
Yup. With the mangled nerf, and the 8 regression limit nerf, and the other regression perks such as call of brine nerfs, and all non-regression related kick perk nerfs with the 8 regression, and various other perks...the only decent perks LEFT to run are PR\Pop\Grim. BHVR is nerfing everything into the ground for killers except for a VERY select few perks that are still good. Killers are incredibly limited now on perk use - ESPECIALLY the weaker m1 killers. Now, ANY survivor can simply self heal (and very quickly!) on demand with strength with shadows. Now EVERY survivor can just delete pressure.
@menacing_goose said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3686574#Comment_3686574
I mean sure you can say that but realistically who’s playing weaker killers anyway there’s no variety between the killers you run into as survivor either
I almost play The Ghost Face exclusively - P100. Otherwise, it's pig, myers, slinger, and xeno. Just because the weaker killers are barely played doesn't mean we should ignore them - they are barely played BECAUSE they are so weak. They need some love, and all these killer nerfs and killing them.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3684894#Comment_3684894
I would personally argue those two things are linked pretty heavily, is the thing. The reason those aggressive 3-gen games were a problem was because of excessive gen stall, that's the mechanism being used to stall the match out forever. In the same vein, if it were possible to use excessive gen stall to get the same result without requiring the defence of a 3-gen specifically, that'd be equally problematic- this was somewhat seen in the Eruption meta, for example.
Excessive gen stall is the root cause of the 3-gen problem, anything they did to tackle 3-gens like that would necessarily require weakening excessive gen stall. It's not a binary, it's a sliding scale: someone like this Knight, who wasn't aggressively defending a 3-gen, was still very heavily prioritising gen damage, so they'd notice some of the system. By contrast, someone who was aggressively defending a 3-gen as you describe would notice the system way more, because they'd have three gens blocked instead of one, those three gens would be the last ones at the end of the match, and they'd have nothing else to show for it-- unlike the Knight who was actually getting hooks and had multiple gens' worth of time left to correct their mistake.
TL;DR, fixing those 3-gen games requires tackling excessive gen stall, and anyone who participates in excessive gen stall without trying that 3-gen tactic is gonna notice a proportionately smaller amount of the system because of it.
True, but they specifically said this system was ONLY supposed to affect users who intentionally camped a 3 gen from the beginning of the match that refused to do objectives. This was to essentially stop trolls, not stop people from viably defending a vital gen on maps like Ormond or rpd...and certainly not yo nerf weak m1 killers who literally are not allowed to patrol far away gens due to no map traversal abilities - they naturally have to stay more in the center of the map and in turn are far more likely to be negatively affected by perks like surge.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3684743#Comment_3684743
Oh, sure, if the downs are all back to back in a short enough timeframe that you didn't have a chance to pick them up in between, that's probably only one hook, but it still puts the survivors on a pretty noticeable back foot. Worst case scenario you've stalled out all the gen repair and dragged all the survivors into the same place where it's harder for them to reset without scattering. I'll grant it's technically still the system affecting you in scenarios outside of what it's designed for, but that scenario is imo one of the acceptable edge cases because it's relatively uncommon and still breaks in the killer's favour pretty heavily.
As to the second part, yeah, that was on purpose. I was attempting to respond to the strongest version of the position I could, because considering times where the killer's throwing by kicking gens constantly instead of getting into chase would only weaken the opposing argument and I didn't think that was fair.
Like the video you posted, where a player repeatedly bangs their head against the same generator for honestly zero benefit, prioritising damaging the generator over finding the survivor coming back to repair it. That player is both playing poorly and doing the thing this system is designed to stop, which is repeatedly stalling the same generator in a very defensive playstyle.
I don't want to pick apart this one video too much, it's easy to get lost in the sauce of critiquing very specific gameplay instead of making a broader point, but if that Knight would've just sent the guard out to the generator as a patrol instead of repeatedly trying to stall the repair on it with a regression event, this'd be a moot point. Because they wanted to keep stalling that generator, they hit the system designed to stop excessive gen stall.
Fair mostly, but a slight correction. The 8 regression limit was not to stop people overlay defending a gen (lets face it, that gen on rpd is VITAL, so defending that gen is what almost any killer will do), the 8 regression system was specifically to stop killers who focused on a 3 gen at the beginning of the match and refused to progress the objectives. They wouldn't chase, wouldn't hook. They would just camp the 3 gen to prolong the match as long as possible. Clearly the knight was not doing this - he was actively chasing and hooking, so no, the system was not designed for his kind of situation.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3684702#Comment_3684702
Every time Surge activates, you get a down, necessarily. That's the thing that activates it. Now, obviously not every down results in a hook, but most do, and I just don't see a way you could be getting multiple downs near generators that are in progress and not be winning.
In order to reach the cap, the only point at which the system matters, you'd have to get eight downs near that generator. That's enough to have killed two survivors easily even considering that not all of them necessarily translate to hooks, how could you possibly need more than that? To be clear, I'm not arguing that you should be okay with hitting the cap because of this, I'm saying that you shouldn't even be noticing the cap because the game's already over at that point, you don't have to care about that generator with two dead and a third on the way unless it's the last gen of the match- and even then it's hardly that important.
As for non-regression kick perks, I disagree. Eight uses per generator is perfectly fair for pretty much every perk I can think of, especially the ones that are actually worth using to begin with. At most you'd maybe have to make the conscious decision not to spam them, that's all.
If you get 3 downs, you realistically are only going to get one hook, at least at higher levels of play. You're going to have people recovered by the time you get a hook, and the other survivor easily pops them up, and that's not including the multitude of perks that can undo a downed state.
For your second paragraph, you're ignoring the cases where there are kicks or other regression events occurring. If someone is SOLEY using surge and Surge alone and refusing to kick, maybe, but that's fairly rare. I had a match just the other day where we were up against a knight. He lost 5 of his charges on a gen in the first 3 minutes of the match. We were all focusing on the center gen on rpd, so the moment he'd come mid, we'd leave, then immediately jump on the gen, again. Between his minion kicks and him trying to use nowhere to hide (we had distortion), he didn't have a chance. Gen locked up permantely before the mid-point of the match.
https://youtu.be/JsA8ApZOCTA?si=UMg5u1EbKE8kYAjD -
I don't think we are entitled to any skins, at all. If they want to fomo it, it's whatever.
-
Surge is also suffering unfairly - it was literally changed to have no cooldown but lesser damage to take advantage of survivors being out of position. With the 8 regression limit, this perk that does low damage but multiple times ends up working against the killer causing incredibly quick lockups. I have literally had 3 regression surge events within 20 seconds before due to terrible survivor planning. That's nearly half the allotted charges within the first few minutes of the match!
Also, any non regression kick perk also suffers unfairly.
-
I reported this over a year ago. I've been able to spot survivors inside lockers unintentionally due to this. Provided video of the issue, but no fix. Might be harder to fix than we'd expect. That being said, I have not personally noticed this happening anymore, but looks like you are having the same issue I had.
Here's the old video I submitted.
https://youtu.be/St1nA_YeU-c?si=LOQhmQoxEAtkLfyF -
It's a killer power that survivors have complete control over. Use turrets effectively. His tail also has a shorter range than Nemesis whip AND it can't destroy pallets like Nemesis whip can.
-
@RFSa09 said:
2.5/4
This is the best answer. Balance around 2 kills means on average the killer never wins. Balance around 3 kills means on average they always win. 2.5 is a nice balance between not winning and winning on average.
-
@jonifire said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3684005#Comment_3684005
That‘s not how it works, 50% means you get 2 kills by default and this is a draw not a lose - not a win (objectively).
Also the game should be fair and fair would only be a 50% kill rate (objectively). Then killers and survivors would have the same chances.
I can understand what you think, but a draw is basically a 1:1 in soccer, no one won - no one lost.
Your calculation missed that you shouldn‘t always get 2ks. It should even be possible for good killers to lose against good survivors with 0k and then the next round according to your logic you would get a 4K. With a 2k you objectively never lost a game, therefore your chances shouldn‘t increase.
I hope I could make my stance clearer.
Slight correction on your part, as this is easily misunderstood and very confusing due to BHVR's design. The game is set up as a 1 vs 4 individuals with their own win conditions. It's not a team vs team game. There are 4 distinct 1 on 1 situations in every match. It's impossible to have a draw in this game design, as it's binary. Each 1 v 1 situation either has a winner or a lower (not counting server crashes). Draws requires both opposing teams to neither win nor lose. With a 2k, 2 survivors won and 2 survivors lost. A draw requires no one winning or losing. Now, for MMR purposes, it counts a 2k as mmr neutral. People confuse this with assuming MMR adjustments are a reward or penalty for winning - this simply isn't the case. MMR only cares about making future matches more fair. That's why many games can have winners lose mmr and losers gaining mmr. MMR is not related to wins or losses in any way. Their have their own calculation for adjustments. For dbd, 0-1k lowers mmr, 2k is neutral, and 3-4k raises mmr. That being said, a killer is defined as winning a match if he wins at least 3 of his 1 on 1 situations. Confusing? Yes. The survivors do NOT win or lose together as a team. However, I seriously think BHVR should change this to a team vs team game. Survivors would then win or lose together. This would encourage survivors to cooperate more as opposed to an every man for himself mentality as one the devs once mentioned in their live streams. If it was a team vs team situation, then yes, a 2k would absolutely be considered a draw. However, for whatever reason, BHVR says it's not designed that way. 4 individual 1 v 1 situations just makes everything more unnecessarily complicated.
In your soccer example, it's one team vs another team. In dbd, it's just not that way. In soccer, you don't have 30 individual 1 v 1 matches going in per game (however many players there are in soccer....not a sports guy, my apologies).
Now, with all that being said, ONE COULD ARGUE that the killer getting a single kill in a game is a killer win with the possibility of 4 wins every match for a killer. However, that hurts my brain too much, lol.
-
@jonifire said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3683986#Comment_3683986
That makes no sense. With 55% there is only 20% missing for winning all the time.
I edited my post to make it more clear.
Remember, a 50% kill rate is a 2k. Failure to win
A 75% kill rate is the minimum needed for a win, a 3k.
If their kill rate was 55%, then they are failing to win the majority of their matches, as a 75% is needed for a win.
Look at it this way. If they had a 50% kill rate, that means every match on average they are only getting a 2k. They would essentially never win despite being only a 25% difference from a win. At 55%, that's barely a difference even if only 20% away from a win.
Let's trim the fat on these numbers. Anything below a 50% kill rate let's ignore and anything above 75% let's ignore. Anything below 50% is just as much as a failure of a win that 50% is, and anything above a 75% is just as much as a win as 75% is. If we trim the fat, that leaves us with a scale of 0-25. 0 would be the old 50% and 25 the old 75%
Now your 55% translates to 5 (55 - 50).
From a scale of 0-25, how long would it take to get to 25 for a win when on average you're getting 5? It would take 5 matches to finally get to 25, a 3k. If we are dealing with BHVR's 60% kill rate, that translates to 10 in our example (60 - 50). We would win after our third match with a little extra that would carry on into the next games. Over the course of several matches, it would roughly come out to slightly under a 50% win rate. 10 + 10 + 10 (a win in 3rd match with an extra 5 left over), 15 + 10 (a win in 5th match), then we would be back to the 10 + 10 + 10 pattern again.
-
@jonifire said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3683809#Comment_3683809
I would prefer a 55% kill rate, in this scenario the killer would still have the upper hand, but you aren‘t guaranteed to loose by default as survivor. Killers shouldn‘t win because of a win rate goal, so shouldn‘t survivors, but with 60% you almost win by default all the time. For me it‘s incredibly easy against good survivors and I don‘t play nurse and blight.
Counter question aren‘t Games supposed to be fun and fun also comes from winning and isn‘t it unfair objectively to loose more than 60% of your games just for we „ we want 60% kill rate“? I wonder what killers would say if they only had a 40% kill rate by default.
60% kill rate means slightly under a 50% win rate. 62.5% would be an even 50% (on average, of course). A 55% kill rate would mean on average, every match the killer would not win. It would mean failing to win every match except for every 5th match where you'd end up getting a 3k at a 75% kill rate.
If we are averaging
Match 1 55% (the 5% will carry over into future matches via averaging. Will calculate the current average carry over below per match)
Failed to secure a win with 3k
Match 2 60% (carry over up to 5%)
Failed to secure a win with 3k
Match 3 65% (carry over up to 10%)
Failed to secure a win with a 3k
Match 4 70% (carry over up to 15%)
Failed to secure a win with a 3k
Match 5 75% (carry over up to 20%)
Killer win with a 3k
You're asking for killers to have a 20% win rate. That's not feasible. At 60%, they have slightly under a 50% win rate. That fairly balanced.
-
@menacing_goose said:
Please change the killer meta. Pop and pain res are in just about literally every killer build and it’s so boring atp. I don’t see these perks as a problem on their own but they get paired together and just over reward killers. I don’t wanna play survivor anymore because almost every match everything done is just about for nothing because of this and survivor is so boring as a whole it’s to the point where I don’t want to play survivor unless it’s in a customs with friends
That's what happens when BHVR keeps nerfing every other alternative. This 8 limit regression gutted non regression kick perks, surge, and eruption. Heck, they even nerfed a multitude of perks that used mangled effects recently. Now there's even less perks to run. Pop/PR are some of the very few perks left to run, especially for weaker m1 killers.
-
@jonifire said:
For me the problem starts with their 60% kill rate goal. This alone makes the game miserable, because they then do stupid decisions to accomplish that.
All the past map reworks did only do one thing in my opinion make the survivor experience even worse.
Then they do questionable perk changes all the time for both sides and why is their only solution for everything nerf it into uselessness?
I don‘t mind the newer killers, but most of them have one thing in common easy and quick downs.
What percentage would you prefer? Higher? Lower? 60% kill rate means on average they are getting roughly 2 and a half kills a match over an average of matches (slightly closer to a 2k by 2.5%). Killers win with a 3k, so they are expected to win half their matches with an occasional extra failure to win from time to time.
-
As an m1 killer main, this whole 8 regression limit has nearly pushed me out of playing DBD. M1 killers without map traversal are forced to stay near more centralized gens since they can't afford to patrol extremely far away gens. This means they are FAR more likely to hit the 8 limit - ESPECIALLY with surge or eruption. It's even worse when survivors all focus on 1 or 2 gens - this essentially forces killers to lock up gens early even if they aren't camping a 3 gen.
The whole system just sucks. It makes weak killers even weaker. That's the LAST thing we need is to encourage killers to just all run the powerful killers. Let's stop invalidating m1 killers every patch, hmm BHVR?
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682449#Comment_3682449
The devs already have pointed this out numerous times. Every survivor has their own win condition.If you're going to focus on the devs, the devs also use the word draw to describe a 2k. The following comment is about how to treat a 2k.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/2912408#Comment_2912408
Full thread link: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/2912408
Hyper focusing on the the same result between two sides for the definition of draw neglects that this is an asymmetrical game.
If you want to get technical on that point, the game has zero win conditions. There are escapes, deaths, points, pips, etc. The mere fact we are calling something a win or a loss means we are outside of what the game provides to us.
You can just as easily call a 2k a win under the logic of why it would be a loss.
Also, saying that the survivors are not a team and that's the devs stance is not correct. The devs have left such things up to the players. Being I'm going through dev posts, here's a recent example where Peanits refers to the survivors as a team
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3625891#Comment_3625891
Thread here: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3625891
Basically
If you want to use MMR, 2k is a draw for the killer, or if you prefer, an even result
If you want to throw out MMR, there's no objective standard for calling anything in the game a win, loss, or draw - but the community has very broadly set guidelines for the killer role, 3+ kills a win, 1 or less kills a loss, 2 kill neither of the above (insert your preferred word)
You might want to reread their comments. They specifically say that's related to MMR adjustments alone. We already all know that MMR adjustments are not related to win or loss conditions. It only exists to try to make future matches more fair. That's why in many games you can go down in mmr on a win and up in mmr on a loss. It doesn't care about win or lose, it cares about adjustmenting future matches for more fair play. You'll note that the devs specifically say in regardingto MMR they treat a 2k as MMR neutral or a draw. It's not enough to move the needle for adjusting the MMR. That's entirely unrelated to a win or a loss. You literally cannot have a draw in a 1 v 1 in DBD. A survivor either escapes or they do not. There is no situation at all where neither the killer wins nor the survivor wins (unless you count the server crashing, ha). It's four distinct 1 v 1 situations. It's dumb, but that's how it's designed. They need to change it to team vs team so survivors all win or lose together, imho. If they did, then we would have draws with a 2k AND survivors would be encouraged to work together since they win or lose together instead of every man for himself. The every man for himself doesn't come from me, either. The devs have stated that's the design on multiple occasions and even on live streams. I think that's the wrong approach, though.
-
@sinkra said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682293#Comment_3682293
50% kr is balanced. Anything else isn't. You can't just say "draws" don't count when it's 2k.
The game is 1 vs many. It's not 1 team vs another team. The devs already have pointed this out numerous times. Every survivor has their own win condition. You can't draw on a 1 v 1 in this game. A survivor either escapes or they don't. It's a 1 v 1x4 game by design. A draw only occurs when neither side wins or loses which isn't possible in dbd.
The killer failing to win on average is absolutely not "balanced". You are confusing kill ratea and win rates. If on average killers only get 2k, then on average they are failing to win their matches. That's an incredibly weak position in an asymmetrical game with a power role.
I'm aware that a 2k is considered MMR neutral (or a draw if you want to use that word), but MMR adjustments are entirely separate from wins or losses. MMR only cares about trying to make future games more fair. Some games MMR will drop even if you win, or might go up even if you lose. An experienced player might not gain ranking if beating a new player, and a new player might not drop in ranking for getting beat by an experienced player. Ranking adjustments are rarely strictly tied to simply winning or losing, and that is also how it works in DBD. It uses strict kill count definitions to go up or down. A 2k isn't enough to warrant any movement on the adjustments, so it's MMR neutral even if the killer lost. MMR adjustments are not a reward for winning or a penalty for losing, they disregard the match result and only cares to adjust future matches for fairer play.
Now, BHVR has cornered themselves into a rough spot for balance with the decision to do 1 vs many instead of a team vs team environment. In a balanced situation, we would want killers to win roughly half their matches, but we also want survivors to escape gave their matches. The problem is, if each survivor has a 50% chance to escape, then that's 4 individual survivors each with a 50% escape rate. Adding them all together, and you have a pretty darn high chance at survivors getting 3+ escapes out every match which then conflicts with the killer win rate. That's why survivors get an innate lower win chance - since there are 4. This whole weirdness, I feel, could be better tackles if BHVR abandoned the whole 1 vs many system and instead turn it into a team vs team. Survivors win if 3+ escape. Killer wins if he gets a 3k+. It's a tie if 2 escape. This would also encourage survivors to work together more since they win or lose together. Now, a fair question is if 3 people have died, then your team lost...what's the point of trying. Very fair. It would give you a chance at extra bp, but ultimately, I feel balancing would make more since regardless to shift to team vs team.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682131#Comment_3682131
Stop dredging this up, it is flatly wrong. The outcome of the average match =/= winrate. 60% is massively killer-sided.
Also, the recent stats do not disprove the statement that killrates are higher at high MMR.
Facts are a real bummer. Must really hate math, eh? A 75+% kill rate in a match is a win with a 3k+. A 50% kill rate in a match is not a win with only a 2k. 75% is the minimum for a win. At 62.5%, it's the halfway point between on average always winning and on average not winning. Essentially, it's a 50% win rate. Going down just a few percent to 60% generally still means they are expected to win roughly half their matches, but with an occasional extra loss when averaging several matches. I know you spout that kills have nothing to do with winning, but come on, it literally does. 3k+ is how a killer wins a match. We don't want to killers to have an average of a 75% kill rate because on average they'd always win. We don't want them to have a 50% kill rate because on average they'd never win. That's why they go with 60%, on average over a period of matches, that grey area between those two numbers gives them room to both win and not win on average. 62.5% is the true middle point, but they opted to drop it down to 60%. With that bring said, we have several killers in low to mid 50% which means they are a lot closer to only getting a 2k every match than if they were at the intended 60%.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682131#Comment_3682131
Look, let's cut to the chase.
We should balance around a 75% KR
That would be awful. That would mean the killers on average win all of their matches. The middle ground between not winning and winning is 62.5%. The devs want it to be 60% which means winning roughly half their matches with an occasional extra loss in there. At the moment, a lot of killers are actually in the low to mid 50 percenttile on kills...way underperforming.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
Reasoning?
I dont really think it is hard anymore with just getting a 4K. Getting a 2-pip was hard (even tho, still manageable when you wait until Grade Reset). But getting a 4K is not really that hard IMO. Might not work in the first game and you sadly have to slug, but not really something which needs changing.
Probably to eliminate the RNG of hatch. Can do exceedingly well and still lose out on the adept because hatch spawned at the last survivor's feet.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3681984#Comment_3681984
Killrates have historically been higher at high MMR than overall.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3681972#Comment_3681972
I think it'd be a better idea to look at killer gameplay and think of gameplay improvements for it, rather than making the other role also unappealing.
Not according to their recent stats. A lot of killers are actually way underperforming the intended 60% kill rate (60% kill rate means winning slightly under half their matches, as it's almost in the middle of a 2k and a 3k. 62.5% is the true middle ground).
-
I almost always let last hatch unless they were toxic or cheating. If they had a REALLY rough match, I'll let the last two escape. I try to avoid tunneling unless they are toxic or I'm really behind. Generally I try to avoid double hooking.
-
Because they balance the game around mid to mid high mmr. It's only "super easy" for killers at low mmr. As mmr goes up, it becomes much harder for killers unless they are playing nurse/blight which stomps at high mmr.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3681244#Comment_3681244
This would completely invalidate the system. Because it would then not work anymore against Killers who 3-Gen from the start, who are the reason why it was implemented in the first place. Because it does not matter what happens to the other Gens if a Killer is just guarding 3 Gens from the beginning, so if it would only work with 3 Gens left, it would never kick in. Unless the Survivors bring themselves into a 3-Gen to activate the system, which is really not the purpose of the system.
The entire system needs to be reworked, then. It's absolutely affecting normal matches and even worse against m1 killers without map traversal. They naturally are forced to stay in the middle of the map, as they can't afford to travel to far away gens. It also affects all killers where survivors only focus on specific gens only. For example, Orlando main building gen is almost guaranteed to be permanently blocked early on in the match due to how many Survivors groups throw themselves st that center gen.
-
@CaulDrohn said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3678353#Comment_3678353
Not sure about overcharge, I think I remember a dev stating that OC only uses one event. The second likely event is a skill check after all, and since normal skill check failure does not count as an regression event, it would make sense that a difficult skill check failure does not count either.
With eruption, at least you get two separate events (one when kicked, one when eruption triggers). And it will be 15% for two events, so 7.5% per event. Still bad, but at least better than two normal kicks.
With undone, you are doing just one kick animation... and still lose two stacks. Even if you only had the minimum stacks (3), so you get an 8% regression, with 4% per event. So it's better to NOT kick a gen wirh just 3 stacks ... thats just dumb.
Also, wenn Undone uses two events (one for 5% base and for additional % dependant on stacks), why does pop not do so as well? You could argue that its also two events, 5% base and 30% remaining progress afterwards.
So on the one site, we have Pop as THE meta gen-kick perk, that can be applied 8 times on a gen.
And on the other side, we have Undone, highly inconsistent esp against exp. survivors (who never miss skill checks), hard to get ANY value out of it even when running dedicated builds for it, and even if you manage to miraculously gain some tokens on the perk, you can only use it 4 times.
Thats pure insanity, imo.
Edit: And even if you get much value out of it (so many stacks), you are likely also winning without it, just bc of the lost progress by the missed skillchecks itself.
Undone in it's current state is unbelievably weak, possibly the worst regression perk there is. Even if it only used up one regression event, it would still be extremely weak. There needs to be a different way to accumulate tokens, survivorsfailing skill checks is not the way to got, imo.
Btw. does it atleast work together with OC / Oppression skill checks? Or do such "difficult" skill checks not count?
That's what I've been saying. This whole 8 regression limit has severely hurt the viability of SEVERAL perks. This whole thing needs to be reworked to only kick in once there are only 3 gens left.
-
My issue with OTR being 80 seconds long is that if someone has OTR for 30+ seconds, they are definitely going out of their way to NOT do any conspicuous actions to keep OTR enabled long term with the intent on weaponizing it against the killer to waste chase time or bodyblock - you know...exactly the opposite of what it's supposed to do...stop tunneling. Nope, survivors just use it to specifically TRY to get the killer's attention.
-
@Kaethela said:
I use anon mode because if I don't people will leave hateful messages on my steam profile or find me in other places based on my username. Not having that happen again.
This is why I play anonymously.
-
There is no anti camp mechanic in the game. How can it get buffed?
-
@brokedownpalace said:
Look at a wall.
You can still blind killers looking at a wall. The amount of times the wall is THE only thing on my screen and I still get blinded is ridiculous.
-
@BlightedDolphin said:
Flashlights are powerful and can quickly change the outcome of the game, however I think on their own they are fine. There’s risk to using them as you aren’t repairing gens and have to be in close proximity to the killer to pull it off. If you don’t get the save you’ve wasted a fair amount of time and possibly taken a hit
I think the issue is that you can easily remove that risk with Background Player. The killer has no way to know you are there and they waste way too much time if they stop to look for you. And if you do somehow mess it up, the speed boost just gets you out of trouble and you can just run off without any harm.
I don’t think Background Player is necessarily overpowered, but it does remove the vast majority of flashlight counter play.
Naw, background definitely is overpowered. The speed is comedic. On smaller maps, you can literally travel half the distance of the entire map. There is no way for a killer to be able to flush someone out with hoe much ground than be covered with the speed boost. Even if you throw flashlights out of the equation, it literally makes every pallet in the entire map unsafe to pick anyone up at. Want to be immune to pick ups? Always go down at a pallet and have a friend who runs background player. 100% guaranteed to never get picked up.
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
Mimics don't work in DbD. Simple as.
Just have to look at it from a different perspective. For example, after enough work from the killer amounts up to roughly 3 hooks, the killer can infect another player. Once this happens, that survivor swaps sides to the killer's side and only wins with the killer. That survivor has essentially been "eliminated", but instead of being eliminated, it's a turncoat. Could have a few various ideas on what that turncoat survivor can do (and what the real survivors could try to do to counter it), but even has an SWF, he'd want to keep his identity secret from his buddies.
-
You literally get an entire free health state. That's pretty incredibly strong as-is.
-
There's less and less other options to run as a killer, so many killers are getting pushed into tunneling. Regression perks nerfed (and in some cases gutted ie CoB or Overcharge), then you got the 8 regression limit that's making weak killers even weaker if they dare run surge or eruption, then you got mangled gutted, so perks built around mangled use such as sloppy are out the door, multiple gen rushing perks implemented and no regression perks to counter it save pop\PR (and PR can only be used 4 times in an entire match), pretty much all there is LEFT to even do is tunnel. I'm not sure why BHVR is so insistent on tunneling being "the" way to play, but that's just the design direction over the past few months.
-
I literally discussed this over a match I had last night...this very topic. BHVR is pushing "nice" killers into extinction and making weaker killers required to play absolutely sweaty and aggressive to stay competitive.
Can hear me talking about it through the match.
https://youtu.be/PtQvef6ZOIk?si=b9i92tYbQSOyrU7W -
@Nebula said:
I see this brought up so often whenever kill rate is brought up, with many pointing out that kill rate doesn't equal win rate, and while yes, that's true, I don't think a lot of people actually understand what this means or look further into it. I wanted to clarify this topic that I see quite often when discussing statistics in this game.
Here's a breakdown of the actual statistics at play based off the stats we've received.
Now without getting too in depth about combinatorics, here is what the "win rate" for killer currently looks like based off the 60% kill rate benchmark that has been set by the devs:
- 0 kills (loss for killer): Probability = (1 - Survivor escape rate)^4 = (1 - 0.4)^4 = 0.1296
- 1 kill (loss for killer): Probability = 4 * (1 - Survivor escape rate)^3 * Kill rate = 4 * (1 - 0.4)^3 * 0.6 = 0.3456
- 2 kills (draw): Probability = 6 * (1 - Survivor escape rate)^2 * (Kill rate)^2 = 6 * (1 - 0.4)^2 * (0.6)^2 = 0.2304
- 3 kills (win for killer): Probability = 4 * (1 - Survivor escape rate) * (Kill rate)^3 = 4 * (1 - 0.4) * (0.6)^3 = 0.3456
- 4 kills (win for killer): Probability = (Kill rate)^4 = (0.6)^4 = 0.1296
Based off this data, currently killers are seeing a "win rate" of 0.4752 or 47.52%. This is where I feel so many people get lost. They see this win rate of less than 50% and assume that the games still not balanced for killers because true balance would be 50/50.
Draws are often forgotten and possibly purposefully overlooked in these scenarios.
The current outlook for killer currently has them at a 70.56(!)% chance that they achieve a 2k or better in a match. This data for escape rates and kill rates were taken over an average of hundreds of thousands of matches. Sure, it's not fully representative of what will actually happen in your given match, that's the nature of statistics, but this is what the entirety of the games outlook currently is.
Feel how you want about draws, but to completely invalidate them as a meaningful statistical outcome is misleading to this discussion. 2 kills, 2 escapes is a completely respectable match outcome for both sides and for it to be thrown out of the discussion for personal feeling is arbitrary.
TLDR: Killer currently has a 70.56% chance of achieving a 2k or higher in the average match.
One thing to factor in is that the draw thing is ONLY for mmr adjustment. It's not related to wins or losses. MMR adjustments are designed to try to make future matches more fair - that's it. It's not a reward or penalty for winning or losing. Some games will have you lose MMR if you win, or gain MMR even if you lose. With that in mind, the devs stated that this is not a team vs team game. It's a 1 player vs 4 other individual players each with their own win condition. Survivors win by escaping and lose by not escaping. That means that you could have 3 winners and 2 losers in an example of 3 survivors escaping (killer and the 4th survivor lost). Essentially. The game is designed around the concept of killer vs 1 survivor situation for every survivor there is. Due to this, there is no actual draw that's possible. A survivor either wins or loses. The killer either wins or loses. A draw means neither side wins or loses, and that is impossible in a 1 v 1 (x4) situation in dbd. When it comes to MMR adjustments, 2 survivors escaping counts as MMR neutral, but wins and losses are at a per survivor/killer level. It's one killer vs 1-1-1-1, not a killer vs survivor team. Weird, I know, but that's how it's designed.
-
I wouldn't say it's OP, but it definitely needs an adjustment. At minimum. The cd should be 45 seconds.
-
@CarlAlc7 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3679325#Comment_3679325
I mean it's faster than a survivor healing you if you combine it with Botany Knowledge so maybe you had that equipped as well.
Good theory, but no, Sir. Only healing related perk I had was SiS.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3679054#Comment_3679054
It's not 'a few seconds'.
The perk takes about 22.8 seconds just for the heal, and that doesn't include any travel time to or from the basement.
Hmm, must be bugged then. Took about 10 seconds for me last night. I'll retest tonight.
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3679027#Comment_3679027
That's an upside, sure, but the biggest parts of old CoH still aren't present. It only affects you, but most importantly, the thing that actually made CoH overpowered is impossible from two angles when it comes to SiS.
You can't use SiS to make medkits absurdly powerful because it doesn't stack with medkits to begin with and those medkits aren't nearly as powerful to begin with.
As to the erasing all the killer's pressure, that's not true. Even with Botany the heal isn't that fast, and factoring in the travel time, you as the killer get basically what you want from leaving a survivor injured: they're off generators to heal, and they're not interfering with your other chases either. At worst, it shortens your window to make that injury pressure, by occupying multiple other survivors, but healing perks are supposed to do that and I don't think this one's unbalanced.
(Brief pedantic nitpick as an aside, you don't pressure generators, you pressure survivors.)
lol fair, I meant pressure survivors - it's late and I'm tired.
I've been running SiS as survivor. That heal is incredibly fast. Only takes a few seconds then I'm back on my feet. Even without any medkit help, it is extremely fast. Maybe it's bugged?
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3679008#Comment_3679008
To be fair, while Strength in Shadows is really good, it's nowhere close to old CoH for three major reasons.
- You don't control where the spot you have to run to is,
- It only affects you and isn't teamwide for one perk slot,
- Most importantly, it doesn't stack with medkits, and even if it did medkits aren't OP anymore like they used to be.
It's much more equivalent to if CoH was ran on its own and that nobody else benefited from throughout the whole match, which was similarly good but not OP- and you still controlled where it went, so it still would've been stronger than SiS.
keep in mind though that SiS is not broadcasted to the killer - CoH was and still is. You can easily erase all pressure on you at will, and the killer will be none the wiser unless he stops pressuring gens and stops chasing people just to check you MIGHT be happening to heal in basement. With CoH, the killer instantly knows there's a boon in play, and there's only so many places it could be. It might not be as strong as old CoH, but it's incredibly close to it.
-
Need to fix that you don't actually have to be in the basement for the heal. They need only be on the stairs, you know, where if basement is in killer shack, they have an amazing window and a god pallet nearby which makes the whole "risk" completely voided?
On top of that, BHVR was aware that how someone could just undo any damage by going to a certain spot on the map was very broken (original circle of healing). It just erases killer pressure. Now they add this perk in and just create the old problem again...a survivor with the perk just has to go to one spot on the map and can self heal. At the very least, it should be 50% healspeed. 70% is incredibly fast for a self heal.
-
Happens to me as xenomorph all the time. I understand!
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3677263#Comment_3677263
What game I'm playing? Helldivers 2 because MMR is ruining the game for me, but in Dead by Daylight, I try to mess with Survivors predominantly as Killer, and mess with gens predominantly as Survivor. Plus I must be doing something right as Killer if I can win 74% of my games before the gens pop (see picture below).
That is correct, that if the Killer doesn't attempt to kill them while not kicking gens, the Survs will pop gens. If the Killer provides more pressure than the Survivors are able to keep up with, or do a gen kick where the passive regression won't be stopped early, then it will help Killer win. They may repair gens faster, but you'll also find that the Killer will kill them even faster than that. Playing ineffective gen defense may get the Killer 6 hooks by 5 popped gens, but playing effective offensive pressure will likely get the Killer 9 hooks by 5 popped gens (if the Survivors are even able to pop that final gen).
Like I said before, a basic gen kick abandoning a chase gives the Survivors 36 gen seconds at the cost of ~9 regressed gen seconds, a net 27s loss for Killer. Even with a hooked Survivor and still abandoning a chase, it only provides Survivors 12 gen seconds at the cost of that same ~9 regressed gen seconds, still a net loss now at 3s for Killer. When you can guarantee the regression will sit for an extra 12/108 realtime seconds (hook or no hook timers respectively), then the gen kick finally is worth it for Killer.
There are also perks for seeing more blood pools (Bloodhound), but I'm not sure you would agree this will carry a Killer to victory from existence alone. I would even argue that by purposely using a bad perk, it makes you lose more often. I can't recklessly use Hex: Pentimento without another totem perk and expect it to make me win, despite the massive 30% gen slowdown it provides when active. A perk being dedicated to something doesn't make it innately useful by virtue of existing.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/TQI0X1WO0SSS/gendefense.png
I see where you're going for and where your confusement is. I'm not talking about abandoning a chase to kick - that's normally a bad idea unless that gen is super important and the killer knows other survivors aren't focusing on it. Otherwise, yeah - do continue the chase. Even then though, if a killer stops to kick gens with chases, that doesn't make it a "non-normal" match. BHVR defined a non-normal match as a killer who camps at a 3 gen from the very beginning of the match without advancing the objective with the intent on prolonging the game as long as possible. THAT is what is "not normal", and they said that this 8 regression limit would not affect people playing normally (ie actually attempting to advance the objective). This clearly is NOT the case and is what a lot of us here are pointing out.
Also, for what it's worth, Helldivers is one heck of a great game. I don't blame you for playing that more than DBD, ha! Go spread that managed democracy.
-
@felipesegatto1 said:
get good, killers got everything easy and a lot of abusive perks,combos and strategies. this is the only strong thing survivors have
Survivors are very strong and are the power role in higher mmr. So many tools that the killers simply can't counter.
-
I used to play every day. Seems every update, they are kicking m1 killers in the nuts. I like to play "fair", and not a fan of playing meta killers. I prefer playing the underdogs like ghostie, pig, Myers, and deathslinger (though he's not an m1). However, they are absolutely obsessed with the idea to make these killers more and more trash. Now they implemented this 8 regression limit which absolutely wrecks m1 killers, especially with surge, since they aren't allowed to apply pressure to gens miles away from all the other gens. They by design have to stay more in the center of the map, so they easily get punished with the new system even if they aren't camping and are doing chases and hooks. On top of that, they are making it almost impossible to play the game in a fair and friendly manner. Gen regression gets nerfed, chase perks get nerfed, mangled gets nerfed, gen control gets nerfed...the only thing left that you can optimally do is tunneling...and that's incredibly lame. Avoiding double hooking, avoiding slugging, and avoiding tunneling is just a recipie for getting teabagged at the exit gates. They are pushing fair killer play into extinction.
I've gone from playing daily to once every week or two. This new 8 regression limit is the straw that breaks the camel's back for me. I am legit thinking of walking away from away from game, forever. Killers have become a joke, and we are slowly turning towards tunneling being THE only viable option at high mmr.
-
Had a match yesterday with a blatant hacker. Endgame chat, he said to report him, as he'll just use another account. Said this is his 20th account so far.
Bear in mind, BHVR made the disastrous blunder of doing a free time period with Epic. That ALWAYS generates THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of automated bot accounts which then get sold for cheap for cheaters to get back into the game for very cheap after a ban.
BHVR NEEDS to implement hardware bans.
-
@Mandy said:
If a Gen is blocked it cannot be progressed or regressed - so yes, this is not a bug but by design of the perk.
I'm a killer main, and while I hate the idea of yet ANOTHER gen rushing perk, I don't think this part of it is fair on the survivors. It's not technically regressing or progression the gen - it's reducing the max amount of charges needed to finish a repair. That being said, can we stop with the onslaught of gen rushing perks?
-
@mareld said:
If you're main goal as a k1ller is to secure a win, utilize tunneling, camping, and slugging, is the easiest way to do it. The problem is that tunneling, camping, and slugging, doesn't require much skill at all - And you get rewarded for it.
It's a very boring playstyle, and very boring to face as a survivor. I don't understand how people who play k1ller can think it's fun to play that way.
I really hope BHVR can do something about it.
Out of curiosity, what's your feedback\suggestion on how to address it?
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3676818#Comment_3676818
Do you not understand that there is nuance here? There is a difference between "make no mistakes" and "mistakes should be punishable". If you want to claim that your opponents are all inhuman machines that make no mistakes, then yeah I guess your point would be valid. At the same time shouldn't you be happy you got to the highest MMR and proved yourself to be in the top echelon? I think everyone is human, capable of error, and errors can be capitalized on by an intelligent opposition. That means you only need to make fewer mistakes than your enemies, kinda like the "I don't need to outrun the bear, I only need to outrun you" joke. That's how I won most of my matches, by forcing a critical decision, and my enemies choosing... poorly. I never claimed I didn't lose, just that my losses as Killer were near strictly under my control. If I really wanted to improve I would record and watch over every loss, but I don't care that much.
You end your paragraph agreeing with me strangely enough. "That means normal gameplay would be trying to play with the intent on advancing the objective (without cheating, of course)." Killing Survivors is the Killer's objective, doing gens is the Survivor's. In most scenarios, if a Killer ever prioritizes a basic gen kick over a known chase, they aren't advancing their goal, they are trying to slow down the Survivor's. Gen kicks are almost always worse than chasing, so I always encourage pressure/chase (even if it is setup Pressure like Blood Orb collection or 99'd stalks). Its fine to make mistakes, as people learn more from their failures than their successes, but bashing my head on a wall and refusing to use a more effective tool like a Sledgehammer doesn't mean the wall's HP should be nerfed.
Not sure what game you're playing, but gen control and regression is directly tied to being able to kill survivors. If you just let them repair gens without trying to regress them, they'll repair them MUCH faster and escape MUCH faster. Part of killing survivors is gen management. That's quite normal in the intended gameplay design - there is even perks dedicated to it! How about that.
-
I thought Jake and Trickster were considered Asian? Admitting, I'm pretty terrible at identifying origins.