Rulebreaker
Rulebreaker
About
- Username
- Rulebreaker
- Joined
- Visits
- 7,579
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Crowman said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3576101#Comment_3576101
People said the same thing when dead hard was nerfed the first time and it was still strong enough to get a 2nd nerf and it's still a good perk.
Just because people are saying it's dead doesn't mean anything. People love to overreact over any changes.
True but that doesn't stop people from thinking it does it?
-
About 2-4 times a year between the 3 of us. We can double the number probably if we counted fake outs (killer kills us before we escape through the door/hatch.)
-
Judging from the literal rain of posts about it being dead, safe to assume alot of ppl think it was over nerfed.
For our opinion we really don't care about it. It's about the same to us.
-
Not entirely sure that's how it works....
Either way, probably be nice to not see anything until the end, least for our opinion.
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3574617#Comment_3574617
No, no. I'm personally ok with any 4 perks, even selfish ones like Left Behind.
I don't want to be matched with anyone player running a build that literally won't work. For example: No Mither, Self-Care and For The People.
I want everyone to use whatever perks they want. Emphasis on USE.
The build I just described eliminates the ability to use the perks
Frankly, the game should just let them know they're not compatible and not allow it. I don't see the game allowing me to add toolbox charges to my medkits and flashlights. Same should go for perks. If it did, this thread would be irrelevant.
Thats sorta restricting choices and we're not much a fan for that. We don't realy have any arguments against wanting teammates having a functional build other than people should be able to use whatever the hell they want (good or ill) but we do want to point out the perk randomizer challenges. Needless to say people have gotten that build [with the added bonus of tenacity in our case].
-
Its kinda strange but we miss the stupidity of the instant-up syringe medkits. Slug to healthy in the blink of an eye infront of the killer, door, hook, etc. We pulled so many stupid stunts with that broken add on...it deserved the nerf but we miss it all the same.
The darkness offering as well. Made most the maps spookier especially if survivors threw all thick fog. We love most the new visuals but they look to...clean? to give that same feeling. Some maps can still do it but nothing like old coldwind where the sky the color of tar and mud and fog and corn where no one can see a thing and anything can come and merc you. Maybe its missing some old visual tastes.
This last one maybe whining so apologies but we also miss the lack of perks, specifically regression. Currently 4/5 killers will run 3+ regression or slowdown. When we came to the fog the only major regression was ruin, and while everyone ran it, we atleast had more players who didn't heavily rely on it to win.
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3574609#Comment_3574609
And you still will! With people who also do that! This would also separate people who are playing more seriously from those who are not. Do you at least see where I'm coming from?
Depending on how the rules are set/detailed we may or may not get affected. We're paranoid enough to not take the chance. For example: our Cybil runs Desperate measures, calm spirit, no one left behind, and BT. What does this count as? For super serious survivors this would probably count as a meme while we dont see it as such. We think we see what you want [teammates more inclined to play in a similar style to the solo que one] but do not see how well this would work especially since que times for survivors tend to be a loooot longer compared killers (atleast for us especially since killer time is sub 60 seconds usually. Yay backfill). Then theres also the problem of how this works with SWFs. A friend usually runs a full meta build, but we run something like Cybil above. How does the rules the solo gave fit this? Devils in the details, and we love loophole abuse.
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3574599#Comment_3574599
I disagree we would never find a game. Those who don't like the idea simply opt out, just like opting out of cross play. I do depip when playing with trolls or P65s running no perks and that is annoying.
I don't understand your last sentence, please clarify about letting the killer in the lobby.
Let us specify, we (as in the 3 who share this account) would never get a game. We go with thematic/gimmicky/incharacter builds.
The second one was ment as a joke but if you insist~ The killer gets to hop into the survivors lobby as theyre readying up and picks one to start on a hook.
-
We're going with nope. We like people whining about MFT for every reason under the sun to much to consider losing that source of entertainment. Its crazy to see each and every day.
-
......soooo is this serious or something complaining about depiping or a joke?
If serious, then no as we would never have a game.
If not, then let the killer into the survivor lobby and dictate who they get to hook.
-
The killer will usually slug for some reasons such as kills and achievements. Not everyones a malicious sweat lord and just want their mission done. If someone needs that 4k to complete the rift challenge and dont want another game, theyre gona do everything they can to get it. Don't exactly gotta like it though [9/10 its a pain for survivors regardless of intent].
-
@TotemSeeker91 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3574584#Comment_3574584
Your saying if the killer wins then they should be happy, so if I get anything greater than 2k, I should just let you escape and don't even try for the 4k because
"The only time I go for the 4K or slug for it is if I have a challenge which requires Kills, if I go for an Adept-Achievement "
I don't know how to properly quote certain lines
We're more curious as to how you got that from that post
-
We like the art and game play. The trials are just similar enough to know what to do while just random enough that we can't fully predict everything (though ppl are trying really hard to be predictable). And the art is lovely. Even if we don't agree with some of the choices, it atleast looks good.
-
Because we haven't seen one in a few months try this:
Trickster
Perks: Any but must not have more than 2 gen regression perks (we're sick of seeing 4 regression perks on everything)
Add ons: trick blades and your choice (recommend Edge of Revival for the party feel)
Offering: Any (recommend indoor map because funny to us)
Conditions:
You can only hook someone downed by your blades
You can only hit survivors by ricochet with your blades (or explosions with Edge of Revival)
No unreasonable tunneling or camping (survivors being stupid is fair game)
Have fun
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3570081#Comment_3570081
Actually an eye for an eye leaves one person left with one eye. Who then rules the world because they are the only one left who can see.
not if the guy who starts it has only 1 eye to lose :P
...or a lucky shot from the blinded one
-
We don't have a main as we play everyone sans nurse, but our favorites be Artist, PH, and ghostface. We like artist kit and are fans of Silent Hill. Ghost face is just funny causing random chaos with our build.
-
@pseudechis said:
Don't apologise for a long post I'm happy to read it and this so far has been a very civil and interesting discussion.
The core point has strayed a lil but I don't think we've gone completely off topic as the topic relates to skill issues playing a role in supposed "camping" and "Tunneling", where those disparities in skill come from and how people react to them, given the topics of camping and tunneling are hot button ones at the best of times.
I don't really have much to add as I think you've answered my points well. I believe we share a similar view but come at it from different angles.
I don't have a better solution to some of the problems listed but I also don't see them as big problems either. Yeah self policing and band aid mechanics may be the solutions we have but it doesn't make them good solutions.
A: not everyone's the same: That's why self policing doesn't really work.
Keep in mind we have to accept that the player who focuses on their own fun without regard for their opponent's is just as valid as a player who does think of other player's fun, because not everyone's motivation to play is the same and the reality is the consequences are non-existent in the grand scheme, a bad game is just that a bad game nothing more.
Why is one valid play and the other not, especially given the inconsequential context? Do we have the right to force people to play how we want? The answers are, it isn't and we don't.
B: theres a certain balance to challenges: Yeah I think we've established and agree on that but often the complaints about balance are heavily one side, so its typically grain of salt all round. Its about sifting the value from the crap as it were. Not all opinions are valid as much as we may want them to be.
C: With respect to people who quit. This is where my concept of codling comes from. With anything that's been around a long time and has an experienced player base, you'd expect as a beginner to eat a lot of losses before you get the opportunity to do well. If doing so makes someone quit then that's a them problem. So how much do we handhold the quitters simply to attenuate their aversion to loss and willingness to quit when faced with hardship? I don't have a good answer for this, but its not my job its BHVR's all I can do is express what I would like from the game.
If the brutal and unique parts of the game making it a real horror experience induce some people to quit, then I have to admit I'd rather see them quit than the game be put on training wheels in the name of making it less confronting. Especially as this tends to appeal to players who really take it to seriously and are quite single minded in how they play and how they expect others to play.
I'm often reminded of that Twilight Zone episode where everyone has to think happy thoughts all the time at the whim of a small child who can punish them if they don't. That kind of Orwellian behavioural control is a bad thing. Especially if the setting is a horror experience where the goal of the killer is to violently kill you but they are forced to do that in the nicest way possible while considering your feelings. Why? because people can't separate the game world from the real world.
I'm not reading to much into the game, its only a game. But how people react to games can be very telling and it makes me ponder the overarching reasons why people collectively behave the way they do.
I've enjoyed this back and forth but I think its reached its natural endpoint, please add more if you like, I'll happily read it, but I'm not sure I have much more to add without eventually going way off topic. Good luck in the fog.
Probably is the end so we just want to throw a few personal views on the points.
A: True that self policing doesn't always work, but as before, it's the only tool we as players really have. If the option doesn't hurt us and makes the things Abit better, we'll use it more often than not. We're a surprisingly optimistic pesemist.
We agree we don't have the right to force ppl to play a certain way (though some seem hellbent to and the devs are curbing certain ways for good or ill) but there's that old saying "eye for a eye makes the world blind". If no one tries then eventually we think everyone in this fog will be blind.
B: All options are not valid, but there are some worth testing. We mostly see people dismissing things outright without wanting to try, which we feel is more of a waste of potential "what if".
C: This is an off track comment from us but we'd like to remind the fog of all the ones that quit for flimsy reasons such as they don't like the killer, they got down under 30 seconds, etc.
At the point, yes beginners are expected to loose but depending on how harsh and often (aka they were repeatedly slaughtered without knowing what or how it happened) is Abit much to us. A good chunk of the responsibility for knowing is on the players but when they can't effectively and practically practice that knowledge becomes frustrating, atleast to us.
We're going to side step the twilight zone paragraph as what we have to say about that and currently society will make us look....bad? Odder? Don't want to touch that with slinger's harpoon.
Have fun mate
-
We wouldn't say toxic or things like that but there's always room for come backs, or in your example a way to escape if your unhooked. We're not going to advocate trying to unhook to death (we loath that), but in your example we wouldn't hold a grudge for you not hitting skill checks if left there and no one's actually trying to get to you. Ether way it's probably not good for the game in general, but that's our thoughts.
-
"Happy birthday to you~
Happy birthday to you~
Happy birthday dear GannTM~
Happy birthday to you~"
Your gona have to imagine the crows singing it as we dont know how (or probably should) but sound here :P
-
Want us to sing happy birthday?~
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3569504#Comment_3569504
Well I think lobby shopping is a big problem.
MMR doesn't cope well with queue times and balanced games when it comes to people not committing to what their matched with. Your customers either wait longer or they get backfilled into mis-matched games. Neither is a great result and you just have to find the best medium road with which to balance the two.
Attenuating game mechanics just to account for being backfilled into tougher games or expecting players to police that themselves though is not really a solution.
In a perfect world I guess we'd all think of each others feelings but at the same time what are really trying to be empathetic about here. As you say its a game of no consequence.
Getting smashed in a computer game is hardly a life changing event. Heck getting smashed in computer games was at one time what computer games used to be.
Any kid who pumped change into an arcade machine back in the 80's learned this lesson hard, yet we still kept coming back for more because the challenge was part of the fun, the reality was it didn't matter.
If its the goal of a player to smash their opponents and enjoy the power trip that comes with that, then more power to them as that's part of the game experience as well.
Lastly can we attribute the need to be coddled and offered a heap of second chances to some modern shift in personal resilience with respect to gaming?
Is it a simplified mirror of the modern world as a whole where after generations of "everyone gets a trophy day" celebrating mediocrity has lead to a society that can no longer cope with even the irrelevant of losses? Even the harsh ones.
At what point do players take responsibility for personal improvement rather than outsource that responsibility to game design and others?
Maybe I am reading to much into it.
We believe yes, your reading way to much into this mate. And gona be honest we lost how the heck this conversation steered to this, but we're gona try to see if we get everything cause we feel partially responsible. (Apologies for the looooong reply)
"Your customers either wait longer or they get backfilled into mis-matched games. Neither is a great result and you just have to find the best medium road with which to balance the two."
And that best middle road is something that everyone can't agree on. Which is kinda where we are in our opinion.
"Attenuating game mechanics just to account for being backfilled into tougher games or expecting players to police that themselves though is not really a solution."
These are currently the only options we have on hand. Realistically speaking we only have the ability to police ourselves as we cant directly change game mechanics, only scream and shout into the fog. If you got another realistic solution we're listening intently.
"In a perfect world I guess we'd all think of each others feelings but at the same time what are really trying to be empathetic about here. As you say its a game of no consequence."
Mostly we're trying to be empathetic to the fact that we are playing against other real humans (or some lifeform that can play the game). While it is of no real consequence, we're at least willing to be nice to people until annoyed. We had a match where the killer slugged the last person and went to do event stuff until the last second. We're betting that slug had such a good time. Now we get that your in charge of your own fun and not others and mostly follow through (key word is mostly), but do people have to go out of their way to ruin other humans entertainment?
"Any kid who pumped change into an arcade machine back in the 80's learned this lesson hard, yet we still kept coming back for more because the challenge was part of the fun, the reality was it didn't matter.
If its the goal of a player to smash their opponents and enjoy the power trip that comes with that, then more power to them as that's part of the game experience as well."
We're not that old but we do know that A: not everyones the same B: theres a certain balance to challenges C: If the opponent keeps getting smashed then they either keep going or quit. Which just comes back full circle here. We're not seeing a third option here.
"Lastly can we attribute the need to be coddled and offered a heap of second chances to some modern shift in personal resilience with respect to gaming?
Is it a simplified mirror of the modern world as a whole where after generations of "everyone gets a trophy day" celebrating mediocrity has lead to a society that can no longer cope with even the irrelevant of losses? Even the harsh ones."
We do agree, but we also keep listening (not specifically doing anything, but listening to what they're saying) because sometimes the whining has merit....rarely.
"At what point do players take responsibility for personal improvement rather than outsource that responsibility to game design and others?"
Depends on the game. Here to us is anything within mostly their control is their responsibility. Is survivor A responsible for the killer's decision to tunnel or their teammates to use everything near the hook before grabbing them? No. Are they responsible for getting caught while trying to hide before that first chase? Yes. Are they responsible for the backfilling lobbies? Nope. Are they responsible for trying to get away from that tunneling killer despite everything being gone? Yep. But heres where we go back to "How much skill can improve in that short time and will it frustrate people enough to quit?".
We do not want hand holding (especially when we had to learn the hard way through old ruin and doc) but we understand some of it.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3569123#Comment_3569123
Yes MMR is a different topic but if the example requires a failure of MMR as the core cause, it becomes very relevant. The fault lies in the poor match making system there not the players.
I agree with your point about fun but again its the role of MMR to ensure "balanced" games and can be a stretch to push the responsibility of botched MMR onto the players.
As while you can guage throughout a game if someone is less experienced than you, making that call on the basis of what could just be an experienced play with a botched first chase and then feeling obligated to attenuate your gameplay on the off chance it could be someone new trying to learn, isn't a great concept on the whole.
If this is going the direction we think then what of those who lobby shop for easier matches? The fault lies with the players? We feel it's a hard yes. MMR works for us fine so makes us wonder what is going on with everyone else.
While holding back on the off chance it is a new survivor is indeed not a great concept, it's still an option. If you're doing well enough and can afford it, why not spare them Abit of grief (not their life but not kill them off in the moment)? It is a game with no stakes. As it stands people have a distinct lack of empathy here to a degree that surprises us but that's also another topic (with a story even). The weak link keeps dying quickly each time and either learns slow and painfully or quits.
-
Our vote goes to either pyramid head or Onryu. Most the dread goes away at the start of chase but hearing the drone gives that "uh oh" feeling for us.
-
It's nice seeing a verity of definitions
For us we're part of the "Can't damage with their power directly" group. This includes the likes of spirit, nurse (yes we know what your thinking and don't care), trapper, pinhead (normally), ghostface, hag, clown, onryu, meyers, doc, hux, wraith, dredge, merchant, and freddy.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3566074#Comment_3566074
But the example you gave requires a mismatched killer with lots of hours vs a new player.
You're not gonna get a balanced outcome from that no matter what, tunneling or not.
Preying on the weakest link is a common thing in life and in gaming. The quicker you learn not to be the weakest link the better you succeed.
If evenly matched, being "tunneled" should afford the same opportunity to practice chase and any other chase does, because it's just another chase.
The onus is on MMR to make sure the hard "I quit" factor is minimal as possible. Again I say how much hand holding do we really need?
And yet theres a lot of miss match, but thats a different debate regarding mmr. Regardless that point still stands especially as "should" doesn't always translate as "does". There are also other factors to consider, such as if a teammate loops the killer near you and uses everything. And what if theyre the weakest link each time? How much practical experience will they get each time? Will it be enough to over come the quit factor? And again we say we agreed with you, but now we kinda want to go the agreement route for entertainment value.
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3566008#Comment_3566008
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3566089#Comment_3566089
It should be optional hide to prestige. Most want to see it and show off. I never had dodging issue when played my P100 feng maybe killers left me just more alone if they didn't catch me immediatelly. But I want to show it. I have meg P26, Nea P26 and Ace P21 I want to show them as well.
I want to see my team prestige too sometimes I don't want to play with lower prestiges when they throw enough games. SoloQ is enough rough already. I don't even see my friend prestiges on lobby... P100 definetely should get skin it's much bigger grind than the old prestige system was and they got legacy skins.
While we would like it to be an option as well, we're aware that having it as an option would be effectively be like not having it on as the ones who lobby shop will see a hidden prestige and more than likely nope out.
...the second paragraph kinda re-enforces the point of hiding it... though a skin would be nice it kinda ties with our first paragraph.
-
@Verconissp said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3567028#Comment_3567028
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3566998#Comment_3566998
If people dodge lobbies due to p100. that means there'sa lack of Skill behind said Killer to begin with,
if i see multiple P100s. i want that challenge.. not just "Oop. they all got it hidden. idk what ima be facing and Quite Possibly. i'ma face Baby Survivors IF that,"
And even if. and i mean IF. they stopped this Testing, People will Dodge for Numerous Reasons, some lack Confidence in said Killer. Or stuff came up. Vise Versa.
You aren't everyone. Just because you or us or player 2094 doesn't dodge doesn't mean SOMEONE else won't dodge. Each person is different.
As it currently stands keeping it hidden does more good than harm. At best it reduces lobby dodging a little and at worst makes curious players have to wait out the end of the match.
-
I got the ohmwraith shirt when it came out.
It's kinda a YouTuber thing but I'm counting it.
-
@Verconissp said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3566685#Comment_3566685
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3566695#Comment_3566695
Cause i like to see What they got said survivor Up to?
Is it morally wrong wanting to know what they got their prestiege to on said Survivor now?
Then as people before us said, you should wait till the end of it means that much to you. The original post makes it seem that hiding prestige is some flaw that needs fixed for everyone.
-
@Verconissp said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3566613#Comment_3566613
...Cause i like to see other's Prestiege levels?
And if people dodge. that's on them... p100 doesn't Represent Skill at all.. Just shows you dedicated 60m+ Bp to a Singular Character,
So what is wrong with hiding them then?
-
@Verconissp said:
I just want to see the Prestieges again.. It's quite annoying to NOT see it till the endgame is done..
Cause my God.. Hiding it in the First place is not it Chief.
May we know why you wish to see them and why it's annoying? You said yourself you already vs ppl "ain't up to par" so why does it matter?
And a follow up, how isn't hiding prestige the way?
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3565784#Comment_3565784
True lethal plays can play a part in something like that but it still affords you the opportunity to try and escape from chase.
You can't learn how to escape if you're never chased. Does it matter so much that a chase may start 5 mins into a game or 2 mins?
Lethal aura reading only lasts for 9 secs.
Maybe we're not making our point clear (or we're missing something from yours). While true they have an opportunity to try and escape that chase, since this example has a much more experienced killer, this chase ends super fast and practically non existent. And then what of the next one if they're tunneled? They can try and improve again but its probably gona be shorter than the first depending on what happened while they were on hook. And same with that last chase under that circumstance. The amount of experience they gained (sounding like an rpg here...) is practically nil and the survivor in question probably had a short (probably frustrating) time actually playing and will say [BEEP] it and quit.
Again, we're going with survivors trying to improve their skills while being tunneled, though admittedly we're thinking of newer survivors instead of the usuals. Might be a factor
...9 seconds is MORE than enough time to pick a target at the start...especially on mobile killers...
-
On this one we gotta disagree Abit, atleast with the title.
Niche to us is as you said, specialized, and the ones we consider niche (for example we don't consider overzealous as niche) do give inconsistent results. They're not bad but they don't always give results. Take calm spirit (which we do consider niche), it stops a handful of perks and some parts of powers, but has a penalty to totems and chests. I've personally gotten great use out of it as many times as it has screwed me over with that penalty (desperate to break devour? To bad) while every other time it did nothing of value. Similar niche perks are consistently inconsistent (ha) like that. They're not bad or trash, but expecting consistency is a spike fall trap, which being honest is why we feel a lot consider them trash.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3565191#Comment_3565191
True getting targeted and eliminated early especially when you're new and an easy target is harsh.
But its also a reality of playing games online and games in general, I mean how much hand holding do we really need to do.
Maybe its because I'm an old school gamer from the days before every game had a 20 min tutorial that told you what each button does. The best way to learn is to lose and the harder you lose often the harder you learn, but it seems like losing now turns into being a victim of an unfair system rather than a learning experience.
I rarely get tunneled out early now because I've learned not to be found first and play more mindfully and cautiously at game start, which you would expect in a horror survival game.
It's common to see players just run everywhere and make mountains of noise and then complain they got eliminated early and its kinda silly.
Yeah there is a balance needed between the two but if the solution keeps being, "lets build in more mechanics so people don't have to play well", then as a survival horror the game gets more and more lackluster every time they do that.
Again we agree, but then there are things such as lethal. If the weak link keeps getting unlucky for example and chosen to die first by the big bad hunter with triple their hrs, there's little time to build up skills before they say #### it and leave. As you said there needs to be a balance (and we agree with yours) but that fact remains.
-
It's not a specific one really but we get the feeling there's something going on as each day there seems to be one survivor who always succeeds and one who epically fails. And it always changes....
-
When we started we would always flee at the heartbeat. The amount of times we did that without looking was....a looot. We'd jump right into the killers arms for a friendly smack to the face~
-
Our definition might be a bit odd as a good chase is one where both sides are able to "play" against each other in a meaningful or exciting way. Running round a car over and over isn't really a good chase despite the time it wastes.
For what your asking for as a killer anything over 40 is seconds without a meaningful result is a lost case for us (didn't get hits, no good pallets down)
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3565175#Comment_3565175
That's great, you are displaying a maturity that outstrips some of the adults here. 👍️
So very unfortunately true
For the topic:
While we agree with some of the sentiments, we're gotta to point out that tunneling does not always allow for survivors to display or improve the skills listed (for example how would they improve said stealth skill if the killer is within line of view)
-
Depends on the survivor. Dweet is an Omni tool (leader, overzealous, small game, we'll make it.) Claudette is a medic (botany, self-care, empathetic connection, desperate measures), Rebecca is a rescue operative (reassurance, desperate measures, circle of healing, [insert Steve's anti camp perk]) and so on.
Sadly our killers usually have to mixed up perks to usually be called something (while they also go by a theme or restriction, it's a lot more vague than survivors).
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3562288#Comment_3562288
Saying it was pulled out of thin air is generous. You are saying I am here arguing for Survivor bots when Survivor bots have been a readily available feature for almost a year. All perks are available at tier 3 in custom games, so there is no need for BP if playing against bots is someone’s goal.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3562252#Comment_3562252
I’m sure this will be torn apart, but you answered my question, so I will respond in kind.
HexHerbz put it well, it feels like Scooby Doo more than a horror film. I fear the game is too far gone to be anything else at this point.
The Killer should be someone you don’t want to get in the face of, style-on, taunt, or hang around with. That doesn’t mean Survivors don’t escape, but you can escape an intimidating antagonist without it being a joke at the end, even if the Killer was technically crushed.
Escaping Darth Vader in Jedi Outcast or, a more obscure example, Kirie in Fatal Frame are good illustrations of this. You may have played the part of the game easily but you still didn’t want to hang around.
Only thing we can tare is the fact you skipped the second part of the question. We can't tell you what you want after all.
Though we would like to say that players have to work to be intimidating (whether or not killers should be by default is a matter of opinions) as both sides are "fighting" for dominance. Most times when survivors try facing off they end dead quickly with just about anyone because we put in the effort to out play them (or out smart in alot of cases). When we fail it's because they usually out play us (we're going to politely ignore the maps messing with us).
-
Survivor: More than [insert meta here] perks are viable to use.
Killer: You don't need to be [insert top so and so here] to win as killer, even against swfs.
-
@Ayodam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3561741#Comment_3561741
Not pulled from thin air. I’m familiar with OP and the assertion I made tends to undercurrent everything he posts. He isn’t shouting into the void, he’s saying the same stuff he always says. Lol
Fair enough
-
Perks that interact with hooks, more points, possible quicker games due to finding prey easier, and not causing undue irritation to survivors (last one is Abit of a stretch due to survivor behavior)
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3562207#Comment_3562207
Fair enough. Perhaps I missed it but they never answered mine. I have noted 2-3 answers to my original question in my thread despite many more posts.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3561947#Comment_3561947
It’s not though, it’s the core of the issue. If what Survivors want is a Party Clown to amuse them and BHVR is accommodating them, the game heads in a quite negative direction. There are some folks who are fine with this role but for the most part people want to feel strong when they play a role like Killer.
That's fair. We want a fair and interesting challenge as survivor. We don't want clowns, but we don't want sweatlords either. We don't want to see the same thing time after time, nor do we want a lack of interaction such as camping. We want Abit of everything the game offers like the greedy birds we are.
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3562144#Comment_3562144
Not a pot shot. You tried to attribute an argument I never made to me then brushed it off.
We? Who is we?
Allow us to be clear then. Ayodam implied your bothered by human opponents. You dismissing it as you did (which is strangely missing) was not helping disprove that (your case). We're not brushing it off per day as we simply don't care.
We is the 3 of us who share this account. Or we're French. We'll never tell.
And you seem to not know what you want for killers or how to get it.
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3561741#Comment_3561741
Aware? I don’t think you were.
Pot shots at us for being honest won't help either ~
Regardless we got a genuine question at this point: What do you want for killers and how would you go about it? In depth if you can.
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3561715#Comment_3561715
I never suggested that and am honestly baffled where this is coming from.
We're aware.
Started from Ayodam pulling it out from air.
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3561630#Comment_3561630
To be candid, I’m not quite sure what case you are referring to.
Mostly the one that implies that you don't want human brains controlling the survivors. We're aware it's probably untrue but your not helping by poking with your choice of words.
-
Be a horror movie killer. It's a strange balancing act that you both have to play with your prey and brutalize them at the same time. Use your power effectively and constantly keeping everyone hurt, make sure not to many gens get done, and kill them all.
-
Seems to do it's job well enough. When the killer gets within spitting distance the bar fills fast but is otherwise pretty lenient for the killer. As a bonus, looooots of less killers camping, went only 1 game where the killer camped, and they even had a good reason so can't blame them.