Rydog
Rydog
About
- Username
- Rydog
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,015
- Last Active
Comments
-
Well I mean yeah, 1v1 is unfair. Survivors are weaker than the killer on an individual basis. This is the entire point of the game.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/679988#Comment_679988
The perk is meant to be an anti-tunneling perk, which is separate from a "leave you alone" perk. A "leave you alone" perk shouldn't even exist in this game, no perk should make a survivor feel invincible to a killer. That goes against the whole 1v4 dynamic, where the 1 is supposed to be more powerful than any singular 1 of the 4. D-strike doesn't fit this idea due to how it interacts with lockers, and how many people have caught on to this fact and are abusing it almost every match.
Tunneling, at least in my eyes, means the killer is actively going out of their way to kill someone as quickly as possible, ignoring all other survivors. How, then, is slugging tunneling? Especially if the killer only does so after chasing another survivor? The killer will still leave you alone after you're slugged, after all. Your D-strike will still be useful as a deterrent, your team will just have to get over to you and get you off the ground.
I don't mean to be dramatic -- I'm using "leave you alone" to mean "not tunnel." DS just isn't going to be a major issue most of the time, if you're not hyperfocused on one survivor.
And re: "But at red ranks there's at least seventy DS perks, and gens finish as soon as you spawn in!" arguments, these are edge cases that don't apply to 99% of players or matches, and shouldn't be used as a realistic balance target.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I'm gonna put it out there that the only change I want to see for D-strike is for it to be deactivated on locker grabs. Maybe even pause the timer when slugged or halve its decay rate when slugged if it absolutely needs a buff to compensate for that kind of nerf. There is no reason you shouldn't be able to at least slug the survivor and apply some kind of pressure on them and the rest of the team assuming you're able to catch up to them again/find them after chasing someone else.
But considering Peanits's reply, doubt even that's going to happen. Inner Strength + D-strike here we come.
Deactivating it in a locker would go against the purpose of the perk. The survivor SHOULD be incentivized to force the issue, or bluff if they're marked as the obsession.
The point of the perk is to make the killer leave you alone. That is why you dedicated an entire perk slot to it, to guard against the killer tunneling you -- which is the only scenario where hopping in a locker would be beneficial, because DS only activated for one minute.
Pausing the perk's clock while the survivor is slugged would be an amazingly bad idea, because it would take away the one piece of counterplay that the killer has during edge cases -- i.e. triggering DS at the end of the game and surrendering the kill entirely.
-
You guys are frigging dumb. DS activates for one minute, and then it's gone. Can you really not just go deal with other survivors for one minute, when you see someone is marked as your obsession?
The whole point of the perk is to force you to leave that one survivor alone after they've been hooked. Adding a whole bunch of stipulations to prevent it from working as intended would be idiotic.
-
People in this thread not understanding that the point is, the grind isn't healthy in its current state. Player retention, and -- more broadly -- the game respecting your f-ing time, is the issue. The grind needs to be reasonable for normal average players with jobs and lives, which it currently is not.
-
@pemberley said:
I have been playing dbd since August of last year when it came on ps plus, quite regularly, and here’s a couple things to note:
- Jane is my only p3 maxed out character.
- I have only prestiged Jane, Ash, Michael, and Plague - all tier 1.
- As far as killers go, it’s only NOW that I’ve been able to get MOST of my killers to 50. I STILL have to do Clown, Legion, and Leatherface.
- Levels 40-50 literally take over half a million (500k) bp to complete.
- Even level 40 killers are not guaranteed to be fully enjoyable and playable due to perk rng.
The grind is neither fun nor satisfactory.
I am in a similar boat. I started playing in November 2018.
I have leveled 6 survivors enough to get their teachables (working on #7 now), and they're all learned on my level 50 Claudette, along with some stuff I bought on the shrine.
I have leveled all killers to at least 40, except for Nurse and Pig (I've gotten their perks exclusively from the shrine). The only teachable perk I don't have unlocked is Make Your Choice. They're all learned on my level 50 Spirit. She is the sole killer that I have been able to achieve this on, so far.
I have never prestiged anyone. I am currently Devotion level 3, with what I estimate to be around 800 in-game hours.
This is a garbage place to be at with this much time invested. The fact that I have only one killer with a full perk loadout, and lots of survivor teachables left, is ridiculous.
-
Spine Chill has no aura mechanic, and therefore should work as normal vs. stealth killers and T1 Myers. If this isn't the case, it seems like a bug that ought to be fixed.
-
Cool necro of a dumb idea!
-
@Xboned said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/676340#Comment_676340
And I will/am, but I think it's worth examining if this aspect of the game's design actually benefits anyone. I'm cool with there being a grind, it's expected, but the one we have now is huge, complex, and somewhat opaque.
I enjoy this game because it's unique. There just aren't that many asymmetric PvP games out there, let alone asymmetric survival horror PvP games. I think that's awesome, but it's also a niche market. Every player this game retains will improve its overall health, but as you pointed out this game doesn't really welcome new players.
There are plenty of games with long grinds in them that I enjoy. The Borderlands series has an insane grind but I keep coming back to it because the fundamental gameplay loop is always there. If I want to play a sniper, I play a sniper. Whether he's level 10 or 50, he's a sniper and I improve him by sniping.
In DbD, I bought a stealth killer (Myers). In order to make him more stealthy (Monitor and Abuse), something recommended by every experienced player and streamer, I had to invest 35 levels in anti-stealth killer (Doctor).
In order to save BP, I needed to do this before I started leveling Myers. So this was my journey to playing Myers:
- Buy Myers in store, get excited, look up builds
- See M&A is necessary for maxing his stealth
- Don't play Myers, play 35 levels of Doctor instead
- BBQ and M&A by level 5, feel like a boss who planned things out well
- Get stomped because level 5 vs survivors with full T3 loadouts and purple add-ons
- Lose 3 ranks in 2 days of play while getting trash talked by SWF
That's just not fun. It's a lot of time spent wrangling bureaucratic systems that have nothing to do with actual gameplay, but have multiple ways of punishing gameplay if handled poorly.
This, 100%. It's baffling to me that so many players want to defend this, and argue that it's somehow beneficial and/or acceptable for everyone to have to suffer through what you're describing. It's harmful to the game, and drives away new players.
There are tons of potential solutions.
1) Perks are UNLOCKED, period, and available to use on everyone once the teachable has been learned.
2) Uncouple perks from the Bloodweb, and introduce an a la carte perk shop where we can select and buy whatever we want for BP.
3) Eliminate multiple perk ranks. Just have one rank for each perk.
But this will probably never materially improve, because Behaviour is super stuck on their grindy Bloodweb system, and somehow believes that this level of oppressive grind is necessary for player retention.
(Cue @Peanits coming in and saying that changes of this magnitude would cause players to run out of stuff to do. I really think Behaviour needs to think of major ways to make the grind less of a horrific brick wall for newbies in particular, but this is apparently not on the table.)
-
Is this meant to just be a tool for practice?
-
The grind is the game's biggest problem. It needs to be cut by like 70%. I shouldn't be able to put 1,000 hours into the game and still have perks to unlock on half the characters, with only ONE single killer currently topped out. It's arbitrary and stupid that the grind is this bad.
-
@Bun said:
No Its Not Sadly. :c
Stop capitalizing every word. I can never figure out why people do this.
-
Isn't there a double BP event starting today?
-
Just like with anything, familiarity is going to dull your reaction to it. It's not really a solvable problem with the game or the genre; it's just what is.
-
Haha I think John Wick is more likely to be a killer. :D
-
Yellow Mori is a "win more" mechanic that seals an already foregone conclusion, since it requires you to down the last survivor anyway.
Green Mori doesn't do anything except ruin the game for a single player.
Red Mori breaks the entire flow of the game all around. Like, it doesn't even matter what happens, as long as the killer isn't a complete potato.
On top of this, Mori kills actively hurt the killer's Sacrifice emblem score.
I understand the Mori thematically, but in practice, it's an incredibly toxic mechanic that doesn't bring any value to anyone, other than the "lol I'm just bringing it to troll/meme/other stupid Internet term" players out there. It's a canonized griefing mechanic.
-
In my experience, people will call anything "tunneling," or "camping," even when those things are not happening. They seem to both mean "anything I don't like" to a lot of players.
-
@InFluxCapacitor said:
"Pretend I am a new player and don't know anything about the ranking system, and explain it to me"
Do stuff in the game that can help other Survivors and yourself such as by fixing gens, healing, unhooking, distracting the Killer and so on.
As Killer, play the damn game.
This leaves open the possibility of confusion when, say, I don't pip as killer after sacrificing multiple people. Or when I don't pip as survivor due to losing Altruism pips, because somebody didn't get unhooked. Or lots of other edge cases. You have to have a bullet-pointed list to understand what contributes to which emblem. This is the problem that, in my opinion, needs solving.
The thing is, I WANT your exact explanation to be true 100% of the time. It's a good explanation! It makes sense!
-
@InFluxCapacitor said:
It doesn't need simplification, the devs just need to tweak the numbers on the emblems. in my opinion the Emblems system has been the best way to judge rank (*although not the previous patch where they changed numbers/mentioned there was a bug in scoring, that made everyone rank up too slowly and made people queue with newbies*).
Pretend I am a new player and don't know anything about the ranking system, and explain it to me. You have to do it in a reasonably sized paragraph (100 words or less) per role, and you are not allowed to link me to any external explanation or use an image attachment, and no incomplete sentences just to save words.
This is rhetorical because I don't think it's actually possible. That's why it needs to be simplified. The emblem screen is confusing for new players, it doesn't explain how anything is tabulated except in the broadest possible sense, and there are all kinds of weird rules to it. I've got hundreds of hours in this game, and I still think this system is needlessly obtuse.
EDIT: Also, to be clear, if you decide to do this, it has to be something I won't easily forget or have to refer back to, and it must eliminate the possibility of me ever having a single follow-up question due to weird exceptions or edge cases.
-
@InFluxCapacitor said:
Killers ranking up based on Kills was a thing, it ended up with Killers tunneling to secure Kills.
Build Borrowed Time into survivors, and provide a stacking permanent speed boost to generator repair speed while the killer stands near the hook. No tunneling or camping allowed.
I know this (by which I mean this and my OP) is probably an idea with a lot of potential holes and problems, but the emblem system is in dire need of simplification.
-
People who don't know how the perk works assume it's a speedhacking exploit. I've seen this accusation consistently leveled at streamers who run it to goof off and constantly swing, especially when it's paired with Agitation.
-
Wat
-
It's annoying, and lag can occasionally still kill you. It's an outdated mechanic that serves no other purpose than to be frustrating.
-
I think having HUD icons that indicate "this survivor is getting chased" and "this survivor is working on a gen" -- that only your fellow survivors can see, of course -- would help to close the information gap for solo players.
-
It happens. The fact that the game is extremely adversarial by nature is just gonna get people's blood boiling sometimes. Best to let it roll off your back, say gg, and move on.
-
Yes, we do. I don't think the game was designed to scale the way that it has. It's very unfriendly to new players.
Insert my usual criticism of the oppressive perk grind here. I'm so tired of repeating it.
-
@PolarBear said:
The devs don't want dlc characters to be maxed out on day one. Without the cap this would happen with every dlc that comes out.
That's such an arbitrary "fake grind" reason. Just let players do what they are going to do. They're going to get that stuff leveled up anyway.
-
@Crazewtboy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/659868#Comment_659868
I feel like it should too. They can get used up way too easily. I also find it stupid that you still lose one to BBQ even when you are in a locker. If they were to remove that, I feel it would be a lot better.
Wait, what? Does this happen? I swear you don't lose Distortion tokens to BBQ while in a locker. Is this not true?
-
Infinite Distortion tokens please. ;D
(For real though, I do think it needs more than 3.)
-
I think the licenses create a surge of interest from people who might not give the game a chance otherwise. But if the game itself were a complete wreck, those players wouldn't stay for very long.
Friday the 13th had a huge launch because of the license, but it flatlined very quickly, because the devs dragged their feet on patching exploits and severe gameplay issues. Just look at Steamcharts to see what a mess F13 turned into, very quickly after launch.
F13's franchise litigation issues weren't a blip on the radar when this was occurring, but they wound up providing a convenient scapegoat. The reality is that the developers completely dropped the ball on basic game maintenance, which the ongoing franchise ownership lawsuit had no bearing on.
-
I try to save people whenever it's reasonable. If you're hooked nearby, there's no NOED, and I'm uninjured and/or have BT, I'll happily go back for you and take a hit on the way out.
But if the door's open, you're hooked across the map, and I'm the only one left, sorry yolo, not being a hero.
-
Wat
-
More of this WE THE COMMUUUUUUUUUUUUNITY HAVE SPOKEN entitlement. The forums are not a design committee.
-
Burn mechanics are trash. You shouldn't be able to completely circumvent a killer's entire power.
-
Why do people get so hung up on this stuff? It's like you're losing sleep over it or something.
We'll get patch notes when they're ready.
-
Wow, this is an awesome guide!
-
Deliverance really should be available in either hook phase.
-
Wat
-
How are you constantly winding up in matches vs. the same player?
-
Wat
-
My favorite was in Nightmare on Elm Street 3 when Freddy injects Taryn with a bunch of syringes, but she tells him the only reason he won is because he picked an OP noob killer with crutch perks.
-
Or also that scene in Halloween 5 where Myers stabs Rachel to death with scissors, and she DC's immediately because she was the first one found?
-
Remember that scene in Friday the 13th Part 3 where Jason axes the dude in half, and then at the end credits the guy calls Jason a noob tunneler who should kill himself irl and stop running Ruin and moris?
-
@Jimsalabim said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/653367#Comment_653367
it does matter when the previous ptb dates were since they were all structered the same so it's only human to think that a ptb will start shorlty after the reveal of the chapter. Also the rumoured date is now the 10th which is unprecedented if true. I could image the disappointment for the wait.
This also has nothing to do with age but with eager and i'm not defending the complainers here but just the enthusiasts like myself.
No, it doesn't matter.
You're holding them accountable for something they didn't do, and didn't promise. It's not like they announced it and then pushed it back. Like, what could they have done to not upset people, other than to put the PTB up on the imagined date that people assumed based on nothing? Give me a break!
-
I wish they could add more of his masks (Halloween 4, Halloween 2018, etc.) and maybe coveralls that are closer to the original spruce green ones from the first film.
-
@BBQnDemogorgon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/653211#Comment_653211
Actually the indication was the fact that every ptb has been the week after they reveal..
A reveal then 2 weeks later a ptb is unprecedented and has never happened before.
The hell is wrong with everyone in this thread? Turning a pile of nothing into a complaint thread here. If they never announced a PTB date, it should come as no surprise that the PTB date is not tomorrow. It doesn't matter when previous PTBs were, that doesn't "indicate" anything. This comes across as super-entitled.
Swear to god, I sometimes feel like this is a forum full of 15-year-olds who don't understand how the world works, and pretend that their assumptions are reality.
-
@ShadowReaper11 said:
Have any of you guys seen the original Myers movies compered to modern ones your thoughts
The original Halloween will always be my favorite slasher film. The 2018 sequel was amazing, too.
Halloween II felt like more of a copycat than a sequel, like they took the wrong lessons away from what Friday the 13th ripped off from the original Halloween. Halloween III is its own thing, but I think it's a pretty good movie when judged on its own merits (also it stars Tom Atkins, who I loved in Night of the Creeps).
Halloween 4 does the best out of all the "original continuity" sequels, and it tries very hard to maintain a tonal consistency with the original. Halloween 5 and 6 are both hot messes, and Halloween H20 is a fantastic survivor tale and wisely does away with Halloween 4-6's continuity. Halloween Resurrection is both insulting and stupid, and it's generic enough that it could have been anything.
The less said about Rob Zombie's remakes, the better. That dude didn't have even a fundamental understanding of what made Halloween and Michael Myers good, and it goes full-tilt with his gross, trashy, tries-way-too-hard-to-be-vulgar-and-edgy filmmaking style. Like, this is an actual scene from that movie, let me know if you actually make it through the whole thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kZUcjdEReI
Looking forward to Halloween Kills and Halloween Ends. They just cast Anthony Michael Hall as a grown-up Tommy Doyle (the kid Laurie babysat in the original movie).
-
It would still be an issue, especially with regard to the incentive reason that I outlined in a previous post.
-
@Milo said:
"Can we finally get this? Many games offer transfer abilities."
May i ask what games? Im curious.
World of Warcraft, Final Fantasy XIV, Diablo III, various Borderlands games, Hunt: Showdown, probably other shooty games like Destiny or Call of Duty.
Lots of MMOs or other alt-centric games have some sort of shared storage vault, and/or a recycling mechanic for unwanted items. I specifically don't understand why survivors in DBD don't have, at minimum, a shared item inventory because they're all just skins of each other.
-
@NuclearBurrito said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/652390#Comment_652390
Confusion means that the game doesn't present the wincon well. That doesn't mean the wincon is subjective.
I agree with you 100%, but I think the way that players are scored contributes heavily to that confusion.
Presentation, as you would point out, is not a game mechanic -- but it's still key for reinforcing things like whether a player won or lost. If the way that players are rewarded for their actions (via emblems and Bloodpoints) were applied more consistently according to whether they won or not, we would not have this kind of confusion.
EDIT: Also, if there were monthly rank-based incentive rewards like normal games have (Hearthstone etc.), it would leave far less grey area for players to wonder if they are playing correctly/winning (the "I don't care about rank" people).