Rydog
Rydog
About
- Username
- Rydog
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,015
- Last Active
Comments
-
@NuclearBurrito said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/652297#Comment_652297
Yes I would make the same argument. If somehow in league you were to rank up in-spite of your base being destroyed then you still lost.
Rank/Emblems is just one of the games progression system. It isn't part of the actual gameplay and can be ignored when talking about balance.
Win-conditions are also not a mechanic, but are the basis for all of balance. When you say something is better than something else in a game it is achieving the wincon which the thing is better AT.
In anycase, while most games do use wins or loses to determine movement along ranks. Not all games do that. For example Overwatch's ranking system is not determined by wins despite it's competitive focus.
Show me one discussion where a Street Fighter or chess player ponders what might constitute the definition of winning or losing in their game of choice.
It's vague in practice, because the ranking system is not consistent with actions that a player would intuitively categorize as "win" or "loss." Overwatch may be an outlier as well, but that game definitively gives each team a "Victory" and "Defeat" screen at the end of every match. It isn't vague in the least.
You're getting semantic about what constitutes a game mechanic, or not. Call it bad UX, if we don't agree on the former terminology. Whatever it is, it's what creates the kind of subjective wiggle room that leads to threads like this.
-
@NuclearBurrito said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/652269#Comment_652269
Winning is a statistic. It only exists on paper. The victory condition on paper is the victory condition. Period.
The ranking system is not one of the game mechanics (since it exists outside gameplay) and also isn't used to signify winning.
Pips mean that you rank up and ONLY mean that you rank up.
Would you make this same argument to, say, professional tennis players, or chess leagues, or those who play ranked online matches in League of Legends or Street Fighter V? All of those games have a ranking system that is meant to reflect players' wins and losses, and place them in ranks and brackets that are appropriate to their skill.
Again, I know that this is not a perfect 1:1 comparison, but you cannot say that the ranking system isn't a game mechanic in Dead by Daylight, or that players don't bear it in mind as they decide their course of action in a match. The ranking system is not always an accurate reflection of what a player accomplished in the game (as far as the win/loss state that the game's tutorial provides to the player). It leaves room for subjective "Did I win?" interpretation that those other examples do not; if that were not the case, then this thread would not exist.
And, if I were playing a League of Legends match, but my only goal was to, like, finish a certain item build, I would not be able to claim (even in my own mind) that I won if my base got destroyed. In DBD, I can die and rank up, which feels like a (very counter-intuitive) victory to me.
-
@NuclearBurrito said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/652140#Comment_652140
It's really not.
The game guide specifies a win. The only vagueness is the number of Kills required as a Killer.
I mean, sure, that does lay out a victory condition. I'm not trying to argue that. But that's just on paper.
In practice, we've all seen the kind of subjective player-by-player approach that I have described, and the actual game mechanics (by which I mostly mean the ranking system and the emblems) do not always back that up. You can accomplish exactly what is laid out in the screenshot you posted, but the emblem system communicates that you didn't actually win.
I know this is a lopsided analogy, but any professional sport, or chess, or even other competitive video games like Street Fighter have very clear win/loss states that cannot be readily disputed by pointing to a wonky rule that contradicts victory, and players can't just make up their own win conditions and ignore the parts they don't care about. You can't go "I win because I took both your knights, I don't really care about kings."
-
@TAG said:
Whatever the in-game rules says regarding declaring winners and losers.
The in-game rules are very fuzzy, hence the question. Sometimes you die, but pip. Sometimes you sacrifice everyone, but only safety pip. So are pips a measure of failure or success? Some people don't care about pips or rank, some people don't care about Bloodpoints. I've seen plenty of face campers who defend their actions by saying "I got the kill, that's all I care about." So did they win?
It's all really subjective, and down to what an individual player chooses to value about the game -- pips, rank, BP, escaping, making sure their friends escape, sacrificing 2 survivors, sacrificing 3 survivors, sacrificing 4 survivors, letting the last survivor have the hatch, etc. etc.
There's arguably something interesting about this approach, but I think it's less intentional and more accidental due to unfocused design. I wish endgame rewards, pips, and the whole ranking system worked hand-in-hand with the most obvious and intuitive victory states (i.e. a player should always pip/rank up if they escape, or if they sacrifice everyone -- no matter what else happened in the match).
-
I would not count on it. There is currently no offline AI play.
-
Here is all the math on this particular topic. If you're doing it for a rarity advantage, it's not worth it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/deadbydaylight/comments/a4d03r/i_manually_counted_and_analyzed_over_200/
-
@MimiDallas said:
Your problem that you went for the game with 3 survivors with flashlights as a wraith. Pretty stupid of you.
I didn't, actually. Chests are a thing, and someone threw in a purple coin. There was a single flashlight in the lobby.
-
Wat
-
This is a great idea.
-
And, personally, I think it's because new players lean on it as a crutch, it unknowingly instills bad habits, and then they're hard to unlearn.
-
There's already an active thread about this on the front page with 72 replies.
-
Naw man, I'm pretty sure they just eat the offerings. Survivors too.
-
@TheUnendingNightmare said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/649059#Comment_649059
Can't say it wouldn't fragment the queues but there would be the incentive of more BP and shards.
Fragmentation and lopsided challenge would neutralize whatever bonus you would be getting.
-
@TheUnendingNightmare See above.
-
Tapp is supposed to look like Danny Glover? He sure doesn't to me.
-
A stacking TR reduction would be too strong. Monitor & Abuse already does this well on its own.
Insidious does need a redesign, though. Maybe it could, like, turn off TR for 15 seconds after hooking a survivor, or something.
-
Agreed that the emblem system is completely arbitrary, unreliable, and takes an engineering degree or a god damned reference sheet to decipher.
If I, say, ESCAPE, I should not de-pip under any circumstances.
-
"I hope he doesn't have NOED or Ruin!"
-
I think Trapper is too devastating to the Trapper.
-
A 2v8 mode is a completely different way of playing, not a solution to this specific perceived problem.
-
This would fragment the queues too much, and there would be no incentive for killer players to ever queue versus SWF groups. Even if the BP rewards vs. SWF groups were way more significant, it would probably be a better use of time to play multiple quicker/easier games vs. solos than to play a single "high-value" SWF match.
Also: Most SWF groups don't operate with military efficiency and perfect execution of every game mechanic. Some do, but in reality I suspect that they are extremely rare. My own SWF groups go more like this (and we lose as much as we win):
Survivor 1: Is he over there?
Survivor 2: No. Wait, maybe.
Survivor 3: He's been chasing me for two minutes!
Survivor 2: WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY SOMETHING?
Survivor 3: Sorry, I was focused!
Survivor 1: Is that you?
Survivor 4: Is who me? I don't have Bond.
Survivor 3: He broke chase.
Survivor 2: THANKS FOR THE WARNING, HE JUST GOT ME!
...and so on. 😄
-
At the end of the day, we're all here because we enjoy and care about this game enough to talk about it in such exhaustive detail. I have some significant issues with Dead by Daylight, from the oppressive and extremely predatory perk grind, down to a ton of thousand-cuts nitpicks over its suboptimal UX. But I still enjoy DBD, and I play it every day. I complain because I care, and I (mostly) try to do it constructively.
Also, this is another great opportunity to point out that no one here represents DBD's broader player base. The very fact that we have gone out of our way to sign up for a forum to talk about this one specific game makes us aberrant, and opinions here are naturally going to tend toward the extremes. Those of us who make up the forum and Discord community are not "normal" players. Always bear that in mind!
-
Now that you mention it, yeah, that is a little weird.
The totem scoring event was recently increased, in the name of closing the BP gap between survivors and killers. Maybe gen repair scoring events could be raised to 2000 for a full gen or something? That would probably just solve the issue completely.
-
@TKJesse Yeah, I've complained about this exhaustively in these forums. The grind is unreasonably excessive.
-
You're looking at this through an incredibly narrow, cherry-picked lens. Consider it from the perspective of someone who is worried about the impact on player retention due to excessive punishment, and extreme customer support burden due to what would inevitably be a huge upswing in false positives.
-
I think some people here are really not understanding the OP's point, and trying to hijack with strawman arguments. This isn't an issue of "use a better build." It's an issue of new players hitting a brick wall in terms of understanding, and having no accommodating path toward even creating "a better build."
@savevatznick said: "Well, this may not help your concern, but part of playing the game on both sides is reading what perks the opponents have as well as their general temperament."
Part of the issue is that there are 125 perks in the game. Learning the telltale signs of this and that is not an easy or intuitive process. I've got at least 750 hours in the game, and I still make false-positive IDs on BBQ & Chili and other perks all the time. A new player isn't going to understand all of this stuff, and it's very easy for someone to quickly hit this wall and go "oh hell no" and move on to something else that's more respectful of their time.
-
@grayon444 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/648567#Comment_648567
Why do you think so?
It's just a funny stretch to justify everyone being able to pick the same character. I don't really care about lore too much, but that made me smile.
-
Last night I saw a Myers player lead the last survivor to the hatch. The survivor's name was "[Word for Prostitute] for Myers."
-
@grayon444 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/648465#Comment_648465
Entity makes multiple copies of survivors, according to the lore.
Haha, really? Is that a real in-game lore justification? I've never gone too deep there, but that's hilarious.
-
@TheUnendingNightmare said:
Shouldn't activate for every dull totems on the map and maybe it could warn if the totem is a fake one. This would make the perk actually good in certain situations.
Finding dull totems will be more useful once Inner Strength is in the game.
I really just wish Small Game showed auras instead of noise notifications. I've never found it worth using as-is.
-
@TheUnendingNightmare said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/648532#Comment_648532
I'm saying to revert the exhaustion recharge like it was before.
Meaning it would recharge slower whilst running instead of being completly stop.
Pls Read correctly next time.
You did not say anything about the existing Exhaustion timer in your original post.
Anyway, if this is the case and you're suggesting this as a replacement for the current pause-while-running... well why? This just adds cruft to what is currently a straightforward cooldown.
-
@TheUnendingNightmare said:
I'm sharing a few ideas to nerf exhaustion perks.
Fatigue: If you are in a chase and run for more than 30s whilst exhausted. It cause you to be tired. In that state your exhausted status recharge slower (-20%) and you also vault slower (-15%). The effet ends when the survivor isn't exhausted anymore.
Exhaustion cooldown is already paused anytime you are running. Why would you ever add another level of confusion to this? Have you considered the obtuse UX that this would create?
-
I get the frustration with DCs, but your idea is altogether way too extreme, and the bottom line is that it would never work as you intend.
-
Also: Wat
-
Sometimes, I read a topic, and I go "Oh me oh my, this is going to be a humdinger." I was sadly disappointed at how thin a case the OP made here.
-
@Frosty said:
So if the leave game button, looked more like a loose perk button once a game loaded, do you think it would be used? That is the only situation im purposing should be punished. I agree a which hunt on DCing is a bad idea.
If there were an outsized punishment for leaving the game in that specific way, DC'ing players would just disconnect a different way.
If I go to my task manager and force quit DBD, how does Behaviour know the game (or my PC) didn't crash? If I turn my PC or my PS4 off, how do they know my power didn't just go out? This is what I'm trying to get across: There's no way that the systems on their end can determine what factors caused a disconnect to happen, or whether it was intentional.
-
@grayon444 said:
Yeah but the only problem is gonna be that everyone is gonna play as Claudette (Which i don't mind at all <3 i love her and i main her btw) and Meg.Which will give the killers even BIGGER frustration than with what they have to deal with right now.It is a cool idea and it would add more realism to the game.
It would add more realism to the game if all four players were copies of the same person more often?
-
I was reminded of that time in Super Mario Bros. when the fire flower stood up and tried to take me to a warp zone and kill me.
-
@Raptorrotas said:
The Teethface
Please this! 😂
-
@RakimSockem said:
I agree with the premise but I've heard people argue that "this would create a survivor meta and everyone would use the survivors that could heal or do gens or run faster".
To which I would reply, I don't think it would happen because I'm using Feng regardless OR so what? Killers have a meta and tier list. Why would it be a problem if there were meta survivors and survivors tiers?
Your first counterargument is anecdotal. I would use whoever gave me the most clear gameplay advantage.
As to your second counterargument: I'd rather not be hamstrung on the survivor side in the same way that I currently am on the killer side. You have to climb a mountain every time you want to unlock a full perk set on another killer. It's a relief that I only ever need to focus on one survivor's perk inventory.
-
Breaking my WAT rule here again, but: There is no way anyone can detect this in the way that you're describing. You might have disconnected because you clicked "Leave Game," because you pressed the reset button on your PC, because you pulled your ethernet cable out of the wall, because the power went out, because a server crashed somewhere between you and Behaviour, because something was getting DDOSed, because the game crashed due to a random bug, because Windows crashed, or any number of random things.
Punishments for DCs are -- broadly, in pretty much all games -- relatively lenient because there is no way to reliably predict the player's own fault or intentions. If you could find a way to do that, you would be a wizard, and it would literally change the way software is made.
And in any case, I'm all for coming down harshly on cheaters and poor sportsmen, but locking something critical that players had to commit effort and Bloodpoints to is not the way to do it. I'd rather just have them banned for a period.
-
Wat
-
@ABannedCat said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/646880#Comment_646880
Why are Dbd developers always so reluctant about sharing their reasoning behind their creations/ideas/choices?
It's probably because it's not worth their time going into technical detail over factors that should be blindingly obvious for anyone who can put two and two together.
You think: Why isn't this excessively true to the show???
A developer thinks: Is it really worth the development burden to make alternate Upside Down variants of every map -- and every map going forward -- in service of a single power for a single killer, or can we get it good enough and fun enough without committing time and budget to such a grossly outsized development effort for minimal payoff?
How is this something that merits your knee-jerk conspiratorial reply?
-
Spine Chill and Premonition do not have aura effects. So, based on the status effect's particular wording, I'd say these perks should continue to function as expected.
-
The knowledge burden is particularly stupid in this game, I agree. I've gone through this exact same scenario with friends, who have predictably arrived at a "This game is stupid" conclusion. There's just a lot of weird claptrap to get used to, and Behaviour has roundly disregarded any kind of healthy or positive new player experience.
But at this point, what is even the solution? At its heart, this is a game of collecting and denying information; any kind of broad tip-off that an aura perk is in use is essentially self-defeating, but killers need these detection perks to function. I can say "run Distortion" to essentially accomplish what the OP is suggesting, but I think "run X to counter Y" advice is idiotic because you can't know what perks your opponent is bringing, and also it's not newbie-friendly.
-
@bgbomb said:
hi
sorry for bother you
but i really want to know that
do luck perk(like up the ante)increase the item rarity from chest?
the english wiki say no
but the chinese one say yes
i really want to make sure of it
thank a lot
Luck has no effect on items obtained from chests. It only impacts your chance of unhooking yourself or removing a Trapper's bear trap.
-
A better way of contextualizing this perk is that it teaches bad habits.
A lot of new players are told to start with Claudette because of this perk, and they learn to rely on it way more heavily than they should, because it's a useful second chance perk when you're just learning the game.
It's not until later that it really sinks in that Self Care is slow, inefficient, and usually a poor tactical decision. Then they have to unlearn the bad habit.
Medkits, Pharmacy, and especially Bond are way better healing tools when you know what you're doing. And, being injured isn't always a death sentence once you've gained some experience.
So yeah, I blame this perk's popularity on bad advice, which I am guilty of giving too.
-
I currently have 993 hours played, according to my Steam profile. Let's cut that by 25% for time spent in queues, or forgetting that I have the game running in the background (which I do a lot). That's roughly 750 hours.
I have 28 of 51 survivor teachables unlocked, with tier 3 of all currently accessible perks on one single main. I have 41 of 48 killer teachables unlocked, with tier 3 of all currently accessible perks on Spirit. My next-most-developed killer, Nightmare, will require another 45 webs to reach this state AFTER this change goes live. I've never prestiged any character.
Also, I've been playing since November 2018. That's an average of about 75 hours per month, which I suspect is a pretty huge commitment for a normal person -- again, our main target audience.
It's effing stupid that, given this, I do not have all teachables unlocked, and even if I did I would barely even have them all available for one survivor and more importantly ONE KILLER.
-
@Caretaker said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/647736#Comment_647736
I 100% agree. The grind is here to keep people playing, but the problem is it's so unhealthy for new players and even old alike that it ends up killing any will to grind or really put effort into it. What about my ideas, and we can drop teachables to 20-25-30? That way you'd unlock your perk slots, AND look forward to teachables right after. Plus you'd get access to all the perks much faster.
Yeah, I think they have some wild fears about player retention. But they could reduce the perk grind while still requiring some effort, and also there are other types of grinds.
The bottom line is that at the newbie levels, even getting access to a decent selection of perks is too intimidating (which the upcoming change does not address at all). And at veteran levels, getting the specific perks you want on specific characters is totally random and unreasonable (which the upcoming change helps with...but this really should go much further).