Ryuhi
Ryuhi
About
- Username
- Ryuhi
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3820745#Comment_3820745
The issue is that if you take a perk that does almost nothing that can't be achieved without it, and you call that 'overpowered', that is arguing that a perk that does something more substantial would be far more overpowered.
This is an issue that happens a lot on these forums where the balancing standard keeps shifting. With every nerf to survivors, the game doesn't get more balanced, forum killers just adjust their standards and find the next most valuable perk and label that 'overpowered'. The benchmark just keeps getting pushed further down.
WoO is not overpowered, and is not even close to it. It's just that the bar for survivor perks has dropped through the floor, especially with additions like Weaving Spiders.
It is overpowered only because of the tremendous value it provides, which only ramps up as the player is better/more experienced. I run it regularly as survivor mostly for the meta data it provides, seeing when pallets get used up, walls broken, etc. It tells you a lot of extra info contextually on top of its strong baseline usage for routing mid chase. Empathy and Bond are similar in how much metadata they can provide (especially now that the chase indicators were added) but their core effects are not as strong as WoO.
I don't necessarily think it should be nerfed, but we need to be realistic about why its considered overpowered: It provides too much value for a single perk slot compared to other perks in general, let alone other aura perks. Its just outclassing them too much when you know how to glean the extra info instead of just following the yellow waypoints.
Again, is it OP? I say yes. Should it be changed? not necessarily. It just outclasses its competition in almost every single way, thus putting it well ahead of the curve.
-
@100PercentBPMain said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3818361#Comment_3818361
Sure, if we deactivate Noed at end game too. Perfectly fair
So you want the perk to…. literally be an empty perk slot?
-
@Brightened said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3817023#Comment_3817023
And the people that are pro nerfing survivor perks aren't taking into consideration the unreasonable amount of changes they are doing OUTSIDE of perks to help killers also.
I can easily 360 a new killer. An experienced killer? No. A killer with bad ping? No.
Guess what there isn't anymore of? Separation of servers to avoid long queue times.
They completely slaughtered the hug method by putting objects in the way. They've nerfed loops altogether because for some reason killers refused to break pallets.
So yes. When it comes down to it, the aura reading perks do matter.
Because most of the time I'm not playing with 3 others. Maybe one or two max.
Now lets factor in the fact that they hid player level AND ranks. Why? Because both sides were getting mad when they were getting people outside of their ranks. What was the fix? Not to implement a system, but to remove the ability to see it.
Distortion's nerf is just ANOTHER way to bring the survivor win rate down.
Are you sure you quoted the right person? All i did was present the frustrations about aura reading vs Comms perspectives and insinuating how much they have in common. You don't need to fire off a bunch of unrelated things you personally take issue with, i even emphasized that I am being reasonable about factors such as lower frequency. Never meant to argue.
-
well that was unpleasant.
Anyway, I wonder why players don't like when their location is revealed frequently. Its almost like theres a way for groups of up to 4 to have all that information without even needing a single perk.
I know its technically whataboutism, but if nothing else it should at least create some understanding of the frustration that a lot of killers feel when going against SWF on comms. At least the killer has to dedicate multiple perk slots to have aura reading for specific occasions (like i'm all ears, new zanshin, etc.) and have to play into those situations as much as possible.
Its not meant to cause an argument or anything, I just feel like some of the people opposed to aura perks for killers might benefit from the perspective shift. Obviously not all SWFs are on comms, nor are they the majority of the playerbase.
-
@SipSipSip said:
I honestly like how "normal" hexes are right now. They're sink-or-swim perks, you either get a ton of value or no value.
The problem is that most (arguably all) are not strong enough to warrant their risk, especially when there is zero guarantee of the hex even being active long enough to trigger any part of its effect. Their risk/reward ratio is not where it should be, most of them either need to be less risky or more impactful.
-
@Neaxolotl said:
They love forcing killers to use bleed out, but they hate being bleed out
Humans are strange creature
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3745907#Comment_3745907
You have two health state and you can just shrug off one hit, rush straight to deadzones
It's more like "that is only true if the survivor is a bot that stays exact opposite of killers", SURVIVORS choose where to move, when to get hit, when to run, and ultimately where to down
Killers NEVER have any control over where survivor goes, survivors can stop running and die in front of killer, survivor can dash into killer and go opposite side, and if survivor decide to abuse deadzone, there is extremely large distance they can run straight to it
Your post reads is as if you don't know there is a human controlling survivors, but the fact is pretty much all of survivors are controlled by humans
I get what they mean with zoning, but its both character and tile specific. In many cases, zoning is either ineffective or minimally effective against a survivor who understands tiles and knows where they want to go. That said, there are often many times (especially with ranged killers or anti-loop killers) where they can corral the survivor in a particular direction (especially when already wounded) or force them to go down early.
Against a killer like ghostface or myers at strong tiles that link easily into other tiles though? not so much.
-
@MaddieMage said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3744138#Comment_3744138
you guys keep bringing up this “but survivors have 16 perks!” nonsense and really let’s stop. Survivors only have 16 perks if 1. They’re in a coordinated SWF and 2. They all agree to bring different perks with no repeats. That does not happen in every SWF whatsoever. Lots of matches are solo survivors who don’t know what perks their teammate has, doesn’t know how they will use their perks, cannot tell who has repeat perks and cannot coordinate with their team to make them synergize. Every team is not a 4 man SWF the way some of you love to think it is.
Its not about coordination or anything like that, its about the fact that the 2 perk combo can be stacked up to 4 times. Its like with perks like DS and UB, how a lot of their power comes from being able to be used up to 4 times, even though they're single use. This makes them much harder to balance by comparison.
If 4 players had BU+FTP they could take turns picking each other up, which for example was much more powerful due to its multiple instances than an aura perk combo that could be countered by moving items out of the way, running specific perks, or simply not bringing an item at all.
-
2/4 =/= 2/16
-
stack every advantage we can while complaining when the other side does the same
-
@Krazzik said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3741825#Comment_3741825
I'm not saying Lethal is OP or anything, it's a solid, useful perk, I'm just saying the only counter to it is Distortion, so it's no surprise that when it's popular, so is Distortion.
the only hard counter to it is distortion, but there's another thing to consider:
The killer will see anyone not hiding their auras, meaning that they have a 25/33/50/100% chance of going after you if seen (depending on how many teammates are running distortion.)
Generally the killer can't chase multiple survivors at the same time (and if they can, the survivors need to split up,) so the killer seeing you with lethal makes less of a difference when the perk isn't in play. Who cares if the killer sees you at the start if he goes for someone else instead?
-
@SaltyNooty said:
The astounding mentality of " I won, but gens popped too fast; let's slow it down." is something that NEEDS to be studied because it's a dead giveaway of borderline entitlement.
Like…? If you won, move on. You achieved the task given to you at an incredibly boring rate and yet it's not enough? Don't know about most people here but if a killer gets 2/3 hooks on a survivor/getting a survivor to death-hook before first gen pops; that's a stomp unless the survivor gets lucky and finds hatch, let's be honest here.
Are we just gonna continue shifting the goal post of what's considered a win? Because right now, it seems like most killers lead with the " If I ain't steamrolling them out the gate, I'm not winning." or " If It's not a 4k before 3rd gen, I didn't win."I'm pretty sure when most people have sentiments like "I won but gens went too fast," they're referring to their win being subject to massive misplays in the end/lategame.
-
Slow down and speed up are too much of a variable, which unfortunately it feels like always get lopsided attention instead of tackling the concepts as a whole.
Gens can be plus or minus too much in terms of progress speed. They need to be more equalized (i.e addressing slowdown, blocking, and gen speed perks simultaneously) so that a much tighter average can be balanced around. They could do that in any number of ways, but the healthiest would be to break up synergy in the aforementioned three categories.
Until there is a proper baseline gens will go too fast or too slow, with whichever side stacks their advantage the hardest coming out on top.
-
@ZE8ERDEE said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3731456#Comment_3731456
this is false, dc’s have seemingly risen again recently and people are even dcing in droves on the chaos game mode. The game has a lot of frustrating elements, generally broken things and legitimately bad map, perk and killer designs that make complete sense why players can often be frustrated. The system just flat out doesn’t work and has several loopholes so it’s ultimately pointless. There would be little to no effect if it was removed
I would love to see the source on any of this, especially the "dcing in droves" part. Also the existence of loopholes doesn't mean a rule should be absolved, it means the loopholes should be closed.
Also, they've tried disabling the penalty for testing periods, and it was pretty bad each time.
@ZE8ERDEE said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3731457#Comment_3731457
nothing is being ruined, there is no insensitive or nothing lost when a match ends. Sure you can play for wins but they mean nothing other than bloodpoints which are mostly pointless. It’s a flawed system that only really impacts people for a multitude of the wrong reasons.
That is the most nihilistic view of an online game, let alone a pvp one, I've ever heard. Unfortunately other people do play to win, or BPs, or pips, or even just have a fun match, where making it a 3v1 pretty much ruins their chances of any of the above. Speaking honestly, maybe a different game would be a better fit for you.
-
@ZE8ERDEE said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3731450#Comment_3731450
it doesn’t work and normally just punishes you for dodging absolute cancer matches or when your internet dies. There is also no system in place to encourage people staying aside from bloodpoints which don’t matter. People dc all the time anyway even with the system it’s pointless
If you're dodging and getting disconnected enough for the penalty to ramp up, you need to ask yourself if you are both willing and able to play the game. I'm currently on an extended break due to my internet being unreliable, So I just don't play until I get that resolved. And you're right people do DC, and they get hit with the penalty like they're supposed to because they ruined the game for 4 other people. Its literally the digital equivalent of taking your ball and going home.
-
@BbQz said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3731450#Comment_3731450
They are circumvented? Don't want to play? Die. All you did is ruining other people's games trust me the desperate need to "punish" the first hook deather ultimate result is ruining the people who's stays time simple as. Ask your self if you didn't get a penalty would you start leaving? If the answer is no then trust me this isn't going to be any more of a problem then it currently is just now your not effected your welcome
You still haven't made a case for how it "ruins" games. Survivors were already going to ruin the match if they DCed (having a bot is not a good substitute for a player, unless the player was truly that bad,) and if the killer DCs the game is over.
All you've brought attention to is that there is a loophole that people use to circumvent the penalty, something that has been discussed and debated to death on these forums.
-
How exactly does a system that encourages people to either play out their matches (or take a time penalty for disrupting the game for 4 other people) ruin the game?
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3729980#Comment_3729980
Each and every time they ask this community if they want quality matchmaking or faster queue times, the overwhelming response has always been in favor of queue times. So the only real chance for their MMR system to work as intended is that first or maybe second lobby, and the dodging & shopping around messes that up.
And yet people hate mismatched games, and survivors especially seem adamant about being able to go next as fast as possible when they happen, meaning that they actually do care about matchmaking quality quite a bit. Personally I think its a combination of running the numbers game (more matches = better chance of at least one of them being good) paired with impatience (both for queue times and unfavorable matches.) In other words, I wouldn't be surprised if many people prioritize matchmaking speed because they're expecting poor quality matches and assume they'll need a higher frequency to have actual good matches. Or maybe they just assume that longer matchmaking will be some egregious amount of time instead of maybe a few minutes more.
I still think backfill respecting MMR should at least be experimented and tinkered with instead of just shrugging and ignoring it altogether.
-
@HamsterEnjoyer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3730042#Comment_3730042
Wheres the strawman? Not to mention none of yall even argued my actual point you just started defending Vecna to the core and ignored the actual point of the post. And im not ignoring it I'm just saying theres no horror theme to Vecna which there isn't. If hes horror does that mean when I play Skyrim and play as a necromancer Im playing a horror game now?
Strawman: an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.You keep mentioning IPs like MLP and Adventure time to try to make anyone who disagrees with you sound ridiculous.
Spongebob had the hash slinging slasher so lets bring Patrick and Spongebob in as well.Might as well add MLP thenHopefully you get the point. Also you continuously repeating "there's no horror theme to Vecna" doesn't make it true. Its just an (uninformed) opinion. You're welcome to it but its a strange hill to die on and you shouldn't be surprised when people who know better disagree with you. cheers.
-
@HamsterEnjoyer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3730026#Comment_3730026
How? Lore and themeing plays large parts in what makes horror horror and even SMs map is pretty horror centric. Even then Vecna is again, just some wizard oh im sorry zombie wizard from a mystical fantasy game. Thats fine, but it doesn't make it horror nor does it make it even horror adjacent just because he's a zombie wizard.
You refuse to see anyone's point when they describe anything about Vecna, Liches, or how pen and paper horror shaped the entire premise of horror video games decades before their conception. That and your constant strawmen don't make your point as strong as you think they do.
-
@HamsterEnjoyer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3730003#Comment_3730003
Yet she STILL far outdoes Vecna in every way when it comes to horror. A rich billionaire who slaughters and hunts her competition using her own inventions vs a wizard who casts mystical spells and flies across the map. Oh but he can make neon purple skeletons that lightspeed shoot across the map so that justifies the horror element
You're being disingenuous by allowing SM's lore to be the source of her "horror." If that's fair game, you could do a 5 second google search and find the following about Liches (not even Vecna specifically, but just as a horror themed creature:)
Often such a creature is the result of a willful transformation, as a powerful wizard skilled in necromancy who seeks eternal life uses rare substances in a magical ritual to become undead. Unlike zombies, which are often depicted as mindless, liches are sapient revenants, retaining their previous intelligence and magical abilities. Liches are often depicted as holding power over lesser mindless undead soldiers and servants.Undead wizard revenants that use death magic and control the undead. Thats pretty horror if you ask me.
-
@BbQz said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3720854#Comment_3720854
If hatch offered zero points the pursuing it would be pointless the minute a person or even two died the remaining players would just AFK near hooks and the game would end. The potential of getting points for a lost game keeps the game going and interesting to the survivors and the killer.
This is the issue with slugging for the 4 kill as that strategy becomes more common survivors are more likely just going to give up as the game win potential reaches 0. Or worse they will see the writing on the wall and think their time being used to waste the killers time is a good trade. As I've watched survivors during a slugging at two scenarios wait till full bleed out then hide during end game collapse just wasting every second which realistically could have been used to play almost a whole second game...
TLDR: hatch keeps players playing the match even when winning is unlikely, circumventing it just makes players give up early or intentionally punish killers by wasting time and vice versa
That would be all well and good if the hatch was guaranteed to spawn away from both remaining players, but it can spawn right at either of their feet, ruining the dynamic. Can't breathe new life into a game if it arbitrarily picks a winner instantly as it spawns in
-
@Royval said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3729049#Comment_3729049
so what this guy said means they played better or are their objective way easier? Enlighten me.
The game is currently "sweat sided", aka whichever side stacks their loadout the most and plays the most efficiently will generally have the advantage.
-
Horror campaigns with creatures like Liches, Wights, etc are the precursor to horror games. A lot of undead in D&D have abilities that scared players even on a meta level (stat and level drains being a big one) and Eldritch horror creatures such as mindflayers and beholders wreaked havoc on parties all the time. IIRC even Vecna has been around since the 70's. The fact that they're still played today in newer editions proves they stood the test of time, and that people still want more.
-
but boosted maps are clearly a fun idea! who cares that the map prevention system was implemented because people hate seeing the same maps over and over again! /s
-
@mecca said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3726731#Comment_3726731
I do see that argument brought up, but survivors do generally leave when the match is a certain defeat. For example, Blight has slugged everyone at 5 gens and they start DCing. It was a blowout win for the killer but the match gets thrown out because someone threw in the towel. It really happens a lot. I wish they were counted but I really doubt BHVR wants anyone to know how bad survivors have it.
I highly doubt DCs when the team has already lost happen anywhere near as often as going next on hook. Both are unknown variables, but one is certainly a lot more likely than the other. After all, why quit and get hit with a matchmaking penalty that delays your next game longer than the bleed out timer (or going next on hook, if able,) and compounds the matchmaking delay with each DC?
-
@josephjsherman said:
This likely means that the map repeat prevention system, which is supposed to ensure a variety of maps, isn't working as intended. It's best to check for any updates or bug reports from the game's developers, as they might be aware of the issue and working on a fix.
oh its working, but "boosted" maps completely ignore it by design. kinda backwards imo.
-
@Hex_Ignored said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3724037#Comment_3724037
Killers not only get stronger the longer the game goes on as resources get used and the patrol routes get shorter, but they also have basekit comeback mechanics in camping and tunneling.
Survivors have all their power at the beginning and it's all downhill from there. So a bad start is a lot more devastating for survivors than for killers.
So a bad start is a lot more devastating for survivors than for killers.Disagree, since the more progress survivors make before they start to weaken, the harder the killer has to snowball to catch up. if a game is 2 hooks on separate survivors with only one gen left, the killer has most likely been hurt a lot by the early game. You're not wrong in stating the importance of the early game for survivors, but its arguably as important for killers as well.
-
@aewi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3723927#Comment_3723927
Like if we're going to water down entitlement to "someone left a match", asking people to stay in the match should be also entitled. 🤣 Maybe if you guys don't want ridiculous things said to you, don't say ridiculous things to start.
Imagine how boring sports would be if players just started leaving randomly in the middle of a match if they were losing and decided they had no chance at a comeback. Just walkin right off the field and ignoring their team. Part of the concept of sportsmanship is playing games out to the end, no matter how bad they look. Why play if you want to keep giving up in order to cherry pick games, especially when you're already in them and ruining the match for 4 other people? What happens when you find a match you're willing to play but other players aren't?
-
@MoNosEmpire said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3722071#Comment_3722071
The action isn't what annoys you, it's the repetition of the action, else you would've been annoyed the first ever time you experienced it on DBD.
I disagree, I'm pretty sure for most people its the disrespect more than anything. Which adding new emotes would only make worse.
-
I wonder how different these discussions would be if the hatch was guaranteed to not spawn near either player, instead of having a chance of just appearing at either of their feet.
-
Jennifer Simpson from clocktower!
-
It can be pretty annoying dealing with the dismissive "just use filters" responses, but a lot of people simply aren't very well educated about colorblindness (I still get people who ask if I only have monochromatic vision.) I usually chalk it up to simply not understanding how much impact is still there until they get into the "but people will use it for an advantage" camp. At that point they're either a bad actor or aggressively ignorant.
-
@alpha5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3718103#Comment_3718103
I'm not comparing the value of hug tech to fighting games thingies, I just used the first analogy I thought off. With the rest I completely disagree. Saving a token and the time to bump around the corner is not minor. If it was then he shouldn't miss it much.
There's a difference between opening new possibilities to handle a situation and said new possibilities being too strong. Its entirely possible for it to not be overpowered yet be missed because its an option that has been removed that could have otherwise been applied. Apologies for continuing to harp on fighting games on this one, but you see it every new iteration of a character if/when they have abilities removed in subsequent iterations. They're clearly minor enough that the character maintains their identity without them, but they are still almost always missed by the people who played said characters in previous iterations. Simple things like crossups or safe jumps don't make or break a character but the players certainly miss them if they get removed, because they lost a reasonable tool from their arsenal.
You can have the argument that hug tech isn't a reasonable tool, and that is your opinion. My entire argument stemmed from the idea that "unintended automatically = bad" is an incorrect mindset to begin with.
-
@alpha5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3717580#Comment_3717580
I am aware of this and generally I agree with you.
it changed the way the genre was […]developedI wanted to point out the importance of this. Otherwise you end up with random frame data that likely wildly favors one character over others. Blight was pretty much the only character who could take shortcuts like this and that is just not fair. If there is animation cancelling to get an advantage there probably should be animation cancelling for counterplay. Depending on how we define this 180 flicks might belong into this category. Chucky got his fixed, Oni did not yet, this is mildly weird. Old pallet vaccums got fixed, too - something like that might have been balanced against hug tech but most other killers have no answer.
I get your point, but I think you're overblowing the potency of hug tech. I'd equate it closer to something like grapplers being able to jab to mask a 360/720 inputs so they don't need to jump, not game breaking but a minor situational advantage. If it was entirely unavoidable and had zero skill expression (like the aforementioned pallet vacuuming) then it would fall in line with that change, but its a nuanced tech which didn't necessarily deserve to be blasted from orbit.
-
@Marioneo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3717580#Comment_3717580
Right well the Devs agree its unintended and its not popular enough to be an innovation alot of people agree it shouldnt be a thingg
I'd argue it was popular enough considering how popular it was with, you know, Blight players. The devs have made their choice, but it wasn't automatically the right one. Anyone who plays this game (including they themselves) knows they've been wrong before.
-
@alpha5 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3717522#Comment_3717522
There is a difference between making a new game around it and keeping the game in a busted state.
I don't think you quite understand what I meant.
The bug of animation canceling was so popular that the entire genre embraced it. It wasn't removed in subsequent versions, it wasn't just one game, it changed the way the genre was both played and developed. From an unintended accident in the code. Its even something that happens in many other genres of games (from FPS to MOBAs and more) which are sometimes patched out, but other times are purposely ignored or even turned into features.
Saying it needs to go specifically because its unintended is anathema to how games grow and evolve.
-
@Marioneo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/413898/why-did-they-remove-hug-tech
it was not intended design your not supposed to slide off things only bounce so it got removed doesn't matter how fun it is
Combos in fighting games were actually unintended. Cancelling one attack into another was originally an animation bug, now it defines the entire genre.
Sometimes innovations happen by accident.
-
@Rudjohns said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3716985#Comment_3716985
Why the killer though? Is their objective to kill the survivors
Parity. Neither should have a sanctioned way to bypass the DC penalty or both should. It shouldn't be a privilege exclusive to either side.
-
@Chaosrider said:
The slowdown meta needed nerfs. Still those perks will be at the top of the loadout choices, cause slowdown is the easy choice.
They need stacking to be addressed, not nerfs. Honestly, they need buffs, but with limitations introduced to prevent stacking. Nerfs while keeping existing synergy just encourages people to double down on running multiple slowdowns to get value, while making them very strong but unable to synergize (like exhaustion perks) would encourage more perk diversity while preventing multi-slowdown builds.
Most people's problems aren't with any one perk, its with running 3-4 of them. Hence why they misguidedly nerfed almost all of them at once.
-
@Star99er said:
these changes confuse me does it mean you can’t stealth around and scamper anymore?
Basically people hated how he could scamper under a pallet, turn around partially, then slice and dice around the loop he just scampered under to catch the survivor trying to loop him. Now he has to slice and dice before being able to scamper, thus removing his ability to turn around and go back around the loop with his slice and dice and putting him at the mercy of the max turn angle.
-
@C3Tooth said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3715666#Comment_3715666
I have thought about it, but there are 2 problems
- It will limited perk builds because of fixed slots.
- Later years perks have multiple purpose (such as UW with blindness and aura, or MFT with endurance and haste). If equipping MFT makes you unable to use OTR and Hope or Exhaustion. MFT would straight up go to low tier.
Limit to the base is what it need. Something like a Gen can only regressed 90sec, the total regression time of the whole match is 400sec. Or survivors can not make a healing faster than 200%, or Gen progress can not make it faster than 200% (given 2 survivor would be 170% speed, and with Prove thyself gives 190% at maximum, would be pointless to have 3 survivors on a Gen)
My point is to make it far less useful when using the same categories perks.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3715654#Comment_3715654
Slowdowns are so strong, so there is no reason to not use 4 slowdowns.
Slowdowns are so weak, now they must use 4 slowdowns.
Set a hard limit is what the game needs.
Limiting/preventing stacking was what I meant regarding breaking up synergy, in case it was not clear.
-
Agreed, the focus should be on breaking up synergy, instead of nerfing them into the ground. The current approach doesn't do anything to discourage stacking 4, it honestly encourages it due to how they're getting weaker across the board. The idea behind gen regression/blocking is to allow more time for chases and less stressful macro play, whose necessity/desirability isn't going anywhere alongside these changes.
They're making portions of addons basekit while nerfing the addons (to both reduce their necessity while encouraging more build variety) and its usually seen as a positive change when they do. Why this can't be applied to perk categories like gen regression/blocking is beyond me, especially since they already do it with exhaustion like you mentioned. The only real problem is that they would have to be sufficiently strong, to match the limitation, which people would still complain about.
-
@Azulra said:
To me, personally, I would say that it would be fine to have available for players who are hard of hearing(but not fully deaf) if the visual terror radius accessibility setting wasn't already in the game. So, in other words, since BHVR already put something in the game for that same purpose I would say "yes" to it being considered cheating since there's already an in-game feature that eliminates the need for a 3rd party software that affects the game's audio. At the bare minimum it's a redundancy and at the worst it's cheating.
That's what I have to say about the topic.
The visual heartbeat is only a benefit to the survivor role, and does nothing to address audio issues for killers (nor other audio issues for survivors at that.) If it did things like give visual representations for footsteps (from all sources,) as well as grunts/heavy breathing/GF's cloak/etc, then you would have a point (and I would love to see the setting be expanded upon for more auditory information for both sides.)
There is a lot of information that someone (with a condition like, say, APD) can find near impossible to properly identify in the game's audio balancing, especially in a timely manner.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3706136#Comment_3706136
Let's put it this way: the current adrenaline change means that the killer has to do exactly zero extra effort to completely counter the perk. There's no change in activity or game play that they need to do, just do their objective and hook a survivor and boom, adrenaline is countered.
NOED requires, as Pulsar mentioned, a minimum of 70 seconds of extra time in the survivors' part to counter it.
To even be close to comparable, NOED would have to be countered by the survivors doing nothing extra other than their objective. So basically if NOED simply didn't work on survivors who were touching a gen as the gates powered, for example.
That's comparable, and equally as ridiculous as the current adrenaline nerf. (The wake up thing is the only justifiable nerf here).
As opposed to the old awkward counterplay of dropping the survivor after the last gen pops and chasing them down (again,) or slugging them and waiting for the last gen to pop so they can immediately smack them back down. I get your point but the previous "work" to counter the perk was completely against the game's flow at best, and extremely awkward at worst.
Also it doesn't require a minimum of 70 seconds, since it can be cleared on a single totem, which again, can be done before the killer gets any value from the perk. It requires a minimum of 70 seconds to not show up at all, which is an important distinction.
-
@Marioneo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3706194#Comment_3706194
sadly has to be a debate cause theres tons of people like hens saying its not cheating
I would personally argue that there should be some degree of options ingame to balance the audio (at least a bit better than it is by default) as it can be an accessibility issue, but there are layers of design that rely on auditory masking.
-
It is, but only because the sound balancing is terrible on purpose.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3706092#Comment_3706092
Don't think we can discuss it here. A certain content creator who popularized the saying was involved in controversy semi-recently.
Theoretically, yes, the totem could spawn right next to a Survivor. It could also spawn right next to someone on hook. I don't think that's a great argument either way, sometimes RNG is just on your side.
I don't think it's even possible to get people to do five totems based purely on a time perspective.
Not taking into account ANYTHING other than cleansing time, that's seventy seconds. Not counting travel time, Killer interrupting, other tasks taking priority etc etc. It is simply not reasonable to expect Survivor to have that much time to spare in today's meta.
Understand the candor, thanks for letting me know. Its been a saying for years that I've seen, and didn't know by the reaction if there was some type of recent inappropriate/cancellation/drama/etc situation.
My point was that it was possible for NOED to get zero value before being cleansed, which is why I originally compared the adrenaline changes to it. They have more parity now after both of their most recent nerfs (than they did in the past.)
-
@Saiph said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3706112#Comment_3706112
It's "discrimination" when it happens to killer players, but not to survivors? Because what you're describing is exactly what happens to survivors, and they find it totally normal, because it's how any other game works, you have bad connection so you get penalized for it, the alternative is to penalize OTHERS for your bad connection.
As for technical solutions. For hit validation the game should be client-sided but have ~80 ms tolerance and above that it becomes partially server-sided again. Regardless the devs don't even want to show the killer's ping for some reason so it's clear to me this is an oversight of the problem and not a technical issue.
No, its discrimination when the game provider sells a game to an area without providing them with a reasonable server distance. There's a pretty big reason why very few games use ping limits.
-
@Saiph said:
Yeah this is number 1 problem in the game for me, and I don't understand how it's getting so little attention.
People on this forum took a lot of time explaining how the 3% of MFT was gamebreaking because it allowed survivors to reach a pallet just in time, but they keep radio silent when the killer gets this same advantage for free just by having a bad connection (or a VPN).
Resilience gives survivors +45 ms faster vaults, and people call that borderline OP, but a killer having 45 ms ping is viewed as totally reasonable and fair, and yet it counteracts resilience.
I guess top players don't care because tournaments are played with low ping anyway. But this makes the ladder a joke, any match where the killer has 100+ ms requires the survivor to play a lot safer, we've seen this in the Europe vs. Asia showcase, players on both sides were getting hit like they are complete noobs, yet the game doesn't even show you the ping of the killer. I despise playing against some killers like Wesker and Huntress just because of ping.
I can't think of anyone who defends high ping killers, aside from killers who purposely make their ping high. I assume (at least in my case) the silence is more from not exactly having a solution, since the game is supposed to be solving the issue before it happens. Only thing I can think of would be a ping limit, but even that could discriminate against people who live in countries a good distance from the nearest servers.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3706076#Comment_3706076
First of all, calling it "Bones" because of an unfunny parody of a pretty disgusting person is…meh.
Second - this will never happen. Survivors dont have time to cleanse 5 Totems nowadays. And even then, the Killer got probably more value out of NOED than anything else since Survivors were dumb enough to decide to cleanse 5 Dull Totems.
I was not aware calling totems bones was suddenly looked down upon? If thats now the case, please educate me.
Your perception of "never happening" is, again, false. I listed a perfect example of how it could happen even if totems are ignored for the entire match. If a totem suddenly lights at the end of the match, you don't even need to wait for it to give itself an aura.
I get your attitude that people aren't generally going to do all 5 totems to prevent it from spawning, but even then its unpopular, not impossible.