Ryuhi
Ryuhi
About
- Username
- Ryuhi
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3706017#Comment_3706017
Except that a Killer will always get NOED to activate. A Survivor does not get Adrenaline to activate every game.
I mean bones can be done preventing it from even coming into play, so no, not "always."
Hell, it can still pop on a totem right next to the last gen that gets done/next to an exit gate and get cleansed after activating but before coming into play.
-
@Spare_Them_Mori_Me said:
lol Killers must be buzzing right now. I would too lol. I'd akin this to Pop only working on the last gen. Man I'd froth lol
Really? I'd compare it to NOED revealing its own location.
-
@goodfriday said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3704377#Comment_3704377
Yeah that is why I am so tired of these killers complaining about it prevents their look up at wall pick up technique. Cause if flashbangs did not do that, then they sorta would be worst than flashlights. That look up at wall technique is so annoying anyways.
There's a really easy counter to the killer looking at a wall: Don't go down next to a wall. Only the most absolute madlads can pull off this technique, however.
-
@Doublenurseblinks said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702546#Comment_3702546
no.
nobody is required to offer incentive to not dc.
people will either play the match they agreed to play, or catch a penalty.
The question of the topic is quite literally
"What is my incentive to stay in a game with a hook camper or tunneler?"And again, I agree with you, I was just pointing out how it doesn't exactly relate to OP's question.
-
@Doublenurseblinks said:
Your incentive to stay in the game, regardless of how that game is going for you, is the agreement you made when queing that you agree to play a full match without dcing, or else catch a matchmaking ban.
Its really that simple.
While I completely agree, thats an obligation, not an incentive. An incentive would be "how awesome it would feel to turn a losing match into a 4E" or something like that. Back when ranks were a thing, you could work toward securing a pip even in losing games. While technically still something that could be used, the removal of depipping made it even less of a factor.
-
Emblem based matchmaking at least allowed for more "secondary" objectives for both sides: Playing hyper efficient actually hurt your chances of pipping, the goal was to play as well rounded as possible, which made the game feel more dynamic for both sides. It also made it easier to take a win from a "loss," reducing the impact of the end result and allowing players to have their own win conditions more easily (if you died but still double pipped, you know you played your ass off. Same for pips when only getting 0-2K as killer.)
The switch to SBMM, but more importantly how its incorporated in DBD, made nothing matter outside of the end result. The infamous hockey analogy got roasted for a reason, it removed all nuance from either role and forced them into outcome biased results.
-
@Boons123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3702473#Comment_3702473
The point is that the tutorial teaches new players that they should throw the pallets as soon as they see the killer
They're not wrong with the controller doublemap statement though. I remember it becoming a huge problem after pinhead came out, constantly throwing down pallets or slow vaulting while trying to remove chains.
-
@Efrost said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3700847#Comment_3700847
Honestly the honest decent suggestions. Killers refuse to even acknowledge that slugging occurs for the 4k. Its taking the game hostage from those who are on death hook forcing them to wait out 4 mins of time. Also tends to result in killers letting them wiggle off in hopes of ratting out their other survivor. Lots of negative impacts from it. Yet they want to claim that its fair and fun.
If they want to address survivors hiding till the other gets found then Slugging needs to also get removed.
Slugging has a 4 minute bleedout, and if the killer picks them up last second and refuses to kill that survivor, they can plop right down on gens while the killer searches aimlessly for the 4th. By contrast, two survivors trying to outstealth each other can last all the way until the server shuts down at 1 hour. There are multiple ways to prevent afk crows without putting yourself at risk.
Which would you rather deal with? 4 minutes or up to an entire hour?
-
@GolbezGarlandGabrant said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3700603#Comment_3700603
I never assumed you are a killer main. Heck I play both sides myself. I just don't think people understand hitboxes.
It's no different than the hitboxes of Huntress' hatchets being unfair for survivors.
One is primarily latency, with a dash of the survivor hurtbox not lining up with their center mass (but rather their feet, causing it to trail behind slightly) while the other is a hurtbox shrinking (on demand) in a way that prevents certain abilities from being able to make contact. Bonus points for it relying on an imposed limitation (inability to look down while using their power.)
Not exactly the same. That said if your point was that they both suck for the receiving end, that part is true.
-
@goodfriday said:
I mean I can say the same for killers getting undeserve hits through windows/pallets or even anti loop killer(artist in general) oh let me put a bird right at the pallets now there either if the survivor move I can m1 easy and if they run into the crow=they are injured. That takes no skill to me. Knight/skull merchant press m2=either way survivor is going to get a injury because your lil bro(the guards) is doing everything for me or you drones=are freely injuring/hindering/broken status affect me.
The answer to anti-loops is to shift+w away from the loop while they're setting up. SM is the only one that doesn't really lose any distance but she's just poorly designed. Artist and Knight have to either bet on the anti-loop (expects survivor to loop) or not commit and chase the survivor to the next tile (if they shift+w expecting the anti-loop.)
That basically just leaves the ones who can hit through windows/over pallets, which require skillshots that can (and should) be baited, adding a layer of mindgame (especially vs huntress around tall loops.)
-
@Thavus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3695232#Comment_3695232
Mandy, a DBD representative, confirmed it was a bug three months after the Blight was released. So yes, anyone who abused the bug after that point should be retroactively banned, because they committed a ban-able offence.
The players abusing the bug can call it a "Tech" if they want, but that doesn't magically make it not a bug.
Splendid! Are we going to ban everyone who uses any "techs" that are unintended actions? I'm sure the remaining 10 players left in the game will appreciate the purge.
-
sounds like more bloodweb clutter
-
@Doxie said:
First do you play survivor and second .. is this your build always and third do you spend the game looking for totems? Then let's add a killer like the newly buffed Huntress… there is little risk. Just went up against one .. 1 gen completed, two of the three hexes found, two people quit and bots took place. Guess we should have spent more time on the totems huh
The recommendations of detective's hunch and/or small game are for if you aren't familiar with the spawn locations for totems. If you already have a good idea of where most/all of them are (or at least understand their spawn logic) then you don't necessarily need to run those perks.
-
@Archael said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689901#Comment_3689901
Problem with cleaning dull totems is pendimento
Another risk/reward. though again, you can always just wait until the last gen is powered then patrol the totem spots a bit looking for the totem aura
-
@Hexling said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3689800#Comment_3689800
Except for noed literally no risk high reward.
The risk is playing the game with 3 perks while the dulls can be cleansed preventing it from even showing up. Bonus points for it revealing its own aura within up to 24 meters over a short period of time.
-
yeah exploits belong in the bug report section, not having tutorials shared in general.
-
@JeanGreyarea said:
Also anyone that uses the “survivors noise” as an excuse is just spewing bs
You mean giving them a single smack to cut short the ear piercing scream? Thats valid vs half the survivors, honestly.
They're so much louder than the game volume I even appreciate when killers do it to me when I'm the one getting hooked. They really should be toned down both in volume and duration. Tired of having to alt tab out just to save my eardrums.
-
@Ayodam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3683183#Comment_3683183
Oh this is new. I know he hadn’t said anything about it for a while (since HUD update I believe). I’ll check it out and return with my thoughts.
Yeah its pretty new. Hopefully it could give a bit of weight to the pregame lobby showing perks or something similar.
-
@Ayodam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3682426#Comment_3682426
He’s part of the reason for the state of this things. I’ve noticed Otzdarva doesn’t really talk about survivor or solo queue anymore and generally avoids playing these roles unless he’s low on content.
He actually recently made a video specifically about how miserable solo queue is, and breaks down a lot of the reasons why. its an hour long because it has games that were surprising in the middle of the video, but the start and end timestamps explain his reasoning and the results of his experiment:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_ap-rZHoW4giving up/disconnecting was as common as 14%, map offerings from one side or the other were 26%, and issues like perks getting hurt by lack of communication (like deliverance or plot twist accidental sandbagging) was 46%. He even advocates for that type of information to be possible without SWF.
-
I could get behind something like this.... IF bleed outs counted as a proper kill (emblems, adepts, BP) or 4K requirements for challenges/achievements were lowered to 3K. Would also be nice to see something that lets the killer give up without having to waste time pushing survivors out if they've already won (whataboutism I know, but still a similar way to force one's time in the match to end.)
All of that said, I kinda like the idea of it having practical uses instead of just being a go next button. It would definitely need some testing first to see if any aspects of it could be abused, but if there aren't I'd be for it. I just feel like one or two things needs to change in the game overall before it could be implemented.
-
@Raptorrotas said:
I'd say I see more survivors asking for the "fair" 50/50 they call the 50% escape chance.
Quickly opened a graphic calculator webpage and wrote this down:
- x = escape chance (the chance for a survivor to win)
- (1-x)^4) + 4 * (1-x)^3 * x = chance for 4k and 3k combined (the chance for a killer to win)
- 6 (1-x)^2 * x^2 = chance to 2k (the chance for the k
- x^4 + 4 x^(3) * (1-x) = Chance for 0k and 1k combined (commonly refered to as survivor "team" win)
With a 40% escape chance we get:
- 47.25% chance for a killer win
- 34.56% chance for a draw
- 17.92% for a survivor "team" win
- The Killer has a 1.188 times higher chance to win than each individual Survivor.
With a 50% escape chance we get:
- 31.25% chance for a killer win
- 37.5% chance for a draw
- 31.25% for a survivor "team" win
- Each individual survivor has a 1.6 times higher chance to win than the killer.
- Yes, this is a "fair" 50/50 or like 31.25/31.25 for the survivor "team" and the killer.
I'm curious where the survivor "team" mentality comes from in these discussions. If it looks like a duck (survivor dies) and it quacks like a duck ( MMR goes down when killed) then it might just be a duck (that survivor lost.) Each survivor has an individual outcome of win/lose/draw (if you count hatch as a draw, otherwise win/lose if simplified to ignore the MMR stipulation) but the killer has 5 possible outcomes (specified since lose/draw/win have a cadence of 2/1/2) and its possible for both a survivor and the killer to win simultaneously (3K/1E) as well as the killer and one survivor to lose (1K/3E.)
I don't consider it a zero sum game, based on how the devs have structured MMR. It technically wasn't zero sum when emblems were the determining factor either, since pips could be awarded or removed on both sides. The only way it works as a zero sum game is if you consider the survivors a team and ignore both MMR and PIPs, which is why I'm so curious as to why its so many people's default view.
-
@catnip18 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3675132#Comment_3675132
This is a bad option for something devs should have known about earlier, there's always going to be 'work arounds' i'm asking about them making the game accessible. People with epilepsy have always had workarounds, but it doesn't mean a game is accessable
I never said they shouldnt change anything (quite the opposite) but just offered advice for the meantime.
-
@catnip18 said:
This is less for me than for my friends. I have 3 different friends that full on refuse to play the game because specific moris either trigger them or gross them out. The legion mori is very akin to SA, plagues is on par with a common phobia, and cenobites is pretty gross. I feel like letting survivors play without seeing the mori's should be a very easy on/off toggle, but if they cant be bothered to do such a simple fix, removing the leaver penalty once a mori starts should be fine, as at the point you've already died.
Are they on PC? If so you can alt tab out and even make it so the sound mutes when the game isn't in focus. On console I guess they could just switch the input on their TV for a minute then flip back? Not saying their concerns aren't valid, just offering a possible solution for the here and now.
I still think plague should have a emetophobia option, as should other phobia-related killers like clown.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3675099#Comment_3675099
I'd blame that length of time on their struggles with their own coding over the years.
You are right that many perks are free for those on comms. The stealth killers are definitely hurt by it, and some builds like using hexes and Knockout etc.
But most SWF never fully utilize those comms to anywhere near their full potential, not like the super sweats can. The average surv teams aren't calling out grid clock locations and the like to each other.
They didn't want the information now on the hud to be given out for free, though. It goes entirely against their immersion focus in the early days of the game. I also think that the code is only so much of an excuse, since they had a full conversion to C++ and the engine updates (which would have been a perfect time.)
And I agree that most SWFs don't utilize what they have available to them, thats why I liked the post game suggestion. I guess we kinda got a little off topic with the intent discussion.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3675056#Comment_3675056
I imagine the info & aura perks are primarily for those not on comms, and a few are useful even on comms.
But they are info that comms can share for free, effectively giving them free perk slots. Maybe a better question would be why it took so long for the HUD info update?
-
@Hexling said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3675056#Comment_3675056
Because some people dont have mics.
Believe it or not, "immersion" used to influence the game's design. Early DBD was a pretty different game to today.
-
@Hexling said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3674989#Comment_3674989
"If comms were intended, there would have at least been some consideration to adding comms to the game, either text/voice/both, but its always a stanch NO."
They are intended they just know that they don't have to make it mandatory to have them because if you want to use them they have apps and chat for that. Why waste time adding it in when you can already do it without them having to do all that extra stuff. The devs know this that's why I'm asking if you think they are morons or something. Its like hey lets spend thousands of dollars we could use for something else (because development time - money) implementing comms when they already can do it for free if they want. Its why they still wont add it why why add it they have a whole discord for that with literal SWF channels multiple channels.
if they are intended, then why are there so many info perks in the game? why is there no baseline communication (see: not voice) beyond pointing and beckoning? Why have the devs made the famous 1v1v1v1v1 comment?
As for "why add it?", did you ever consider pc players may not be discord friends with their teammates (or even on discord at all?) Ditto for consle players with their platform"s friend system, noted separately since crossplay wasn't added until later on?
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3674775#Comment_3674775
SWF was always intended to be in the game, but it was never the intended target for balancing the game. its a 1v1v1v1v1 after all apparently.Not related to the merits of whether SWFs, should be shown or not, but I think the above is incorrect.
I think many people believe that BHVR has a single target for how they balance the game (which would be very reasonable). I think BHVR's intent is much more to balance around multiple aspects - the players who play for themselves, the SWFs, the sweats, high mmr, mid mmr, low mmr, etc. They aren't looking to make sure things are completely fair in any of those tiers, so long as there isn't something that completely breaks the game at any tier.
This is why the balancing can sometimes feel like a muddled mess, but potentially might also be why the game has had such longevity.
Balancing the game is certainly a tricky subject, and you could very well be right that they don't have a single target but rather multiple in tandem to account for various tiers, but their actions regarding particularly broken cases has given the impression that they do at least want certain extremes to be hemmed in (again, CoH and OoO being prime examples.)
-
@Hexling said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3674775#Comment_3674775
So you're saying that the devs are morons and didn't know that people on Xbox and PlayStation had party chat or people on pc had discord and team speak? Pretty sure they were like hmmm we don't need to add chat in game because there's different ways they can do that already lets put our resources to making the game better instead.
No? I honestly don't know how you got that from what I posted. I even literally said in the post you quoted that
SWF being planned from the start was necessaryAlso why are you trying to make me out to be aggressive toward the devs? or that making any type of ingame communication would somehow prohibit them from "making the game better instead"?
-
@Spare_Them_Mori_Me said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3674775#Comment_3674775
I disagree. Their original intent, and I believe is still their intent, is DBD is at heart a party game, not a comp game. If this is taken into account, everything makes sense. But some people refuse to believe dbd isn't a party game, and it becomes their pvp lifeblood. Thats when bias and issues start up.
Comms aren't coming to the game. They also aren't leaving. As a company, it would be a bad move if they removed the ability, which is also pretty impossible. Im amazed its still an issue talking point.
Also, I'm starting to think comm SWFs are healthy for the game. Top killers need that potent team to give them their challenge. Stupidly small percentage of the players right? So probably not a big deal. But here we are.
I also agree that its more intended to be a party game than a competitive game, but I'm going off of the consistency to their design logic and comments that they've made regarding their balance philosophy. My stance has zero to do with any perspective of them to ban third party comms, so I don't know where the "leaving" comes from.
As for the last comment, I disagree. There have been multiple times in the past (most notibly CoH and OoO) where the presence of SWF has made aspects in the game more difficult to balance and easier to produce oversights. Again, I'm not arguing it should be removed or even that every SWF is cracked or anything like that. My argument is solely that there is an advantage present, regardless of how well they do(n't) utilize it. My endorsement was for an idea that was a non-gameplay altering way of rewarding solo players on both sides for playing alongside/against the people who enjoy their potential benefits.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3674700#Comment_3674700
Pretty sure SWF was intended from the beginning.
Iirc, they were working on both KYF and SWF but could only get one done prior to launch. People voted and KYF won, but both were in development and intended to be in the game.
The game is specifically designed with no communication in mind. SWF being planned from the start was necessary, as evidenced by the lobby shopping that happened in the short time before its introduction in 1.0.3 kinda proved. If comms were intended, there would have at least been some consideration to adding comms to the game, either text/voice/both, but its always a stanch NO.
SWF was always intended to be in the game, but it was never the intended target for balancing the game. its a 1v1v1v1v1 after all apparently.
-
@EvilBarney666 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3674700#Comment_3674700
I agree with this take. I as a killer main don't mind going against swf. However I like to check profiles when I can. I want to know if I will be at a disadvantage as they have access to comms.
I won't dodge, but it helps me to plan for the match. The survivors get an advantage with comms. Why should I be required to play against something that is unfair? If I want to run pallet Freddy or a Hex build I know that if it's a swf on comms they will call it out. Lit totem at shack, fake pallets drop early etc. That is an advantage.
I know swf is mostly just friends chilling and playing the game. The point for me is outside comms is an advantage. The killer gets nothing in compensation for it. I think that offering BP to solos and duos as well as Killer's facing swf would give players a reason to not dodge and play the match.
Just my opinion tho.
Just to clarify, I'm more in the camp of knowing it was a SWF after the match rather than before, due to the afforementioned dodging issues it causes in prematch. I just think there should be a little something extra for solo players (on both sides) having to put up with them.
-
@Chaosrider said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3674651#Comment_3674651
Why should killer get bp bonus against swf? Like, most of those swf dont play better than four solos. Stop guessing swf equal godmode.
Again, regardless of whether they utilize their advantage properly, they still have one. Most SWFs aren't an issue but they still have access to something the game was not designed for, voice comms. BP is something that has no impact on gameplay nor balance and would be simply a bonus for going up against such an advantage (Therefore making it a good compensation metric, rather than something gameplay/balance related) Their suggestion also said to give a bonus to solos paired with a SWF as well, which I also agree with.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Because it makes little to no difference statistically, but killers with a victim-complex will absolutely make it as miserable as possible for those players. BHVR has shown that 4 man SWF at the highest MMR bracket still averages less than a 50% escape rate, and STILL killers claim that the SWFs they face are OP. There is no way to reason with that mindset.
While I agree the majority of SWFs are not a problem (most are just chill and playing with friends) the masses not utilizing something properly doesn't make it not OP. Sweat squads are indeed OP, and the game simply isn't designed for the advantages they can utilize. We saw something similar with MFT, as many survivors weren't able to get much out of it, but the ones who did got disproportionate value. Its an example of a statistic like escape rates being easy to misinterpret through confirmation bias. And again, this is coming from someone who does not think the existence of SWF, nor the majority of the ones in the game, are an issue.
I personally think that at the very least there should be notification in the post game tally.
-
Honestly I doubt the system took much work to implement, maybe a few dozen lines of code and a quick and simple element for the HUD.... Unless there were some wild dependencies they needed to account for, it was likely just a simple script. Ironic that I feel like it gets more complaints after its inclusion rather than that middle ground between when hook grabs were disabled and its implementation: People want it to do more than it advertises, while it does exactly as written on the tin.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
OP is probably talking about Scourge Hook: Pain Resonance, even tho this was 15% and could be used multiple times per Survivor.
But honestly, Pain Res is fine, maybe even too strong. To surpass the current Pain Res you would need 7 Hooks on Scourge Hooks before the old Pain Res becomes better than the new one. And when you are on 7 Hooks, the game is probably going pretty well already.
There's a difference in cadence, though. Its entirely possible to get less than the full value from a PR, especially if a gen got finished just before you get the hook. I get what you mean, but its worth considering that not every PR is always going to be full value. Sometimes repeated smaller hits will have more impact than less frequent larger ones.
-
@dragondemon75 said:
When crying about survivor perks they changed it, when I do it it’s a problem
You're right. No killer perk, addon, nor power has ever been changed due to negative feedback from the survivor community.
TBH I just wish the game's community could have conversations without resorting to unsubstantiated hyperbole.
-
@Vorahk08 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3662023#Comment_3662023
Survivors do actually get something for crawling away, because XP for survivors is based on how long they survive, and so is the "Unbreakable" emblem. Besides, the killer usually finds me anyway, and I often find survivors who crawl away as well. Full bleed outs from crawling away are extremely rare in my experience.
Crawling to hide can actually accomplish something, as it makes the killer second guess slugging for the 4K.
I considered adding this in my original post, but I also think that killer adepts should be made 3Ks because 4Ks are often random. Even with slugging for the 4K, the last survivor could still get the Hatch. It would make killer adepts, which are already quite difficult and would remain quite difficult, a little more equitable with survivor adepts, which just require you to get an escape. More people might try for killer adepts if this change was made, including me.
Yeah a miniscule amount of xp means nothing if you were going to bleed out regardless, so I don't think that necessarily counts as something gained. Also Unbreakable emblem has pretty short milestones, with the longest being 9 minutes. Are you going to claim to keep track of exactly how long the match is, and that your time crawling into a bush in a corner puts you just over that threshold?
I do agree about adepts and challenges being reduced to a 3K though. That would fix a lot of problems people have with the slug/hatch issue on both sides.
-
@Vorahk08 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3661971#Comment_3661971
People can feel free to call me petty for crawling away, but I'm still going to do it too. After recovering for BP, it's all a slugged survivor can do. Also, if survivors who crawl away are petty, then what are killers who slug for the 4K? A 3K + Hatch is just as much of a win as a 4K, except that 2 people got a favorable result instead of 1.
Some challenges and adepts require a 4K. Sometimes people are actually doing it for a reason.
And yes, crawling to hide is still petty, since you don't get anything for doing it. All you do is take something away from the killer, who beat you. Slugging for the 4th isn't petty because they get extra BP/emblems/ MMR if they succeed.
-
@Clee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3660855#Comment_3660855
Thanks for the honesty. I see your point, I guess I feel if you go into the game with a chill mindset, what survivors do won't matter. If they pound gens, open the gates and they have to leave. On to the next, where you will find survivors that do enjoy the chill play-style.
But, if you try to chill as a survivor, and you just get tunneled, you can't do anything about it. You give up, and let them get you to end it quick, then suddenly they just want to slug you, because they can. Survivors are at the mercy of how the killer plays. Killer has much more say in the flow of the game.
Unless you are completely outmatched in skill.
How is it not just "onto the next" when you get tunneled out as survivor? And for the ones still in the match, they have the same parallel to having to wait for the gates to open (theirs being having to wait for the killer to finish the rest off. ) If either side goes ham right out of the gate, the impact is minimized (for killer, getting one out before gens pop, for survivor getting as many gens done as possible before tunnel victim is out.)
You can play chill on either side, but you have no idea whether your opponent will be relaxed in kind. Since survivors start as the stronger role and power shifts away from them the more the killer accomplishes, the time crunch starts on the killer more than the survivors (which then shifts on to the survivors depending on how the killer plays.)
Its both easier and smarter for the killer to sweat right out of the gate, get their first kill and/or heavy hook pressure early, then relax as they have the match in their advantage. Survivors have the opposite issue where they can relax early if the killer does, but if the killer goes hard then they wasted that time and efficiency advantage.
Edit: to address the slugging comment, survivors can be just as obnoxious in drawing out the resolution of the game. If they're particularly stronger than the killer they can refuse to finish the last gen and waste as much time as possible for the killer before opening the gates, which means the egc hasn't even started yet. Even then stuff like loud noise spamming for the entire egc is just as obnoxious as getting slugged and bled out. Both suck.
-
@Clee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3658461#Comment_3658461
Do you struggle to consistently win as killer?
It depends. If I play at 3am my time when its only sweatsquads, yeah the momentum pretty quickly escapes me. If I treated any of them like a casual team of megheads i'd be lucky to get 3 hooks by the end. During normal afternoon/evening hours its a mixed bag, but I also don't play killer a whole lot.
That question didn't exactly address my point, however, that you have no real way of knowing how hard your opponent is going to sweat until its generally too late to adapt.
-
@Chaosrider said:
There wont by any surv that thinks being unfavored is a good idea. And there is absolutely no reasoning to have any average bedies 50:50.
Its entirely possible to have a 60% kill rate but a 50% win rate. Its what happens when you have 5 possible outcomes split into 3 different brackets, with a 40/20/40 L/D/W split. As long as their kill target is between 51 and 74 it is technically between a 2K and 3K average, it being 60 instead of 62.5 means that they want it closer to the 2K than the 3K (but still higher than a 2K average.)
The entire system is thrown off by the existance of draws for both sides causing the outcomes to become odd numbers. Not only that, but due to the lack of team outcome for survivors, it is not inherently a zero sum game. You can lose because you die but the killer can also lose because you were their only kill.
-
@sinkra said:
Something I find interesting about this whole debate is I've seen many killer mains justify the 60% kill rate and say it's good, but not a single survivor main who says it's good. BHVR's reason in their own words is this
We try to keep Killers near a 60% kill rate on average to keep matches relatively even and support the horror theme of the game, where the Killer is a force to be reckoned with and the survival is not guaranteed.
Presumably their intention is to make the game enjoyable for most survivors, because It doesn't make sense that they'd want to make the game fun for killers only who are just 20% of the playerbase at the expense of survivors. So that must mean they believe it's more enjoyable for survivor players to die in most matches "to support the horror theme of the game", and that most survivor players do not want a 50% kill rate.
I want to ask, are there any survivor players here who agree with BHVR that a 60% kill rate makes the game more enjoyable for them than 50%?
So that must mean they believe it's more enjoyable for survivor players to die in most matches "to support the horror theme of the game", and that most survivor players do not want a 50% kill rate.The kill rate being 60% does not mean you as a survivor are guaranteed to lose 3/5 of your matches. It just means that the average of all survivors comes out to that number. You can easily perform better or worse.
-
@Clee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3657859#Comment_3657859
The bigger question is why do so many killers tunnel with no regard for the unfortunate gamer getting tunnelled.
Tunneling at times is understandable, Tunneling as your whole strategy, from the jump is just so unfun to verse.
Because you have no idea how your opponent is going to play until either you or your opponent is ahead. Killers need to snowball and survivors need to maintain their strength they start with and get as much done as they can before losing efficiency. There's often little opportunity for either side to switch gears before its too late.
-
I still think the new killer looks like a mutant out of LISA
(this is a good thing)
-
@Shroompy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652312#Comment_3652312
Ok.. but thats not the point. The point is Survivors shouldnt be able to have an out either. Survivors are the one brought up here because they are, as you mentioned, the only ones who do have a work around.
And I'm in complete agreement with you. I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of an argument used multiple times in the topic. Maybe I should have quoted them all?
In any case, sorry for causing a tangent.
-
@Shroompy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652292#Comment_3652292
Yeah I didnt really pick up on the whataboutism aspect of it initially.
While it does sort of have relevance, it definitely isnt worth mentioning as it steers away from the actual point of the thread
The point is that killers finish their games just fine by not having a way to go next. They either finish the match or they eat the penalty, which is something that apparently can't apply to survivor. Perhaps I could have framed it a bit less sardonic, but I kept seeing the same regurgitated "you can't force people to play" argument which comes up in every topic on this subject.
-
@idefinitelyloveDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652281#Comment_3652281
yes, yes it is.
i'm so tired of all the people forcing discussions that are about one side to be about both sides like you're doing right now. the original poster has only mentioned survivors. everyone else has only mentioned survivors. you're the ONLY ONE mentioning killer penalties. if you want to start a conversation about the killer side, go for it! start a new discussion. but do not force every discussion to a halt because it isn't talking about what you want it to talk about.
I'm the only one mentioning it because it never gets considered when making the arguments people make for allowing the loophole to continue. My point is a very easy one to understand: Killers are forced to either play out their games or take the DC penalty.
They can sandbag themselves, try to farm, but at the end of the day they are required to finish the match they queued into, or eat the penalty. Survivors can similarly leave via DCing and eat the penalty (and produce a bot) but they have no reason to while they can still circumvent that and be allowed to get right back into the queue. It very clearly forces the killer to consider whether taking a 5 minute penalty is worth leaving over, or whether they need to just try to finish the match.
Survivors are supposed to have to weigh that same decision, but they currently don't have to.
-
@idefinitelyloveDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3652276#Comment_3652276
i mean, i can understand why they're not advocating for a killer forfeit. because uh... it's off topic for the thread? that could be a good clue.
No its not. The topic is about survivors being allowed to leave a match in a way that circumvents the DC penalty, and how that gets abused. Many of the responses are about how you can't force people to stay in a game, yet ignore that the killer has to do just that. In the exact same game.
Personally I don't think either side should be able to leave without DCing (thats the entire point of the leave match button, after all) but some people seem to think its impossible to do anything about the loophole that gets used by survivors regularly. They've already reworked struggle mechanics before (it used to require constant mashing) so there's no reason it couldn't be put on the table once again.
But again, it seems like its only a one way street within the community.
-
So many "you can't force a player to stay in a match" posts, yet not a single one advocating for the killer to be able to forfeit. TBH I just want parity between the two, make the DC penalty actually relevant for both sides or allow both sides to circumvent it.