Ryuhi
Ryuhi
About
- Username
- Ryuhi
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Relix_Fichter said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206776#Comment_3206776
In that case maybe it's the best for everyone to take a break and hope that their luck has improved when they next hop into the game. Judging from my own experience, the chances of getting several of those teammates in a row are low. Maybe this is more of a killer problem, if they're using a character or playstyle that people tend to dislike going against.
Why should the people who want to play the game, gross underside and all, have to take a break because of fairweather players? Are the fairweather ones not the ones who should be taking a break instead of ruining the games of others? Again, its just a complete lack of personal responsibility, and suiciding on hook is a loophole that gets used to avoid the DC penalty (which ironically forces said players to take a break, growing longer the more they do it.)
The most unfortunate thing about the whole situation is that disconnecting due to hackers is sometimes necessary, so when it happens those people actually get punished more than the people who suicide on hook to bypass the penalty.
Edit: Also, don't use anecdotes to try to downplay or invalidate the experiences of others, this is arguably one of the worst games to rely on personal anecdotes for. People's experiences vary wildly, whether we agree or disagree with their perceptions due to them. Its an easy assumption to make, but it just takes some mindfulness to avoid.
-
@Relix_Fichter said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206710#Comment_3206710
Considering how... inconsistent to put it mildly DbD is, they're probably loading into the game not expecting to find themselves in an unpleasant situation, which are a minority of matches excluding some unlucky days. And I hope that anyone who DCs or suicides 2 matches in a row understands that by that point they need to let it rest for a while.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206721#Comment_3206721
Of course there's that, it's just that personally I don't find any individual match important since they're short and I usually play through several each night so isolated annoyances are insignificant. Hook suicides aren't common enough to leave a strong impression that there's something seriously wrong that needs to be looked at, plus I think that the whole process of finding a match, waiting in the lobby, loading in, and running around for 2 minutes just to leave almost immediately with nothing to show for it is by itself deterrent enough for would-be "serial hook suiciders" to prefer quitting the game instead of wasting their time loading in and out of matches for fifteen minutes.
If you get multiple in a row, it doesn't matter how short they are. Also don't forget the aforementioned consumables, which also includes survivor items/addons/offerings just as much as the killer consumables as well. It doesn't matter how quick your matches are if you keep getting forced losses back to back. Not to mention just knowing that someone else would literally put their whims above your ability to play the game as intended, let alone actually have a chance of winning.
-
They just need to nerf SWFs in a way that only affects their potential, as thats the only thing anyone has issues with. The majority of SWFs aren't sweat squads, but the concept allows for sweats to get a very large amount of unintended advantages. If they can use any of the ideas that hurt the potential of comms and organization without punishing people for playing with friends, thats the direction to take.
-
@Relix_Fichter said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206397#Comment_3206397
I agree with you that some people give up for dumb reasons or too easily, and there have been a few games where I wish they'd stuck around since even with 3 we managed to make a lot of progress, but this is after all a game meant to be fun and none of us can really know the circumstances behind someone's decision to abandon the match by any means.
Maybe the "fast down" was due to a hit that felt unfair or an unfortunate spawn in a deadzone. Maybe they don't have the energy to play on a map the killer brought where (s)he has a huge advantage. Maybe they don't want to deal with the 3rd Legion in a row, or Alchemist Ring Blight, or Starstruck Nurse, or some other highly mobile and powerful killer with slowdown upon slowdown when their wish is to play a few relaxed matches before going to bed. I can't and won't blame anyone for not wanting to put up with a stressful game.
Their decision makes that a pretty much guaranteed loss for 3 other people though, as well as ruining the match for the killer who had to sacrifice consumable addons to load in. Being able to leave matches early by any means is supposed to be more for emergencies than whims. Nothing you said is invalid, it just doesn't factor for all of the collateral damage that gets caused.
-
@WipeIncGamingYT said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206679#Comment_3206679
I am glad we could agree on the fact, that a match of DbD needs 4 players for the role of survivor and 1 player for the role of killer. And that if 10 players refuse to play killer, 40 survivors are unable to play as survivors, at the given moment, in this region, in the proper MMR, while breathing and sitting at the chair... did i forget something? You overcomplicate a simple fact: it needs 5 players to play a match of DbD. Do you want to change the matchmaking, that the game tells you, what role you have to play? So that the game says you: ok, you are the killer although you wanted to play survivor?
Look up any of Peanits posts explaining how it works if my explanations didn't make sense. I'm not overcomplicating anything, just stating that your screenshot didn't prove anything. Again, its a common statistical misconception.
-
@WipeIncGamingYT said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206665#Comment_3206665
All variants of MMR still need 5 players, 4 players for the role of survivor and 1 player for the role of killer. While I am lower MMR as killer, because I nearly never play killer with the exception of progress in rift and my survivors are newbies, I can watch streamers, who play high MMR. All of us need 4 more players to play a match of DbD. This is fact. And if European streamers get the 100% BP incentive and I being low get the incentive and chat says, that they all get the incentives, this is, how it is.
Youre oversimplifying the process while ignoring how it works. Yes, every match needs 5 players, but how quickly any given match will find survivors and killers of equal MMR is going to vary, just like it does between regions, at different times, etc. Its an extremely chaotic combination of numbers at any given time, which is why its not a static universal bonus but rather an individual one based on when you are joining the matchmaking pool.
-
@WipeIncGamingYT said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206625#Comment_3206625
I have to bring your attention to one simple fact: if players want to play a game of DbD it needs 4 players for the role of survivor and 1 player for the role of killer. If it is true, and it is, that every evening around 10pm there is a lack of killers now in Europe, how can this be healed by nerfing killers again? If, e. g., 10 players refuse to play killer, 40 players for survivor are unable to play at this very moment.
No, because thats ignoring all of the other factors that are tying into that number, like MMR. The matchmaker works by starting accurate and expanding to be less accurate to get more possibilities of matches, and all that bonus means is that you would be helping the most amount of people who have been waiting if you choose X over Y. If there was no MMR or matchmaking critereon based on location/skill/rank/etc, then you would be correct, but its a bit of a correlation vs causation distinction.
-
I see a lot of people claim that wanting reassurance changed was killers crying wolf and it wouldn't have been as bad as they were claiming. It often gets framed as overreaction, so lets look at how the two versions of reassurance would work in conjunction with the basekit UB.
Current: Survivor can lead a chase straight to a hooked survivor, divebomb the hook in the killer's face, reassurance, get downed. They now have the hook paused for 30 seconds, and can get up anywhere from 22.5-45 seconds (could be even faster, but being more realistic about stuff like exponential.) If the killer picks up the survivor, they open the other survivor up to being saved while the killer is transporting (even to a small but reasonable degree in the basement) resetting the situation entirely. If the killer doesn't pick them up, they will be able to get up again in 22.5-45 seconds, and force the killer to play whack-a-mole if they don't want to let them get the unhook and basekit BT bodyblock and everything that comes with it. Don't forget i'm purposely ignoring perks like Dead Hard and Soul Guard here, as well as MoM or anything else that can be used here like purple medkit addons. Due to the limitations on Reassurance, this situation is at least not cyclical.
With PTB Reassurance? They could have kept getting up, pausing the timer, then going back down and repeating. This means that two survivors are holding the killer in a situation where the other 2 are free to work on gens with zero potential to be pressured, and the bleedout timer eventually preventing further UBs would be the only thing that could stop it, unless the killer abandons the hook pressure entirely. And remember, this scenario didn't even require camping, it can start with a survivor routing the chase here in a play thats so bad it would normally be throwing the game in almost all cases. Instead it guarantees breaking up existing killer pressure, while also allowing an avenue to punish the killer for whatever they deem the correct way to handle it. All options are covered, it's lose/lose.
A lot of times these scenarios are cautionary, they're just outlining how people can and will exploit these tools when given the chance. That factor gets so far out of control at times that BHVR is very clearly unable to consider these usages in their design process, which is why people try to warn them.
-
@WipeIncGamingYT said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206619#Comment_3206619
This is proof. The screenshot shows RPD background, saying that is a present screenshot. And it shows 100% incentive for killers. So it proves my point.
Queue bonuses aren't a blanket thing like that, they take more factors into account. While it does prove that the bonus isn't stuck on survivor, it doesn't necessarily say much about something like # or even % of people queueing as killer. That doesn't stop people from doomposting about how nobody wants to play survivor because thats where their bonus is, but just clarifying that applies here as well.
-
@WipeIncGamingYT said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206545#Comment_3206545
If you want to balance a game you have to balance it around the better players, not the newbies. This is a simple matter of logic. Otherwise a game goes downhill.
You for sure want this easy solution: you can't pick, if you can play survivor or killer, the game decides what role you have to play. Like the idea? Or how do you want motivate enough players to play as killer? Tell me.
IDEALLY the game would be balanced in a way that it is fair at low MMR by being intuitive in what is/isn't efficient play, while simultaneously blocking excessive exploitation in high level. That shift is why its currently very survivor sided higher up, while killers who can keep up end up being sweat elementals because of it. It should have the same style of play at all levels, just with people making less mistakes at higher level and that still fitting within the same gameplay loop as lower levels.
This game is unbalanced as hell, though. A lot of it is far more balanced than its ever been in the past, but its nowehere near where it needs to be to be a healthy game. They just don't understand how to properly limit too many elements in the game, just let the extremes counterbalance each other and call it a day... which is why high MMR always ends up an exploitation fest. There shouldn't really be as much of a deviation between levels of MMR if they actually got it right.
-
@Wezil said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206542#Comment_3206542
You are talking about less than 1% of players. You can't balance the game for 1% of the players without ruining the entire game experience for 99% of players. I guarantee you're not a 1% of players, do you want your game play ruined?
And that 1% of players, most of them are cheating.
Where did <1% come from? They didn't release breakdowns of any MMR brackets to my knowledge (feel free to correct me if i'm mistaklen,) so you're using a made up statistic in conjunction with existing ones which skews your perspective.
Kinda like how you ignored when the devs said there was a +/-12% variance between killers and claimed their average is "across the board" performance.
-
@Wezil said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205529#Comment_3205529
What are these "blatantly ignored variables with high correlation to inflating that number" or is that just a bunch of word-salad you made up to justify your lack of evidence.
Things like ragequitting on hook significantly increasing the kill count for a given match, for one. It means there is a statistically relevant variable that is not accounted for in the results. I'm sorry but I can't think of a more simple way to say that.
-
pretty much. Its pretty well known that generally the game is killer sided in low MMR, and survivor sided at high MMR. This means that as killer you generally reach a point where you get consistently paired with groups that are of equal or higher skill, which lets the system do its job and keep people within ranges based on how they can adapt. The same kindof applies for the survivors as well, since high MMR as killer is only really sustainable to the ones who can do well consistently in spite of it. Thats also why there tends to be a lot less variety at that level, as well as being more able to rely on teammates as survivor.
This is all assuming that the matchmaking in question hasn't been altered due to either time waiting or premade groups, though.
-
@ImNotBobDylan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205477#Comment_3205477
I would actually be pretty happy with this. Both totems in the same place so you have a clear region to patrol between hooks. You are playing Nurse so you can very quickly go back there. Also this hill looks quite good with LOS to the totem so survivors will almost definitely take hits trying to cleanse it.
In my experience the worst RNG is when totems are scattered across the map. It's not very relevant that the totems are well hidden, survivors will end up finding them anyway, and then they will have an easier time cleansing them if you don't have LOS.
They're... both within line of sight of at least one gen, the left one in LoS of multiple. Thats fine if you want to camp that position and force it into a three gen (either from the bad grouping visible, or a possible offscreen closer third gen,) but it pretty much requires you to do so if you want to get any value from those hexes.
And since one of them is Devour Hope, you're going to be required to move away from the hook to be able to get any value out of it, meaning you either need to hook people away from the 3 gen, or just never get devour stacks anyway.
-
@Wezil said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205431#Comment_3205431
Except it isn't a target, it's the actual average.
It has been stated multiple times when clarifying their 2E/2K stance that that outcome distinction is specifically due to the LCD of outcomes being in 25% breakdowns, and that they want a number higher than that but not as high as 1E/3K. That means that something in the high 50's to mid 60's is exactly within their target.
-
@Wezil said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205500#Comment_3205500
Which is why your argument is wrong. 61% is not weak, when compared to 39%, correct?
61% is not a concrete number. There are blatantly ignored variables with high correlation to inflating that number. It is literally a high estimate, which means that the actual value when specifically factoring balance has to be lower by within x margin.
In terms of balance and no statistically manipulating events, it is an unknown amount lower than 61. That means that if 61 is indeed around their target, the current status quo is actually under where it is supposed to be by an unknown amount. This is exactly why they say NOT to use these statistics the way you currently are. Just like how you could claim Nurse is the weakest killer if you ignore the skill floor variable.
-
@Sava18 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3204488#Comment_3204488
At least half of all blights are forced to run three perks. They wouldn't want blight to be running four perks, come on now.
I'm just glad they removed his camera from his belt buckle and properly put it around where his face is.
-
@Wezil said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205431#Comment_3205431
Except it isn't a target, it's the actual average.
Which is also their target, which means that its where it should be. That means anything lower is below their expectation. This is all going off of their number as fact and not estimate, of course.
-
Of course they do. They started improving them and a small handful of spawnpoints are actually really good now, but you wouldn't want to hide them from survivors bringing boons into the match, now would you?
It was another design change that kinda got thawrted by a conflicting one introduced after. I guess their reasoning is "if its easier for the survivor to see, it'll be easier for the killer to find if its been booned" without even thinking about how its something hexes have desperately needed to fix.
-
@Tsela said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205426#Comment_3205426
I don't see it as a huge issue. So many games implemented FOV changes to show speed, to create a focus, so many reasons I can't even count. It's not like gamers haven't dealt with FOV changes in so many games before
And those games let you adjust it for those very reasons. Being able to disable options like motion blur is tied to the same reasoning as well. When games have FoV or Tilt adjustments that cannot be disabled, that is inaccessible design which causes issues for people, which is why many of them give you options to disable one or more offending aspects when present. When games don't do that (like here) its bad design, and not exactly a good example, since the people it affects are basically told their money isnt welcome.
-
@Wezil said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205192#Comment_3205192
Killers are making 61% pretty much across the board, so your argument doesn't hold weight, as per the devs.
61% is more of their target than 50% is, also as per the same devs, so neither does yours.
-
@Tsela said:
Well Monitor& abuse has changin FOV depending if you are in a chase or not. And nobody truly complained about it, nor I ever had any trouble with that changing FOV back and forth
Thats because if you have issues with one of the FoVs but not the other, you would just not run the perk to avoid having variation. Its now a basekit mechanic in a certain situation that theoretically should happen every single match. If both values don't cause any physiological issues, especially when alternated, it shouldn't have any impact. But for those who it does, they just got a basekit accessibility nerf.
The devs are effectively parroting the misunderstanding that "more = gooder"
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205368#Comment_3205368
I really believe this is there for balance reason. I am a stealth player at heart, and i used to juke killers all the time, and they being able to overlook you because of a limited fov or a dark corner is a real balance thing.
The problem is already that many people use brightness filters, so hidding in a dark corner is mostly gone.
Map reworks left a lot of areas either without los-blockers, or with nowhere to go after you broke sight.
Iron Will nerf broke the close range juking once you are injured.
The game is more and more reduced to just hidding before the killer is there, as soon as you hear him, or just go into a chase (which for me is actually the boring part of the game. I like it as a hide-and-seek).
Thats why i am very sensible when it comes to further changes on whatever is left on stealth play.
Maybe they just give killers that fov-slider, but that will finally kill the almost-dead-horse stealthjuke in a chase. At that point, i will leave the game. And thats why i ask about compensations that keep stealth play alive, but noone is interested, and thats why it feels like people just want an additional advantage.
If you're an actual stealth player you WANT the killer to have higher FoV, because it lets you blend easier. "FoV-tech" is not stealth, like i said before, its abusing a very bad limitation that is forced on the killer. This is also why it is extremely ineffective at most skill levels.
Brightness filters through third party software has absolutely nothing to do with an FoV slider ingame, especially since it would actually make it HARDER to see you due to the aforementioned blending. Contrast and Luminosity are the only two things that would affect blending negatively, while brightness extremes actually help it.
The comment about maps is inherently false, as there have been more LoS blocking tiles adapted to other maps, like the Yamaoka and Ormond styled ones. While configurations might have changed so that you're more likely to have two mindgame ok loops back to back, thats honestly something that should have always been the case. If you're struggling in that regard, run Windows since its a perk that gives you more value the better you are.
Iron will got nerfed and then rolled into OTR, a perk that everyone and their mother has been using to replace DS, while the IW part doesn't even wear off with the conspicuous action. You get to keep it for ages after every unhook. If thats not enough, play Ace and you don't even need it.
Mid chase jukes are still plenty viable and have absolutely nothing to do with abusing FoV limitations. They're based on misdirection and mindgames, which using in tandem with perks designed around jukes can cause a massive delay in the killer resuming the chase. Most times you succeed with a juke its not because you vanished, its because restarting the chase causes too much of a time deficit for the killer, so they move on to another target. They usually only restart the chase if they have no other target available, I.E. the other players who might be nearby when it happens are also being stealthy.
You don't hide in a box like snake and laugh that you can't be seen. Unless its a snowman event, anyway, then you just abuse that for free health states instead.
All in all its not that i fault you for feeling how you do, just that most of your perspective is flawed. And thats extremely important when the topic is about accessibility, since it affects a lot more than just you.
-
@TDtheDoc said:
If you get motion sickness playing a game then just quit playing.Changing the game because a very few people get motion sickness is dumb
Most games don't need to be changed because they structure their games around not agitating the condition. Its a very easy accommodation to make, and has been since the 90's. They even teach it as part of curriculum around first person perspective in games in general.
This is the same tier as separating WASD/left stick movement with mouse/right stick look. Its been solved for over a decade.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205339#Comment_3205339
I dont think the spinechill rework was needed at all. But the difference is, they were using a perk, instead of asking old spine chill to be base.
And i do understand it, i am colorblind myself.
And after years we got a color blind mode that does basicly...nothing. I proposed the ability to change the color of auras from red to blue, so you could see them (on certain maps, i couldnt see auras of gens or hooks, and had to search for gens like a survivor). Instead we got filters that i have to adjust for every map differently. That results in matches where the first gen pops before i finished adjusting it.
So yeah, i understand accessibility, but i also understand game design and balance, and choose not to just ignore it.
Then you should still agree, unless you think that crouching next to a window after jumping through it is masterclass strategy that would be ruined by an option that lets people actually play the damn game. I agree that the colorblind options don't help with everything that they could, and that its limitations in doing so are indeed tied with the game's design and multiple of its factors (which would need to be reworked to make more meaninful options, like aura colors, or contrast/luminosity adjustments.)
Giving FoV options only removes strategies that rely on the killer only being able to interact with the very center of their screen, and ones where the camera is locked in place entirely. They're both forced limitations that it is exploiting, which makes them bad mechanics. Whether they are in the game or not is irrelevant, and there's a reason they don't do anything at even lukewarm MMRs. People only hold on to them because they don't want to lose a thing that can potentially benefit them, and prioritize that over people ability to actually play the game without getting physically ill.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205351#Comment_3205351
But it IS the reality of this game that this happens time and again, and you should account for it, and the reasons why it happens.
Its not the reality because of balance, its because people sabotage other people's games. If nothing else, it just makes a stronger case for punishing ragequitters, which has a very unfortunate affect on their cheating epidemic situation.
This is why the appropriate solution is to pretend those games never happened in terms of stat tracking, which again, is currently inconsistent with how they do it making their statistics inherently corrupted. They're estimates, not hard facts.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205336#Comment_3205336
So, are you telling me if someone dies on hook, the killer didn´t kill him?
No, but I AM telling you that if someone throws themselves out of the match at 35 seconds in, it is effectively a 1v3 and not a 1v4, which has completely different balance considerations that the game very clearly is not designed for. It is also the exact reason why DCs nullify results in regards to their internal stat tracking.
Edit: Actually, they even used to load matches in with 1-3 survivors and just reduce the number of gens required when it happened. There are very good reasons why it doesnt work that way anymore.
-
@supersonic853 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205315#Comment_3205315
This is such a bad take i don't even wanna spend the time explaining about how letting people not feel sick because of the fov being 85 by default (which is actually lower than most games minimum of 90). Because of something out of their control. Especially when i also suffer with it. And allowing you to permanently have sprint burst. Have a nice day.
I actually missed it but as someone with an anxiety disorder, thats an extremely scummy way of being disingenuous. Especially since there have actually been constructive suggestions that people have had to address issues for people like me. If its not a conversation about stuff like SWF or the absurd amount of info that you need to mentally juggle as killer, kindly keep my condition out of your arguments (to the person you quoted, of course.)
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205004#Comment_3205004
IF it was not killer sided, why did the kill rate rise by 8%? That patch was designed to increase kill rate, and did it, and you say it wasnt killer sided?
Maybe get a hold on the games basic concepts before posting false statements?
Because hook suicides do not get thrown out and count as normal kills, which also increases the liklihood of the other 1-3 dying significantly. Based on their current judgement metrics, you have to assume that the final result will be lower (by an unknown amount) than the balance would imply based on its end results. They throw out matches where people DC for a reason, but inexplicably refuse to put a similar consideration on their own sanctioned form of ragequitting. There's a reason they constantly say not to use those stats for balance discussion, despite their weird insistance of throwing them out just before talking about balance.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3204600#Comment_3204600
Why can't they balance the game around having a higher FOV then? Also, at high level play (where it actually matters) FOV doesn't matter because stealth is a terrible strategy.
Just to clarify, High/Low FoV affect different types of stealth: High FoV is actually worse for stationary stealth, since the distortion done to your view makes it harder to differentiate. Its actually the foundation of the "t-rexes only see through movement" myth, since their FoV made it easier for stationary prey to blend with their environment.
The only stealth it affects is being right next to the killer and out of their direct line of sight, which is essentially being blocked by blinders. Ironic and somewhat fitting how tunneling became such an issue in a game that literally forces tunnel-vision.
-
@Tony_ said:
Look, i was once just like you but then i realised. Is 45 seconds really meaningless? I mean, survivor bleedout timer is 4 minutes which means even tho he will get up, he lost nearly 1/4th of his bleedout timer. This basically means you can have 4 hook stages but without hooking them.
But i still think NOBODY should get any basekit perks. The only exception i think of is kindred, becouse it wont affect SWF but will impact solo queue. Kindred basekit is just healthy for the game, but UB and BT both aren't really healthy. I think from all the perks, theese 2 SHOULDN'T EVEN be considered making basekit
Its actually 1/5th, between there and 1/6th. If they bring unbreakable? its nearly 1/11th. I get why you rounded it the way you did, but it's not quite accurate. We can very easily see the return of whack-a-mole trolling that was oh so fun during the boil over RPD test.
-
@psionic said:
Can someone explain why on earth they decided to create this FOV feature? That makes no sense to me.
THey're using their monitor and abuse logic, that "higher FoV must always be good"
Which is somewhat understandable when they set the default FoV very low and gave zero means of changing it. They're just extremely tonedeaf to the situation, and aren't likely to change that anytime soon at this rate. We can only hope for another PR disaster to force their hand about it i guess.
-
Oh look, more bad actors ironically making the bad actor argument against an accessibility option.
-
@Neprašheart said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3205209#Comment_3205209
That's right, those aren't the major influencers.. The major influencer is the ~10 second increase per each generator, ineffective Decisive Strike, and .. the requirement to properly time Dead Hard to have its effect, you know.
If those extra few seconds per each chase with Dead Hard' dash pre-rework were such a huge difference, then I'd assume that combining faster vaulting, destroying pallets, damaging generators, and successful attack recoveries could make such a huge difference aswell.
I do refuse to believe that it's because of survivors sacrificing each other on hook, although that's exactly what I do recall experiencing; Not necessarily sacrificing themselves on the hook, but rather giving up and offering themselves to the killer to get hooked over'n'ver, which is even worse than sacrificing on the hook, as that requires at least one survivor to leave generator repairs and unhook the griefer, who only offers himself or herself to the killer, effectively wasting one of the survivors' time.
That alone, plus a huge influx of tunneling and slugging have had such effects.. Given how weak will slugging become, tunneling will only get worse. Well, at least, we'll see killers crying about ~3 second stun per each hook.. I don't like this at all.
The time added from perks like dead hard is completely different than the time reduced to actions like kicking and wiping because of their placement. Gaining a few seconds with dead hard (even the old version) meant nothing if those few seconds didn't get you to a pallet or window to reset chase positioning, much like they almost never do with any of the changes that were made to the killer basekit.
If it was something like the killer could just do an instant ranged grab from a distance as a one time thing with a cooldown that would be busted as hell for good reason, because it would be able to guarantee value from its timesave by providing all its value in a short burst at will. Its why even a mediocre perk like coup de grace has the limitation of gens being completed: Even just extending the lunge at just the right time makes more of a difference than minor timesaves that don't fit within chase cadences.
Ironically of all the basekit changes to killer, i feel like the slightly faster kicking might be the most influential, moreso even than the blade wipe or shorter hit sprint duration (even combined) since it makes things like zoning before pallet breaking more likely to trip up a survivor from routing to the next defense, and even that is a pretty minimal difference in reaction time.
At the end of the day, the point is that time saves and time wastes have disproportionate value based on when they apply, as time differences are generally relative in this game. All reducing blade wipe recovery and on hit sprint does is give the survivor slightly less time to reach their next defensive point, to which the changes are extremely minimal. If they understand how to route their chases at all, this makes little difference. If they're using a perk like Windows, it makes absolutely no difference at all unless they ignored everything and ran into the middle of a deadzone. If they don't understand routing chases, they'll likely not know where to go before they get hit, waste the sprint, then think killer op. So basically just a buff to killer in low MMR, where they already do well more often than not.
-
I think the post was great, albeit far overdue. My only complaint is that they're doubling down on the arms race comment, its one that gives off a lot more excuse than reasoning. I understand why they say it, but that fact that it was previously followed with extreme silence and zero progress reports gives it an extremely bad aftertaste.
This type of progress report and roadmap planning is exactly what they needed to do, though.
-
@StarLost said:
Okay.
Your definition of 'proxy camp' seems to encompass literally anything the killer does to defend the hook.
I don't camp, but yeah - if I hook someone and I can't find anyone, damn straight I'm going to patrol back in order to try and catch the unhooker. What's wrong with that?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3202686#Comment_3202686
Bingo.
I swear, literally: 'killer exists' = 'killer is camping' or 'killer is tunneling'. Had a game yesterday where the same Bill would get unhooked and immediately start doing the closest gen in my face. I killed him and he and his duo partner cussed me out in postgame for tunneling.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203053#Comment_3203053
It's sort of useless in DbD though as, especially on territorial killers, it basically means 'playing that killer as intended'.
I have no idea what exactly the OP is looking for here.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3202817#Comment_3202817
No, it's not.
You aren't guaranteed completely safe unhooks.
Using proxy camping as an insult in this game is literally just whining, I'm just wondering why people are caught up on the definition of a term i used to hear in UT 2K4 nearly 2 decades ago. Like has been said, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it as a strategy, and its not even an oppressive one. It's just strategic control of an area of the map.
Is it because of how much the term camping invokes fear and anger or something? I'm not OP, but maybe people are conflating our arguments that I must somehow agree with them?
-
@drakolyr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203109#Comment_3203109
Well, its clear that camping and tunneling is effective right now. But its not like you got buffs etc to make other things more worthy. You just proofed why i wrote this thread.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203148#Comment_3203148
Just because you dont get value out of it, doesnt mean everyone dont get.
Saw many games were gen regression was really good.
Also 10% is much. Especially in multiple chases. It even creates dead zones faster.
The game is designed that you sometimes get pallets in your face. Chases shouldnt be just free downs.
And tunneling had not much counterplay after the update, since DS was nerfed etc. And everything should have a counterplay, so Base Kit BT is fine. Switch target or tunnel anyway. You can avoid the base kit BT.
I still think tunneling and camping shouldnt be rewarding at all.
So you're either insinscere and want to exagerate the changes as much as possible to try to attempt to be more convincing, or you just honestly don't understand any of the values involved. Either way feel free to hold your opinion, but you clearly have no intention of learning anything new. Cheers.
-
@MrMori said:
Nah Billy is fun, but he could use a rework like Legion got. 30% faster chainsaw movement speed + 30% faster turnrate (boots) basekit, more forgiving overheat when not near a hook, and an addon pass would do wonders.
He doesn't even need all of that, just fix his damn camera/animations and turn down that tinitus factory he starts up right inside your ear.
-
It was done so that they could have their own MMR, which they then scrapped for a bit, but then kinda brought back? My understanding is that its currently weighted by all your killers (to compensate for M1 killers basically being very similar) but it does still have individual tracking that primarily (i think?) gets used, with things like that aforementioned average affecting the starting MMR of newly purchased killers (with their amazing starting loadouts)
Its been clarified a few times but I honestly don't even care at this point, but that should be at least partially accurate.
-
@Yamaoka said:
Since we're posting personal stats to boost the credibility of our statements :
Around 7000 hours in DBD at this point - I want all the "strategies" to be dealt with so the game can finally get balanced around interactive gameplay (aka legit chases).
If the devs finally got rid of slugging, tunneling and camping they could finally get data on "fair" gameplay.
Soon they would realize "high level survivors" will typically allow a good killer on average to get 5-ish hooks before they escape if said killer plays completely fair and relatively good.
As a result they could finally balance around fair gameplay and possibly even add a little additional objective.
You have listed absolutely no concessions from the survivor side, and implied that killer strategies are the only thing holding the game back. Not even a single thought about why those strategies might form, just "other side bad."
Note how that other post made very clear admissions on how the changes would affect either side, be it positively or negatively, as well as mentions concerns on how the changes would affect other seemingly unrelated factors. Actually putting in not only considerations for both, but also reasonings that preemptively remove exploitation avenues.
Again, even without agreeing that its the best avenue to take, its considerably more constructive and considerate than trying to punish one side into submission while pretending the other side can do no wrong unless they're forced to then its ok. The projection about how survivors sandbag themselves to give nice killers a reward is also extremely anecdotal, and completely contradictory to the experiences of many.
And you're completely welcome to believe it, but you'll have to pardon people who don't agree, and especially those who will start arguments over it with you.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203088#Comment_3203088
Well, i just dont agree with you. But i do play both sides, and recently, at least to me, solo surviving has become incredible hard, because of the the killer buffs/survivor nerfs and a matchmaking that keeps giving me teammates that cant handle that.
On the other side, i recently got ALL the killer challenges and achivements i couldn´t do before, because i am just a mediocre killer. But killer became really easy (unless you get a 3+swf, because they can easily compensate, but i actually play killer only at times when they are few in between) against solo and 2swf, and either a lot of killer mains choose to ignore that, or are just afraid to lose their edge again.
I, for one, profit and from every balance change, because i play both sides, but thats why i want the game to be balanced.
And yes, i belive the unbreakable basekit is a good thing, while i dislike the mori-removal from both devour hope and rancor. They could do the endgame-mori despite having the perks do it earlier.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203103#Comment_3203103
Yes, but in solo queue, you also get all kinds of teammates, so the kill rates mean actually a lot on your own survival rate.
I'm glad you do well as killer and im sorry that you struggle as survivor, but anecdotes mean literally nothing in this game, especially when attempting to use them to discredit the opinions of others. They are simply what you have experienced, and the basis for your perspective. nothing less, but also nothing more. It has absolutely nothing to do with how the game is balanced, just why you feel the way you do, and thats completely fine as long as its kept within that scope.
-
@drakolyr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203074#Comment_3203074
You mean faster Bloodlust in chase?
Longer Gen times?
Faster recovery from hitting, breaking Pallets and going trough windows?
Survivors get less distance after being hit?
Littery things to leave the hoo, go to gens or chase, made better.
Dont forget the buffs to gen regression, where you can focus more on chases.
If you give a group of 10 people five pennies each, but a separate person a single dollar, who won out?
The basekit pop barely even offsets the time it takes to kick the gen, and they lost a perk that did a flat 25% regression to get it. The quantity over quality meme about those changes is kinda baffling if i'm honest, since they not only don't add up, but they involve forced duration cadences: If that 0.2 second faster blade wipe paired with that 4 less meters gained by the survivor still ends with you getting smacked in the face by a pallet instead of landing your lunge (or even trading,) then it has done literally nothing for you in that exchange. You could make the same argument for the 5 seconds of BT+haste, so they decided to buff both to boot so that even in the basement it is now impossible to prevent someone from reaching the window or pallet unless you are able to bodyblock them for at least 2-3 seconds. Their value isn't even comparable.
-
Still has its issues, but still considerably better than the official plan (thus far) and addresses some of the core issues, and most importantly none of the pointless bickering while instead sharing considerations between both sides while actually considering secondary effects of the changes. 8/10
-
@SmarulKusia said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3202875#Comment_3202875
Being slugged is not the survivor failing. They fail when they die because their objective is to escape. Killers that tend to resort to slugging are failing because they are not getting rid of players, they are still keeping them in the game, at times, keeping them hostage.
slugging is a crutch for killers when they can’t keep up with the survivors, the same way that DH was, the same way that a 4-man hatch escape was.
the changes punish being too greedy as your main objective is hooks/kills.
A concept as wildly variable in its applications as slugging is an extremely bad comparison for a 4 man hatch escape. DH maybe (at least it has the concept of variance, so thats a start!) but if you think they're comparable, then you are blatantly only factoring in the absolute worst extreme and ignoring everything else. You're welcome to not understand the difference, but it sounds pretty silly when you do.
-
@Tsela said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203069#Comment_3203069
the concept of "camping" is staying in an area and not leaving it. Proxy camping is just a made up thing we can call being on the map proxy camping since we are camping the whole map otherwise and it starts sounding quite ridiculous. Camping only applies if someone stays in one place and doesn't leave. So there is no such thing as proxy camping because that's not camping anymore.
Thats not how this works. Thats not how any of this works.
I feel like you're just stuck on someone using it to ascribe negative meaning onto the term and being defensive over that more than trying to understand the concept.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3201419#Comment_3201419
They made camping and tunneling way less necessary than before, but since it also became easier, its use did rise, not decline.
The Community has already shown that the "they only do it because they need to"-argument doesnt really work.
Did they remove CoH and I didn't notice? If not, then they didn't make them "way less necessary" strats than they were. All they did was extremely safe adjustments to a variety of interactions, most of which didn't even break even to their disadvantages. If you want a clear example, just compare how pop was handled (both basekit value, as well as the perk change to match it) compared to either of the new survivor basekit tools. Its weaker and its basekit impact barely offsets the duration of its animation lock, and the perk is absurdly weaker than it was previous while current BT basekit is stronger than old BT with the perk was due to the haste that got thrown in as well and a (now) much closer duration.
And no, the point of that is not to bemoan that survivors got a nice thing. Its to give you perspective to how badly that perspective is skewed. As for the rest, Killers had most of their incentives to leave the hook taken away, as well as their ability to use their loadouts to help provide surrogate pressure: For all the gen perks that are the new ones to complain about, half of the old ones got nerfed into uselessness, especially ruin and corrupt. So now you have less reason to be confident in leaving the hook, no direction to go in, no reason to leave logically... Its absolutely no surprise this didn't have any impact to reduce tunneling nor camping. Its both made them the most consistent strategies while simultaneously ruining their alternatives, a trend thats been happening in this game's balance for a while now.
This is why carrot and stick analogies don't work unless both are present. If its always just the stick thats just abuse.
-
@Pizzaman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203002#Comment_3203002
Let's call a spade a spade: the old anti-camping mechanic didn't make it into live, because the solution was flawed. It had a flaw that could have been corrected, but nobody at BHVR ever fixed the flaw.
After 6 years of fixing most of the game issues with perks ... entering: the Bandaid as a Perk aka "Reassurance".
And btw. it didn't really help, that most of the discussions about fixing the camping issue were shut down by people parroting the good old sentence "has been tried and abused" (without mentioning that it could have been fixed).
Anyway, that's off topic, yet it had to be said.
Glad you said it, but reassurance is a bad example. It's actually going to play very nicely with this new basekit change in its current state, you'll be able to bumrush the hook with it, even leading the killer to it midchase, and get downed on purpose to create lose/lose situations right in the killer's face, and won't even need to waste the formerly single use self recover to do it. Yet another extremely horrible play that'll suddenly be made a good one because of exploitable oversights.
Playing well at dbd means being as efficient as possible, on both sides. Being as efficient as possible means both knowing how to take every advantage possible to do so, but also knowing how to prevent your opponent from doing the same. You could argue that this situation would be pointless because "two survivors arent on gens now," but one has frozen the hook timer of the other, and they have created an inevitible self recovery right next to the hooked survivor: You either need to pick them up and tell everyone to go for the save while you walk them to a hook, or just sit there and wait so you can handle the situation thats been dropped in your lap. Or just leave and let them get what they want for free with no repercussions for a play that would have otherwise completely thrown the match.
Good survivors find these things all the time, because its part of what makes them good survivors. Just like good killers tend to be good killers because they find and/or recognize very advantageous tools for themselves while maximizing denying the tools of survivors. Thats why exploitation potential is extremely important, but unfortunately BHVR don't understand how to prevent exploitation without just nerfing things into the ground instead.
-
@Tsela said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203053#Comment_3203053
well yeah I'm proxy camping the map we are in. You know because I do patrol it. I'm proxy camping the whole map since I go after survivors and I don't leave the game I suppose. Every place is proxy camped because I will go (or return) where I believe there are people to be found. My proxy camp covers the map.
Thats not a proxy, then. The concept of a proxy is when one entity represents another, in this case the area the survivor is in is representative of themselves. You are defending that area because doing so means you are defending that person. The scope needs to be reasonable or the representation part doesn't really make sense: You would break it down to say you are defending the loop they are hooked at, maybe its a nice lil jungle gym or a bottleneck in a map like autohaven, the area around the surgical theatre in lerys, and so on. There needs to be strategic relevance between the location and its contents.
-
@Yamaoka said:
Played a couple killer matches earlier. Didn't camp, tunnel, slug, 3-gen etc.
Was an amazing 11 "legit" hook match without any cheap trade hooks that allowed everyone to equally play the game.
Unfortunately most people don't care about gameplay. They just wanna win so they'll do whatever is the easiest way to win.
Thats a bit of an unfair assumption. There's a difference between wanting to win and wanting to win at all costs, and wanting to win is not mutually exclusive to playing the game to have fun., neither of which is mutually exclusive to "not wanting the match to feel terrible."
Since up to three gens can pop before you reasonably get your first hook, and multiple aspects of your intended gameplay can outright be denied (including said hook,) its completely understandable when some would rather prepare for the worst than assume the best. Honestly its an extremely conditioned response, which is why its no surprise that the liklihood of adapting to what works over whats fun (including for that player themselves) feels like it gets higher the longer people play. A combination of other players making their games feel miserable and being punished for trying to be fair goes a long way to changing a person's outlook on the potential of their opponents.
-
@Tsela said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3203032#Comment_3203032
Oh I'm not arguing with you at all. I am talking about this made up stuff they named now "proxy camping" I just find it ridiculous that OP comes up with new words. But I heard many nonsense over the years. like "gen camping" "slug camping" . Now it's "proxy camping" meaning.... not even in the area, but why is the killer coming back at all? haha He should stay away! ignore those noise notifications which are deliberate part of the game to signal survivor activity, he shouldn't play the game as intended because otherwise no matter what the killer does, it's some sort of camping :))
I simply find the name of this behavior ridiculous, and I'm making fun of OP "proxy camping" lol
Its called proxy camping because you are camping their location by proxy. Not directly, but rather the overall area around it. Its a concept thats existed since people in arena based fps used it for defending areas where resources (re)spawn around the map. It just means to pressure an area while not being directly in the center of it and instead hovering around its fringes (aka defending the reward within it "by proxy")
People can misuse it and apply connotations to it all they want, but it both exists as a concept and is a valid strategic option.