Senaxu
Senaxu
About
- Username
- Senaxu
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
sadly not. There is still no server side validation and no cheat protection in place.
Also nothing mentioned on any road map, so high likely it will stay that way until it is getting that bad that BHVR is literally forced to act.
-
I agree with the crosshair part. Not really convinced that aim assist belongs in DBD, but a simple optional crosshair absolutely should exist by now.
For ranged killers knowing the exact center of your screen is basic QoL. ppl can already get crosshairs through monitor settings or overlays anyway, so not having an in-game option just makes it less convenient for no real reason.
Another QoL thing I’d love to see is being able to open Match Details / teammate perks without being forced to stand still / in idle. In a game where time is everything, checking your team’s loadouts should not lock your character in place. Plenty of games let you open scoreboards or information panels while still moving or doing basic actions. DBD should too.
-
Devs are like: ups, no hatchet pull up sound, no lullaby, but it looks nice or not? BUY! Pay2Win on the next level.
-
@Skillfulstone said:
Well...
If every time you get "server error" is when you were winning/carrying/just downed someone as Killer, then it's very possible a hacker crashed the server on purpose (because yes they can do that, happened to me a few times and your post isn't the first of its kind).
Just like hackers are able to give the "suspicious behavior" warning by killing everyone near-instantly as Killer, hackers can force the server to crash.
Funny how these “connection issues” always happen at the perfect moment. If there’s no reliable detection or protection, then of course people will keep abusing it. At least after 10 years we have a valid competent cheat protection system in place and the topic is frequently mentioned on any roadmaps xD
-
server side validation and proper cheat protection.
But that's basically a pipe dream and not realistic. -
best counter is to not buy the dlc generally spend any money at the game
-
without DC penalties the game would turn into PvE pretty fast. Wrong killer, wrong map, fast first down, fast first gen.
in fact DC penalties should be harsher if anything. 1st First DC 5min, 2nd DC 15 min, 3rd DC 1 hour, 4hours and so on. -
I honestly agree that this event feels very survivor-sided.
The portal/invisibility/invulnerability combinations are extremely strong, and on some maps it can feel miserable to play killer into it. But at the same time, I can understand why they went this direction this year. Jason just released, killer interest is already very high, and if the event was also heavily killer-sided again, the queues would probably be awful.
Last year the event felt much better for killer, so I just played a lot of killer and enjoyed it. This year I would honestly do the opposite: if killer feels miserable, just play survivor and farm the event while it lasts. The BP is good, the tools are strong, and it is also a good time to learn matchups like Jason from the survivor side.
I don’t think killers should torture themselves through an event that clearly gives survivors this much value. Sometimes it is better to just play the side the event favors and move on.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4092814#Comment_4092814
I personally think that Thrill of the Hunt deserves a nerf. The Perk just screams problematic, maybe not initially, but whenever something releases which makes Hex-Builds very good (like Jason), then the Perk gets problematic.
At the very least it should not work on Pentimento-Totems.
I get where you are coming from, and I agree that Thrill can become very problematic in certain builds.
But I would be careful with simply nerfing the perk’s numbers again. Thrill basically has one job: protect totems by making cleansing/blessing slower. If that value gets reduced too much, the perk quickly becomes not worth running at all, especially since every cleansed totem already weakens it and if Thrill itself gets cleansed first, the perk is just gone.
To me, the bigger issue is how punishing interrupted totem progress is. If you get forced off by a scream or pressure, you basically have to start from zero again. That is what makes these scream + Thrill setups feel so miserable.
I think a better solution would be to change totem progress behavior itself. For example, if a survivor lets go of a totem, the progress could start regressing quickly, similar in spirit to how Invocation progress can regress, instead of instantly losing everything. It should not permanently save progress forever, because that would make totem builds too weak, but it also should not be all-or-nothing every time you get interrupted.
I can also understand looking at the Pentimento interaction specifically. But overall, I would rather see the interruption/progress problem addressed than just nerf Thrill’s numbers until Hex builds stop being viable.
-
I really hope they look at Jason first before nerfing Hex builds in general.
Thrill-Hex builds can be disgusting, sure, but on most killers there is still a clear risk: if the totem is gone, the perk is gone for the rest of the match. That is a valid playstyle and survivors do have tools to deal with it.
The problem is that Jason’s kit makes defending totems way too easy compared to most killers. He can move around the map extremely fast with OE, pressure multiple floors, force screams / Killer Instinct value around the area, and even interrupt people from a distance with that spear scream addon. That makes Hex builds feel much more oppressive on him than they would on a normal killer.
I don’t think Thrill itself is the main problem here, like Hens mentioned. Jason is the multiplier. Hens having a huge streak with that build is one thing, but KnightLight is also doing very well with Jason without perks at all (40+ Streak), which says a lot about the killer’s base kit.
I would rather see Jason tuned first than see every Hex / totem build get hit because one killer abuses them too well.
-
@Zakon05 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4092780#Comment_4092780
I was around for Ghoul. But I feel like you're changing your argument a bit here, which I understood to be that they deliberately overtune killers on release to make them sell better.
Like Ghoul I think is actually an example that they don't balance to push sales. Ghoul's initial nerfs took him from high A-tier… to high A-tier. In fact in some ways he became stronger since they toned down that ridiculous auto-aim, allowing him to more easily use advanced techniques like dashing past survivors to cut them off. He's caught more nerfs since then but his tier placement has barely moved.
He definitely sold a lot, as a lot of people picked him up, as evidenced by the fact he's been one of the most popular killers since he came out. You'd think they'd have nerfed him by now if sales numbers were their motivating factor, since the community has been crying for his blood since day 1 of his release and he's still possibly the most hated killer in the game.
To tell the truth I don't even understand what their balancing philosophy is. Like Dracula and Springtrap, for example.
Dracula released strong and got buffed after release. Springtrap released mid and got nerfed. Neither of these things make sense.
I think there are two separate points here.
First, about Ghoul: I don’t agree that he simply went from “high A-tier to high A-tier”. Maybe that is where people place him now, but his release state was far more problematic than that to me. Whether someone calls it S-tier or overtuned high A-tier is mostly semantics, but he clearly had serious issues that were addressed step by step over time. The fact that he is in a much healthier spot now does not mean his release state was fine.
Second, I actually think Aven_Fallen makes a fair point. “Licensed killer = OP release” is not a universal rule. Plenty of licensed killers did not release in a crazy state, and some were even weak or average. So yes, it is not that simple.
What I do think is that chapter context and marketing pressure can matter. I obviously don’t know BHVR’s internal reasoning, and it could also just be a balance philosophy issue. But Ghoul was a heavily pushed anime chapter, and Jason is on another level entirely: the 10th anniversary flagship character and one of the biggest horror icons they could possibly add. So I don’t think it is unreasonable that people are skeptical when he releases with this much power packed into his kit.
With Jason, the problem is not just “he has many powers”. I actually like that he feels like a Swiss army knife. That can make a killer interesting for both sides. The problem is that the practical details add up too hard: Jump Scare value across vertical maps, Killer Instinct catching people through situations where other stealth killers would not get that kind of info, add-ons creating almost free Exhaustion scenarios or basically auto gen regression on the fly, and how quickly he can threaten or cancel spear pressure compared to other ranged killers.
That is why I still see him as a power creep problem right now. Not because every single part of his kit is unbeatable, but because the total package outclasses too many older killers while punishing him too little for mistakes. The solution should not be to drag every older killer up to that level, they need some love too in the right way for sure. But Jason's risk/reward needs tuning so the counterplay feels earned and fair for both sides.
-
@Zakon05 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4092628#Comment_4092628
I really don't understand where this narrative came from, it has absolutely no basis in reality.
The only times I've seen killers get released OP and nerfed quickly were Xenomorph and Krasue.
I swear this talking point appeared overnight after Chucky got nerfed an entire year after his release. Not even after his initial rework, since he was still strong after that.
Interesting, but I don’t really agree with that.
Maybe you weren’t around for The Ghoul release, or maybe you just remember it differently, which is fine. But Kaneki also came out in a very problematic state and was pushed pretty heavily from a marketing perspective. Obviously not on the same level as a 10th anniversary chapter with Jason as the main flagship character(special livestreams, huge announcements), but still a big release.
He is in a much healthier spot now, but on release there were definitely serious balance issues that got addressed step by step over time.
That is basically my point. Big releases can come out overtuned or in a rough state, especially when there is a lot of marketing behind them. Then, once enough time, data, and feedback exist, they get adjusted.
I’m not saying Jason has to be gutted. I just don’t think it is unrealistic at all to expect adjustments when his current risk/reward is this far off.
-
I actually like the idea of showing teammate perks during the loading screen. It would be more useful than the random loading screen tips, especially for players who already have enough hours to know the basics.
That being said, I understand the concern. If someone sees a teammate running a weird tome, daily, achievement, or challenge build and decides to crash or DC during loading, the whole match can get cancelled. With how low the tolerance level in this community can be, I can see why BHVR may not want to encourage more loadout dodging.
But the bigger issue to me is the current in-game implementation. Showing teammate perks in Match Details is a good feature, but opening the tab should not completely lock your character. It feels very unfinished that you basically have to stand still and do nothing just to check your teammates’ perks.
This should be a basic UI/input problem to solve. Movement and normal gameplay input actions should still work while the Match Details screen is open, or at least certain actions should continue. In many games you can open the scoreboard, check items, builds, cooldowns, or stats while still moving or continuing basic gameplay. League, Dota, Call of Duty, and many other games manage this just fine. You don’t suddenly go idle because you pressed Tab.
In DBD, this matters even more because the few seconds while the camera rotates around your pawn at the start of the match are not enough to realistically memorize three teammates’ full loadouts. If the goal is to help solo queue, then the information has to be usable during the match without forcing the player to waste time or stand still.
So yes, loading screen perks would be nice, but I can understand why it may create dodging problems. The cleaner solution is to make the Match Details screen actually usable during gameplay instead of treating it like a hard pause menu.
Also, on the topic of lobby dodging: I still think pre-match profiles should be hidden by default. There is no healthy reason for people to check hours, profiles, or names before the match and decide who they want to dodge or tunnel. Character names are enough before the match. After the match, names should be visible for reports and accountability. But before the match, hiding that information would make the lobby healthier overall.
-
Why does he also get extra broken pallet-style spawn points to reappear from in every trial when the existing spots would be enough already? Why is he stealth, mobility and ranged pressure at the same time? Why can he reload so easily from hooks and scrap piles, while his ranged attack is already very strong? Why can he move between floors, stay in Omnipresent Evil for so long, patrol the map extremely well, and still barely get punished for mistakes?
That is the real issue with Jason right now. It is the entire package. And that sells well for sure.
I understand why killer players enjoy him. Of course he is fun to play when you have that much pressure and that many tools. But play 40–50 solo queue games against competent Jasons and then tell me with a straight face that this is healthy balance. There is a reason why some high-level and comp players are rating him extremely high, even top 5. They can see how much value he gets for how little risk he takes.
And no, this is not about wanting him gutted. Jason has a great design and should stay strong. But pretending his current state is perfectly fine is just denial at this point. If someone still thinks this is the new healthy normal, we are getting close to flat-earth territory.
He needs actual counterplay that feels rewarding, and he needs to be punished more when he makes mistakes.
Atm his risk/reward is completely out of balance, and since his release, he has easily outclassed killers like Dredge, Huntress, and Wraith in every way. -
I’m sure Jason will get some adjustments once the sales numbers are within the target range. Right now, Jason outclasses a lot of similar killers, like Wraith, Huntress, etc. After a month or so, once enough revenue has accumulated, they will address it. That’s just the usual process.
My Dredge would love some extra lockers on certain maps too. Too bad he is not a licensed killer with heavy marketing behind him.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
I really think people who claim this dont play Survivor. Or maybe dont even play Killer, lol.
There is a big difference between a Survivor who is actually good at the game (with and without WoO and/or Sprint Burst) and a Survivor who just follows the yellow Auras. It is very obvious if a Survivor is just following whatever they can see with WoO/Five Moves ahead and those are really not hard to outplay.
If you are struggle with that kind of player, this is a you-problem.
(And honestly, a bad Survivor cannot really make use of DS. Sure, they extend their live by a few seconds, but if you cannot make use of the stun and the bit of distance you gain with DS, you will not cause the Killer any problems)
I agree with this. A lot of these takes come from people who clearly only have real experience on one side.
If you mostly play killer and then play 3 survivor games in low MMR, that does not suddenly make survivor “autopilot”. Same the other way around: if you only play survivor and barely touch killer, you also don’t really know how much your own mistakes matter when you are the only person on your side.
People should actually play both sides for a while before making strong claims. Play a week of solo queue survivor. Play 50+ games. Then play killer for a while too. Get to the point where the matches actually reflect your level, and then talk about balance.
Solo queue especially is not comparable to SWF. You can play very well individually and still lose because one teammate goes down in 15 seconds, gives up, refuses to do gens, or gets hard tunneled out early while not running any antitunnel perks. That is not “autopilot”. That is the reality of a 4v1 team game where one weak link can completely break the balance of the match.
So when people say survivor is easy mode after barely playing it properly, I honestly cannot take that seriously.
It sounds like flat earth logic: forming a strong opinion from a tiny sample size and then ignoring everything that does not fit it.Play both sides properly, especially solo queue, then the discussion becomes a lot more honest.
-
@Shirtless_Myers said:
Jason has terrible game design. I don't feel like writing much because the developers don't care about it, either. The power creep is insane, and I'm honestly tired of people trying to defend every new overpowered slop killer that comes out.
I don’t think the devs are incompetent or that they don’t care. I think Jason is exactly where he needs to be from a marketing perspective right now.
He sells the DLC, creates hype, and keeps people talking. From a gameplay perspective, I fully expect him to get the usual treatment in the next month or two. Whether people here defend him loudly or not, I don’t think that is going to change anything. His adjustments are coming.
-
I think one of the biggest problems in this discussion is how quickly people judge the killer from only one side.
Of course survivors need time to learn how to play against a new killer. Nobody should play two matches, lose badly, and instantly claim something is broken. You need experience against the killer, you need to understand the counterplay, and you need enough matches to see what works and what does not.
But the same applies to people defending Jason. If someone mostly plays killer, buys the DLC, has a great time with him, and then says “he is perfectly fine” after only a few survivor matches against weak or inexperienced Jasons, I cannot really take that as a serious balance opinion either.
In my opinion, if you want to judge Jason properly, you need a real sample size. Not 3 matches. Not 5 matches. You need at least 40–50 matches against him, preferably against competent Jason players, and ideally from both perspectives. Otherwise you are not really judging his balance, you are judging your first impression.
After playing against him a lot myself, I understand much better why some very experienced players and comp players rate him so highly. When players with 12k–18k hours, including people from the comp scene(like Dan and KL from Invic), say Jason may be a top 5 killer, I don’t think that should just be dismissed as exaggeration. These are not people who usually throw out ratings like that for no reason.
And honestly, I can see it now. Jason has a kit that covers almost everything: mobility, stealth, chase pressure, ranged zoning, Haste, Killer Instinct, strong reload access, impale pressure, tracking, and very strong map interaction. The issue is not that one single part of his kit is unbeatable. The issue is that the whole package gives him too much value while asking for too little risk.
That is why I find some of the “he is completely fine” takes hard to take seriously. If someone has not played enough against competent Jasons, or refuses to look at the survivor side at all, then that opinion is not really grounded in experience. It is just defending the side they enjoy playing.
I don’t want Jason gutted. I like the killer, and I think his design is very cool. But pretending he is perfectly balanced right now feels unrealistic to me. His risk/reward is off, and once more players fully optimize him, I think more people will understand why some high-level players are already rating him so highly.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4091016#Comment_4091016
I just feel like, I don't know, why aren't people angrier? Why aren't they louder? Are these Jason supporters just lying about him being fine because the want the easiest time they've ever had in this game? I'm just so baffled by this praise while I'm playing against the most free, the most overstuffed, and most forgiving killer the game has probably ever seen.
I mean, he even gets TBtC clock as an add-on while fulfilling zero activation requirements, and an anti-Exhaustion add-on too. I normally advocate against Exhaustion but it's pretty much your only chance to make distance from him, and even I'm so desperate I'm running Overcome—but then it just gets countered by the add-on anyway.
I never want to hear a word about skill expression ever again from anyone who thinks this killer is B tier or fine as is.
In a nutshell: from a marketing perspective, Jason is in the perfect spot right now. From a gameplay perspective, I think he will get the usual adjustments in a month or two, once the sales targets have been met and the data has settled.
-
I want to be clear: I don’t hate Jason. Design-wise, I actually think he is one of the coolest killers they have released in a long time. His power fits the character, he feels unique, and I like strong killers in general.
That being said, after playing against him a lot since release, I do understand much better now why some very experienced players and comp players(Invic) rate him extremely high, even top 5. At first I thought that sounded exaggerated, especially coming from players(Dan) who usually don’t rate killers that highly without a good reason. But after around 60+ matches against Jason myself, with roughly 5,000 hours in the game, I can see where they are coming from.
The problem is not that one single part of his kit is completely broken by itself. The problem is how much his kit does at once, and how forgiving it is. He has map mobility through Omnipresent Evil, stealth, Haste after Jump Scare, Killer Instinct, window and pallet pressure, a fast ranged attack, knockback, impale pressure, tracking through the spike, a mini Mori condition, and very easy reload access through hooks and scrap piles. On top of that, he also gets extra map interaction points through already broken pallet-style spots, so it often feels like he has even more places to reappear from than the normal map resources would suggest.
His spikes are also a big part of the issue. They are fast to ready, hard to react to in many situations, and missing one often does not feel punishing enough because he can reload so easily. Against a competent Jason, loops, windows, and pallets become extremely dangerous because he is still a 115% killer, can threaten range, and often gets enough Haste value after Jump Scare to force very difficult situations very quickly.
The supposed counterplay exists in theory, but in real matches it often feels very limited. Yes, crouching can deny detection, but if Jason uses Omnipresent Evil mid-chase and immediately reappears through a window, pallet, or breakable wall, you usually do not have realistic time to crouch long enough. In chase, crouching is not real counterplay in many situations.
The same goes for some perk-based counterplay.
Chemical Trap sounds like it should be a very good answer on paper, because Jason wants to interact with dropped pallets through Omnipresent Evil / Jump Scare. But in practice, when he reappears at a trapped pallet and breaks/interacts with it through his power, he currently does not get slowed by Chemical Trap at all. Head On-style locker plays also become much weaker when add-ons like Sauna Rock are involved, because you can be revealed by Killer Instinct and hit with Exhaustion before the play even becomes realistic. At that point, it does not feel like healthy counterplay anymore, it just feels like the killer denies too many options at once.
I still don’t think he is as bad as The Ghoul was on release. That felt worse to me. But Jason’s risk/reward currently feels off. He gets a lot of value with very little downside, and once more players fully optimize him, I think more people will realize how strong his zoning, mobility, chase reset potential, and reload economy really are.
I don’t want him gutted. I actually like the killer a lot. But I do think he needs tuning. Omnipresent Evil should probably have a maximum duration instead of being something he can stay in forever, especially for endgame situations. Sauna Rock should also be looked at because guaranteed or near-guaranteed Exhaustion in chase does not feel fair. And his spike reload economy or miss punishment may need some adjustment so survivor outplays actually feel rewarding.
In a nutshell: marketing-wise(as usual), Jason is probably exactly where he is supposed to be right now. Gameplay-wise, I expect the usual post-DLC tuning in one or two months, once the hype settles and the data is clear.
-
In a nutshell: marketing-wise, Jason is in the perfect spot right now. Gameplay-wise, I think he will get the usual adjustments in a month or two, once the DLC hype and data settle down.
-
Honestly, I think Jason is mostly in a good spot design-wise. His power is cool, the fantasy fits, and I actually like strong killers. I just think, like with many new/licensed killers, he currently feels a bit overtuned so people stay interested in him and ofc buy the new dlc as usual.
The main thing I would change is Omnipresent Evil. I don’t think he should be able to stay in it forever. Most mobility/stealth powers in the game have some kind of duration limit or meaningful restriction, and Jason should have that too. Especially in endgame, if you are the last survivor and you don’t find hatch quickly, it can feel almost impossible because he can patrol exits extremely fast while staying in that form. The cooldown after leaving it can stay short, but there should be a maximum duration.
I also think Sauna Stone is problematic. In theory you can counter Omnipresent Evil by crouching, but in chase that is not realistic. If Jason uses Omnipresent Evil and immediately reappears through a window, pallet, or breakable wall, you don’t have enough time to crouch long enough to avoid the effect. So the Exhaustion feels basically guaranteed, with very little real counterplay. Either the Exhaustion duration should be lower, or there needs to be a more realistic way to avoid it.
His spears are also very forgiving because he can reload them so quickly and they are very hard to dodge compared to something like a Huntress hatchet. I don’t think Jason needs to be gutted, but some tuning is needed so outplaying him actually feels rewarding.
Right now many people are still learning him, but once very good players fully optimize him, I think his zoning, mobility, reload access, and chase reset potential will show how strong he really is. I like the killer, I just think a few numbers need to be adjusted so the counterplay feels fair for both sides.
-
@TamaraLatte said:
I keep getting killers with the name 'Goddess(then a woman's name) .store. when I go to their webpage, I see all the things they have for sale. I feel like Behaviour must know about it. Can't they at least ban the name being displayed?
They're AI bots, but they're insane. Devs don't seem to be doing anything about it.
What would drastically improve the situation is proactive, preventive anti-cheat based on real-time enforcement.
But that does not generate any direct revenue, nor does the urgently needed server-side validation.
That's the sad fact so it's high likely that it will stay that way…
The most realistic outcome is that, at some point, there will be another ban wave with adjusted parameters… reactive cheat protection, just as they have always done it up to this point. -
This is possible since there is still no basic server side validation in this game. Sad but i guess it will stay that way.
-
@Wezqu said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4067896#Comment_4067896
That is literally what I have said several times when people complain about anti-cheat being bad when in reality anti-cheat always runs behind. Hackers will create new hacks fast they can have new hack up next day after the old version was disabled by the anti-cheat. Then it takes time to the anti-cheat program to get reports of the new cheat and they now have to create away to detect that one and block it. Its literal cat chasing the mouse as long as the hack makers see profit in making them they will keep doing it.
Calling this a cat and mouse problem is only half true.
Yes, client-side anti-cheat will always be cat and mouse. New bypasses get made, old ones get detected, and that cycle never fully ends. Nobody serious is denying that.But that is not the part people are criticizing here.
BHVR’s own public reporting flow for hacks is still reactive. For “other hacks”, the official policy requires an in-game report and a support ticket. That means the public-facing path is still: encounter the cheater, report it, maybe gather evidence, wait for review, then maybe action later.
That is not the same thing as active gameplay protection.
Dedicated servers are also not the same thing as meaningful server-side validation. A server being the host is good, but the real question is whether impossible actions get rejected at the gameplay layer. Basic sanity checks for impossible speed, teleports, illegal state changes and similar cases should not depend this heavily on players doing detective work after the match.That is why the “anti-cheat always runs behind” answer feels incomplete. It is true for subtle cheats and constant bypass updates. It is not a good answer to the lack of baseline validation for the blatant stuff. Saying “it is always cat and mouse” in that context is like talking about burglars while the emergency exit is still propped open.
Nobody is asking for magical instant autobans for every suspicious clip. People are asking for the bare minimum in a PvP game: do not trust the client more than necessary, and let the server reject obviously impossible actions before the burden lands on the player.
-
This patch note pretty much answers the whole debate. The automatic hit at the end of a Kagune Leap vault clearly was not intended counterplay, because they removed it outright. And the way it is written is pretty unambiguous, so there is not much room left for interpretation. At least now it is clear what the intended behavior is.
-
Yeah, fair point, and you two were right on this.
I double checked it and BHVR really does still want an in game report as part of the process, basically as a breadcrumb so they can locate the right match faster. I still don’t love that it’s treated like a requirement, because if you already provide the proper IDs and details in a ticket it shouldn’t be strictly necessary, but I get the intent. They’re trying to minimize the time spent on cases that don’t generate revenue, so anything that speeds up lookup is “worth it” to them.
That said, the bigger issue is the reporting workflow itself. It’s still way too much work pushed onto players for a PvP game in 2026. Recording, trimming, uploading, filling out a ticket, and hoping it gets handled properly shouldn’t be the reliable path for obvious cases. At the very least, basic server side sanity checks should be catching the most blatant stuff, especially when the underlying engine has the tooling to support stronger validation if it’s actually set up. -
An in-game report is helpful because it gives support an extra anchor to find the exact match faster, but it shouldn’t be treated like a hard requirement. If you open a ticket and provide the relevant IDs/details, they can still locate the match (from a technical POV ofc); the in-game report just makes that lookup easier.
On the replay point, people massively underestimate the scope. A proper replay system isn’t just “watch the match back” like a video, it’s storage, retention rules, tooling, and a way to reproduce what happened in a reliable way. That’s expensive, and I can see why they’re reluctant.
But also: a replay system shouldn’t be the prerequisite for catching obvious cheaters. Basic server-side sanity checks would prevent a lot of the blatant stuff from ever happening in the first place. Right now it feels like the burden is on players to record, trim and upload which is backwards for a PvP game.
AI triage for tickets is fine if it helps routing, but it doesn’t replace the one thing that consistently forces action: a clear ticket with clean video evidence.
-
Yeah, fair point from Wezqu: the in-game report is mostly useful as a breadcrumb so support can locate the exact match faster once you open a ticket.
What’s still wild to me is how manual the whole process is in 2026. If you want a report to actually go anywhere, you’re basically expected to record it, trim it down, upload it, then file a ticket and provide IDs so they can pull the logs. Even when you’re fast, that’s easily 15–20 minutes of work on the player side for one obvious cheater.
I get that evidence helps with context, but the fact this isn’t getting caught by basic sanity checks is the real issue. If something is outright impossible (speed, cooldowns, etc.), the server should be rejecting it automatically, not relying on players to do editing and paperwork. -
@Arikarimo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4063668#Comment_4063668
Um no, i reported the hacker in-game not on forum.
Why do i need evidence when the team probably has match replays when they check for hackers?
BHVR has no public “match replay” system they can just pull up like a video and watch your game back. What they have is telemetry/logs (states, timestamps, values changing), not a clean replay that shows movement, POV, pathing, etc. That’s exactly why evidence matters: a short clip shows context instantly, while logs alone often won’t.
Also: in-game reports by themselves rarely lead to anything you can rely on. If you actually want a high chance that scum gets a ban, you need to open a support ticket and attach video proof. The in-game report is still worth doing, but more as a bonus reference, not the main step.And if you ever got a “report feedback” popup in the past, odds are someone else submitted a proper ticket with evidence and you just happened to report the same player too.
-
@Rigbeta said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4063831#Comment_4063831
And I already mentioned that the Abandon Feature does not make sense as something to avoid punishment for simply sticking it out to the end. What if you have a luck offering? What if a Bot saves you with Unbreakable? Or you have Unbreakable? What if you just like seeing Mori's? Or earning extra points IF you reach struggle phase? Do you understand? Does that MAKE sense to you??
The Abandon shouldn't be a bandaid over a blatant Issue.
And exactly how am I supposed to share additional screenshots of a game that is already over.
And No, I played several other matches earlier, all normal length, all no early leaving, just REGULAR games that ended as they should by PLAYING the game. Meanwhile, this match has the distinction of a Comp playing Killer slugging everyone one by one then getting an "Instant Sacrifice."https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/DC7KZAY5MT4Y/image.png
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/6VQCABOQAUM7/image.png
Wowie gee, lookit that. Regular Matches save for the Lich Game that ended when he dcd himself. Do I need to prove myself some more? Would you like to have my Computer Stats so you can pour through my games before I went on break?
Stop making excuses for a poorly designed string of code. It is FLAWED. It makes NO SENSE to be punished for not abandoning.Hey, just to clarify, I wasn’t trying to accuse you of anything or dismiss what happened. The Abandon option is a workaround people mention because it avoids the penalty, but I agree it’s not a satisfying “solution” when you actually want to stay in the match for points, challenges, endgame stuff, or a potential recovery.
The only reason I brought up context is because most penalty systems usually don’t hinge on a single match in isolation, so if one outlier match is enough to trigger a grade loss/warning, that sounds like a false positive worth reporting. The match history you posted helps, and it does make this look more like a detection edge case than “you did something wrong.”
If you genuinely think this was triggered incorrectly, the most helpful thing you can do is open a support ticket and include the date/time, platform, and the screenshots. Support can actually check the server logs and your recent matches instead of us guessing in the dark: https://support.deadbydaylight.com/hc/en-us/requests/new
Also, I’m not arguing for softer DC penalties in general. I just don’t think legit matches should get flagged because the detection misreads a slug-heavy game. -
As random1543 already mentioned, if everyone is slugged there’s an Abandon option and that’s the intended way to leave without getting punished.
What I’m missing here is context. A warning/penalty usually doesn’t get triggered by one single match in isolation, it’s normally based on patterns across multiple recent games.It’s similar to DC penalties: one weird match DC doesn’t magically explain everything, the system reacts to repeated behavior over time.
So before we call it “broken detection”, could you share a bit more info? A screenshot of the endgame plus a short look at the matches right before this one would help a lot.
Right now it’s just hard to judge because the story reads like we’re missing the piece that explains why the system flagged you.
-
That’s why I keep wishing DBD had a better matchmaking layer that groups players by playstyle and contribution, not just by the final escape or death. Put the locker goblins with other locker goblins and let them experience what that match feels like when nobody touches gens. That alone would fix a lot of the frustration without needing weird UI changes.
Same idea with cheaters, if the game ever gets good at detecting them, I would rather see them quietly pooled together than repeatedly poisoning normal matches. Other games have done variants of that for years.
-
Queue times matter, sure, but I think the bigger reason we keep getting vague “MMR update soon” answers is simple prioritization. A real MMR rework is expensive, risky, and it does not directly sell anything, so it will always compete with work that does.
On top of that, tighter matchmaking would make cheating and “impossible” plays stand out far more, which then forces even more investment into systems that do not generate revenue directly and the game still struggles with. That is a visibility problem BHVR probably does not want to amplify.
And for the OG players: the old pip and emblem based ranks were not perfect, but at higher ranks the matches felt more consistently competitive than what we have now. Right now Grades are basically activity, while matchmaking still feels off for the most part.I would love an update, but I want something concrete: what is actually being changed, what is not, and what tradeoffs BHVR is willing to accept. Otherwise this stays in the “nice to have, low priority” bucket forever.
-
@Arikarimo said:
This summer I reported a speed hacker, and didn't get a notifcation saying they got banned so they didn't get banned.
Why?
did you open a ticket here? https://support.deadbydaylight.com/hc/en-us/requests/new
delivered video evidence etc? -
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4063057#Comment_4063057
The way that I see it is that there was a problem and instead of addressing the problem, they chose to stick a bandage on it like they usually do. And it's still as harmful to the game as the old system, at least in equal measure. I don't wanna say they're incapable of fixing it, it's that they're incapable of caring enough to fix it.
Totally agree with your point. A lot of the time BHVR seems to treat the symptom instead of the cause, ship a bandaid, and then end up rolling it back because it creates new problems or hits the wrong players. The anti AFK changes were a perfect example, good intention, messy execution, and we basically ended up back where we started.
The same pattern shows up with tunneling and slugging. I am not saying those things never feel awful, but the solution cannot be to keep stacking punishments and hoping the meta changes. If you want less tunneling, you make spreading hooks and rotating targets more rewarding than hard tunneling, not just more restrictive. Otherwise players will always gravitate to whatever is most efficient, especially when the match is going south.
MMR is the same story. A stricter system would help beginners and the middle of the pack a lot, but it has obvious trade offs. Longer queues at the top end, more consistent match difficulty, and it would also make cheating stand out way more. And until there is at least basic server side validation, the idea of a truly competitive ladder is kind of a fantasy. People already underestimate how much invalid stuff can happen in DBD because the server just accepts it.
So yeah, I agree. If BHVR wants real “health” improvements, they have to tackle the underlying systems, not keep shipping surface level fixes that the community immediately learns to work around.
-
@UnicornMedal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4062865#Comment_4062865
The crazy part about queues to me is that they've been vocal that that is a top priority for years now. But 2025 introduced the anti-go next/AFK system and left us with the aggressive DC penalties that actively pull players from the queue for longer than necessary. It leads me to believe that it's not as important to them anymore. 2v8 testing Play While You Wait has me feeling some type of way on that front.
I might be jumping the gun here, I can't say for sure, but I do wonder if they're optimizing both Survivor and skill-focused Killers from the game. 🤔 Worth pondering.
Yeah, I get what you mean. Queue times are obviously a priority, but I do not think they can optimize for queues in a vacuum.
As a killer, I do not want DBD to drift into PvE where half the lobby is bots because people can freely bail the moment they dislike the map, killer, or an early down. If DC penalties get softened too much, I honestly think I would spend more time queueing into bot filled matches than actually playing proper PvP games, and that would kill my motivation way faster than a slightly longer queue ever could.
I do agree that queue times are part of the frustration, especially in modes like 2v8 where killer queues can be longer than the match itself. Play While You Wait makes sense there. But for normal matchmaking, I would rather have stricter DC penalties and fewer bot games than shorter queues that come at the cost of match quality. -
I get the frustration in the OP, but for me the biggest giveaway that MMR feels off is how wildly it swings.
I genuinely enjoy tough matches on killer. Close games where I have to think, adapt, and actually earn every down are the most fun, even when I lose. What kills my motivation is the pattern where I get one really sweaty group, then the very next match I get people who look completely new to the game. Not just weaker, I mean genuinely beginner level. At that point I am not learning anything, they are not having a good time, and it feels wrong. I have had matches where I honestly felt bad for the survivors because it looked like they were just trying DBD for the first time and they got thrown into a blender.
That kind of yo yo matchmaking is exactly why hours get brought up so much. Everyone knows hours are not a perfect skill metric, but when the system is hidden and the matches feel random, people reach for the one thing they can see.
If BHVR ever wanted to make MMR feel more accurate, I think the direction is an activity based model, not just escape or kills. Chase performance should matter a lot because wasting the killer’s time is the core survivor skill. Unhooks, healing, and actual gen contribution should matter too. Meanwhile the hide and wait playstyle should not get rewarded the same as people actually taking chases and doing objectives. If someone plays like a locker goblin or spends the match looting and waiting for hatch, the system should naturally group them with others who play like that and not constantly pair them with high participation teammates.
But I also get why this probably stays the way it is. A stricter system means longer queue times, and BHVR clearly values keeping queues moving. And if you make matchmaking more competitive and more reliable, cheating becomes a bigger and more visible problem that needs serious investment. None of that sells a chapter or cosmetics, so it is hard to believe it will ever be a top priority unless it starts hurting player retention in a way they cannot ignore. -
I get why turning off crossplay feels awful right now, but I do not think disabling it by default on PC would fix anything. It would just fragment the pool even harder and make queue times worse for everyone, especially at off hours. A bigger pool is usually the only reason DBD matchmaking stays tolerable.
My bigger issue is that the crossplay toggle does not behave like a real choice. If I turn crossplay off, I should still be able to match into a lobby that is already all Steam players. Right now it feels like you only get matched with people on the same platform who also have crossplay off, which instantly makes the pool tiny. That is why the option feels pointless for survivor unless you enjoy waiting forever.
If BHVR ever revisits this, the better solution is not changing the default. It is making the setting smarter. Let crossplay off mean same platform only, regardless of what everyone else has toggled, so Steam can still match Steam even if the other players leave crossplay on. Or give a middle option that keeps PC with PC but excludes consoles, since a lot of the complaints are really about communication and input feel, not about Epic versus Steam.
Also on the aim discussion, there is no magic auto aim, but controller aim dressing is a real thing, and it exists on both console and PC when using a controller. Either way that is not even my main complaint. I just prefer matches where everyone can communicate the same way, and in my own experience console solo queue teammates are more likely to play for themselves or give up early. Not always, but often enough that I notice it.
So yes, I agree crossplay off feels dead, but that is because the current system isolates you too aggressively. Fix the logic first. Do not flip the default and make the entire game’s queue times worse to create a non crossplay pool that most people will never choose.
-
I actually finished all Tome challenges too, and yeah, some of them were insanely grindy. The early ones especially felt outdated, like they were designed for a different era of DBD. Stuff like basement hook requirements was easily one of the worst for me, because it forces a specific playstyle and can take forever unless the match just happens to line up perfectly.
Another thing that aged badly is the “basic attack” type of challenges. Back then a lot more hits counted as basic even when they came from a power, so you could clear those challenges naturally while playing. These days far more things are correctly classified as special attacks, so if a Tome wants a ton of basic hits and you play a power heavy killer, you are basically forced to swap to M1 killers just to make progress. That is the kind of stuff that makes old challenges feel even grindier now than they probably were at the time.
It is doable, but I would not recommend hard focusing on the grindy challenges or you will burn out fast. I treated a lot of them as background goals while playing normally, and over time they just completed themselves. The really specific ones are still annoying, but if you space them out and do them when you are already in the right mood to play killer, it is much less painful.
-
Yeah, if a match reaches the point where there are no real survivors left and it is just bots, I do not see why the killer should be forced to play it out or eat a BP loss for leaving. At that point the “match” is basically over.
The fair solution to me is simple. If the killer closes the game while only bots remain, just pay out the remaining BP that would normally come from finishing them. Treat each remaining bot as one final hook and a sacrifice for scoring purposes, not 12 extra hook states or anything silly. Just the missing end of match credit so the killer is not punished for saving time.
What I care about even more are the stall situations. Two survivors hide, stop touching gens, and the match turns into a waiting contest for hatch. The killer is stuck searching lockers and corners for ten minutes with no real gameplay happening. If survivors are not doing objectives and there is basically no gen progress for a meaningful window of time, letting the killer abandon should count as a win and the remaining survivors should be treated as dead for scoring. Otherwise you are rewarding stalling and wasting everyone’s time.
Obviously it needs guardrails so it cannot be abused. If gens are being worked on, if there is recent gen progress, or if there is an active chase, then the option should not trigger. But when the game has clearly turned into hiding and waiting, the killer should not be the one getting punished for leaving.
-
I get why people say “just report them,” but that only really works for the loud, obvious stuff. The real long term damage in DBD is subtle cheating that stays barely plausible. Small speed edges, perfect reads, constant “lucky” decisions that never look clip worthy in a normal public match.
What makes it worse is that this is not just a public lobby problem. There have been DBD community tournaments and leagues where players slipped through for a while, even with multiple people watching POVs and reviewing matches. There are some videos on YT about cases where a player had a long run of tournament success, and later, when the tournament staff checked the suspected individual’s PC and DBD files, they found cheating software. If it can take that much scrutiny to catch it, public matchmaking has basically no chance against subtle cheats.
This is also why comparisons to games like Call of Duty miss the point. DBD still allows too many invalid states to be accepted and replicated. Client input goes to the server, and the server pushes it out to everyone else, so basic server checks should be rejecting impossible movement, impossible interaction speeds, impossible item usage, and invalid health state changes. If those checks were stricter, a lot of the blatant stuff would simply fail.
And then there is the incentive problem. The community has wanted meaningful Prestige rewards for a long time, so when P100 finally gets “rewards” but it is mostly small icons and similar, it feels underwhelming. BHVR has framed that as avoiding Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) pressure around grind rewards, but the store still regularly runs limited time cosmetics and event items that rely on urgency. That contrast makes it hard not to read this as a resource and revenue decision. Cosmetics and new content are directly monetizable. Anti cheat work and stronger validation mostly improve match quality but do not sell anything on their own, so unless cheating starts visibly hurting engagement and spending, it is hard to believe it will ever become a true top priority. -
@top500spiderman said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4061015#Comment_4061015
Doesn't change the fact god pallets are useless against him. You can't really greed that unless he fall asleep while waiting for you to drop it…
This just isnt true, greed the pallet and know when to leave the loop. This is a skill issue.
Yeah, I know from experience that doesn't work on safe pallets. He can just pull his power back up and vault.That was first thing I tried when he came out.
Also not true, there is a delay for him going back into his leaping state, and that was done purposely for those situations, skill issue.
That's kinda the issue, if it is big enough loop, he can just vault the pallet or bodyblock with power and if it is acutally that small, then you can just mindgame it easily as 115%.
Not true, once you master greeding pallets against him hes very mid. As far as him body blocking not only is that extremely hard to pull off and isnt realistic. kaneki players quite literally make montages of the tech on youtube its essentially going for clips.
Well, now it's 0 skill guaranteed down tool… so much fun and people wonder why survivors just go next. Trying to get the timing and vault back was kinda my only reason why even try to play against Ghoul, I really can't be bothered now.
This just says alot about your mindset, you refuse to have to be bothered with thinking before dropping a pallet or vaulting, and much rather just completely make a killer useless by exploiting a bug. Instead of actually learning counterplay. DBD needs harder penalties on players who will just disconnect selfishly instead of refusing to learn something new.
At some point, people need to stop confusing “BHVR currently intends this” with “therefore it is healthy design.” Those are not the same thing.
And honestly, when almost every comment from someone follows the exact same pattern of “do not nerf killer, learn the matchup, skill issue,” people are obviously going to read that as bias rather than analysis. Repeating “skill issue” is not an argument. It is what people say when they want to skip the argument.
If you want to lecture survivors about counterplay, then survivor experience actually matters. The same is true in reverse. People who only look at one side of the game usually end up with very loud opinions and very little perspective.
Yes, Ghoul has counterplay. That was never the real point. The point is input versus reward. Survivors are asked for far more precision, timing, and restraint than the killer is asked for in return, especially once the player behind Ghoul is actually competent. That is why many people enjoy playing him, but far fewer enjoy playing against him.
So no, this is not automatically “people refusing to adapt.” Sometimes it is simply players recognizing that intended does not always mean fair, healthy, or well designed. If every opposing view gets dismissed as “skill issue,” that usually says more about the bias of the person posting than the quality of the argument.
-
RIP forum legends. This thread will be closed very soon too.
-
@Dem34888 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4057307#Comment_4057307
A cheater can open gates on 5 generators in 0.1 seconds, and the server won't raise any questions; all clients will receive this information and assume everything is fine. Under normal circumstances, the server will either ignore the gate opening altogether, seeing that there are still 5 generators, or there will be a desynchronization between the cheater and the server, in which case the cheater should simply be kicked from the match. This is called server-side validation, and the principle by which it works is NEVER TRUST THE CLIENT. The server is the authority, it controls everyone and everything, whether it's allowed or not. DBD doesn't have this. There may be some mini-validations, but definitely not full-fledged ones. Why does this work in other games? Probably because they initially laid out the right game architecture and thought about security. DBD was a miracle success; at the time of its creation, no one thought it would last so long, as a result of which the technical debt grows every year
I agree with your point.
What makes this situation so frustrating is not that wallhacks exist. Those can be harder to detect. The real scandal is that we are still talking about bare minimum server authority checks. The server should reject impossible state changes, impossible progress, impossible movement, and impossible interactions. If a client can claim something happened and the server simply accepts it and broadcasts it to everyone else, then the game is built on the wrong trust model.
That is why the most blatant cheats look so absurd. Instant objective progress, impossible speed, teleports, actions happening in states where they should be blocked, interactions that should be gated by prerequisites. These are not subtle. These are exactly the kind of things a server should deny by default, or at the very least flag immediately.The fact that we are years into this game’s lifespan and still discussing missing basic validation is an indictment of priorities. At some point “technical debt” stops being an explanation and becomes a permanent excuse. Players are told to record, edit, upload, and ticket their way through a problem that should be detected automatically for the most blatant cases, basically outsourcing enforcement to the victims.
And yes, it is hard not to notice what does get shipped consistently. Cosmetics, DLC, monetized content. Meanwhile the foundation that decides whether matches are legitimate still feels shaky. That is why trust keeps eroding. Not because people expect perfection, but because they expect the fundamentals.
No one is asking for a magical solution that eliminates cheating entirely. People are asking for the basics. Server authority, sanity checks, and a system that is designed to refuse impossible reality instead of accepting it and calling it a day.
-
@diablo916 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/464245/blatant-cheaters
ThiThis is why DC penalty needs to be removed. They punish their actual players with a timeout if they decide not to stay in a cheater lobby. I really have people trying to gaslight me into thinking the DC penalty is still a good thing
I get why the “remove DC penalties because of cheaters” idea sounds attractive at first glance. Nobody wants to sit in a match that feels illegitimate. The problem is that removing the penalty does not just affect cheater matches. It changes the entire game’s baseline behavior, and it creates more damage than it prevents.
It is the same kind of short sighted fix as saying “some cars have unsafe brakes, so let’s remove seatbelts so people can jump out whenever they feel in danger.” You would solve one uncomfortable situation for a small subset of cases, but you would also guarantee constant abuse everywhere else. Most people will not DC only for cheaters. They will DC for a bad map, a killer they dislike, a rough early game, a teammate mistake, a perk reveal, a gen popping too fast, a mood swing, or simply because they do not feel like finishing. In a five player PvP match, that decision does not just affect the person leaving. It directly degrades the experience for everyone else.
Bots do not fully solve that either. A bot replacement is still a quality drop. It changes chase patterns, macro decisions, pressure, and the pacing of the whole match. If DC becomes frictionless, the “optimal” way to play for many people becomes leaving anything that is not favorable. Over time you do not get a healthier PvP environment. You get more partial matches, more snowballing, more people giving up the moment something looks off, and a queue experience that feels like you spend more time searching for a clean match than actually playing one.
Also, not every match has a cheater. The cheating problem is real and it feels worse than some players admit, but treating every suspicious match as justification to remove the entire integrity system is not a serious solution. It is basically admitting defeat and turning match quality into “whatever happens happens.” That helps cheaters too, because it reduces friction and increases chaos. It becomes harder to separate legitimate play from manipulation when lobbies constantly collapse.
The real fix is boring, expensive, and unglamorous. It is better server side validation and better automated detection for the obvious stuff, plus faster action for repeat offenders. It is also making reporting less punishing for the reporter, because right now the player is doing a lot of the work. That is a pipeline problem. If the only reliable route is recording, editing, uploading, then support ticketing, you are effectively asking the victim to do manual moderation for a live service game at scale.
If anything, the compromise should go the other way. Keep DC penalties for normal matches, but create systems that specifically reduce punishment when the match is genuinely compromised. That could mean better automated flagging, quicker match termination when something extreme is detected, or protection for players when a lobby is clearly being disrupted. Removing penalties entirely is the nuclear option, and it would punish normal players far more often than it would save them from cheaters.
So yes, the frustration is valid. The proposed solution is not. The focus needs to stay on the root cause, not on making it easier for everyone to quit the moment anything feels inconvenient.
-
@DemonicDemons said:
So basically what I'm reading here is, absolutely everyone knows there is a massive cheating problem, bhvr knows about it and nothing is being done to combat the cheating?
Yeah… that’s basically the uncomfortable reality.
BHVR obviously knows cheating exists (they run bans, they use anti-cheat, they have a reporting pipeline), but from a player’s point of view it’s still mostly whack-a-mole: you see the same categories of obvious cheats year after year, and the practical “solution” is still record it, upload it, file a ticket, hope it gets reviewed.
The part that makes it feel hopeless isn’t just “cheaters exist”… it’s that the burden is on the victim and the system is horrible. If it takes 20–30 minutes of recording + trimming + uploading + support ticketing (on top of the in-game report which does nothing on it's own) to deal with one blatant case, that’s not a protection system, that’s crowdsourced QA.
And if you want a very public example of how deep the problem goes: the official Walking Dead collab stream with Chandler Riggs got repeatedly disrupted by bad actors to the point they couldn’t even play properly. When your marketing stream with a celebrity guest can be derailed live, that’s not some niche edge case…it should be a serious wake-up call.
Here’s a short recap from Scott:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hqq7AJ-aHn4Also, subtle cheaters are the real poison. The blatant ones eventually get clipped and banned. The “soft” ones (info tools, minor speed tweaks, timing assistance) can look like “good reads” or “skill,” and unless you have multiple POVs and hard proof, they’re basically untouchable in normal matches. That’s why people keep feeling like something is off even when they can’t prove it.
So yes: people know, BHVR knows, and the visible impact hasn’t changed enough to restore trust. As others said, the only lever players realistically have is to stop rewarding the problem (spending/engagement), and in the meantime: record/report when it’s blatant… but don’t expect the manual process to keep up with the scale of it.
-
@Sp00kyb0b said:
Sadly these threads does nothing :
- Cheaters are nothing new.
- Lacking anti-cheat is nothing new.
We keep buying the DLC every 3 months, no matter how bad the cheating gets.
Today's game companies don't care about making good games or keeping cheaters out. They only care about maximizing their profits while spending the bare minimum.
exactly that, nothing more to add.
-
@Junylar said:
Why would they change anything, if players still continue to purchase the new content with happily wide open mouths? Income and playercount are the only metrics they operate with, and those show everything is perfect, the playerbase is happy as ever. Even you still continue to play with those toxic cheaters, even though you claim you don't like it, and you will continue playing and consuming after you are done with this thread. If some player's sentiment on forums contradict with the general stats, everyone would listen to the stats, and that's what they do.
Well put. Not everyone, of course, but a large portion of the playerbase, yeah.
-
@xAnonymous said:
Hello everyone.
The problem I wanna talk about has been there for YEARS and it keeps getting belittled on a large scale.
I've played Doctor and won many matches and my win rate spiked, therefore I got into better lobbies and just met a cheater SWF again.
They all were subtle cheaters.
I know having a clip would be amazing in that situation but I didn't pay attention to the survivors in lobby and got surprised because of that.
I know that avoiding alt-gen Epic Games survivors / anonymous users (especially) is essential since they are subtle cheaters.
Can you dear devs FINALLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT?
Cheaters themselves admitted to me they are doing this for 6+ months in a row and never got banned.
That goes BOTH for subtle and BLATANT cheaters.
I also saw the same BLATANT CHEATER from 3+ months ago in my lobby who was moonwalking with like 2x my speed LOL
And guess what? Dude is still not banned, just jumping from lobby to lobby freely without a care in the world. Even funnier, this guy is doing this on Steam LOL !!!
This game is RUINED by cheaters. They are not only parasites but also the biggest disrespect to dedicated Killer mains that invested time and patience to get better.
The only killers that can do something about such cheaters are Blight/Nurse. When they are zooming like they have perma 15% haste, then low tier killers can't do absolutely anything.
I know in that situation I could just leave but that's just beyond embarrassing how much BS dedicated players have to endure simply because you guys are doing NOTHING to improve the anti-cheat and stop lying about banning cheaters since you guys turned off the automatic bans a long time ago.
He got banned. Wonder why.
Let’s see how long this thread lasts…