Seraphor
Seraphor
About
- Username
- Seraphor
- Joined
- Visits
- 9,011
- Last Active
Comments
-
Because it directly encouraged tunnelling?
The perk should never have made it past the theory stage, let alone making it into the PTB. It was fundamentally a terrible idea.
Even the mere possibility of this perk being in play would increase tunnelling. Why go after the rescuer if they're just going to Sprint Burst away?
If you're relying on this perk being paired with another one, Guardian of all things, to prevent it from being used for tunnelling, that's already a red flag.
-
You're right, and this is the main reason I was never in favour of the flat increase to gen times that came with 6.1.
Even if you remove the reason killers feel tunnelling is necessary, that doesn't miraculously stop tunnelling from giving a huge advantage in literally any scenario. The cat is out of the bag, once killers start tunnelling, they don't just stop suddenly.
There need to be mechanics that directly impact tunnelling, such as effects that scale with the number of survivors in the game.
If the killer has an incentive to keep four survivors in the game for longer, such as with Thanatophobia, then you might actually curb tunnelling. The problem with Thanatophobia is that the activation requirements mean it only works on two possible killers.
For example, taking gen speeds as an example. If gens were repaired slower with more survivors alive, and faster with fewer survivors alive, you would incentivise keeping as many survivors around as long as possible. You then turn survivor elimination into a balancing act between living survivors and faster gen speeds. Tunnelling doesn't magically go away, but it stops being a win-win scenario, and there's a valid choice to make between spreading hooks and early eliminations.
Whether or not this needs to be basekit, or a new meta perk, is the question. One idea for a perk mechanism could be as follows:
- You gain a token for each unique survivor you hook.
- You lose a token for each survivor eliminated by any means.
- Each token increases/reduces effect x by y%.
- e.g. each token slows down gen speeds by 5%. or, each token increases movement speed by 4%, etc.
- I think this effect would be better than Thanatophobia, because it's not as transient, instead of having a lesser requirement of 'injuring' a survivor, with that effect dissipating upon healing, it's a permanent effect you gain from the more difficult requirement of 'hooking' each survivor, and only gets removed by your actions in an entirely fair way.
- As long as this effect is strong enough to make it a new meta perk, it would have a significant effect.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3364638#Comment_3364638
You´re are just describing the issue with the current system. Someone could farm points and die on purpose/let survivors escape to prevent increasing the mmr.
Doing something is progressing the match and therefore should be taken into account for the mmr. Finishing gens and getting unhooks IS progressing the match. Its not fooling around and doing nothing, like someone who just hides the whole match, does nothing and escapes.
For example, yesterday i had a match where the survivors were clearly superior to the killer. Then the gates were powered and only i escaped, because the other 3 refused to leave. Probably to tank their mmr. Points wise they would have ranked up. But since they died, they lowered their rank.
So basing it solely on kills/escapes can be manipulated to easy. Also, someone who afks or does nothing, would end up in the same bracked as the basement Bubba until both change their playstyle. Which would improve the game experience for everyone else.
Sure, players can manipulate the system either way.
But the key thing here is that those manipulating the system based on kills/escapes, aren't doing so AND winning at the same time. They're choosing to forfeit the game to tank their MMR, instead of getting everything handed to them while the opposing side has a bad time all-round.
What happens if the survivors do well, but then either give themselves up or make a bad endgame play (the latter is entirely fair and indistinguishable form the former btw)? The killer gets a good game.
What happens if the killer does really well, but then lets survivors go or makes a bad endgame play? The survivors get a good game and get their escape.
With "skill" based metrics: What happens if a killer tanks their MMR by camping/tunnelling? Survivors get a bad game, lose BP, lose MMR, get stuck with camping killers indefinitely, everyone loses but the killer who decided to play that way. What happens if survivors play immersed and do nothing to tank their MMR? Everyone loses, killer and the other survivors.
-
As an excuse to release two survivors in one chapter and charge more for it.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3364598#Comment_3364598
The problem is that killing or escaping is seen as win. When its just more bloodpoints. Someone who did 2 gens, 2 unhooks, heals, etc. Should get their mmr increased. Even when dying. Because they contributed to the match.
A basement Bubba should depip for not doing anything during the match. Maybe an alternative to increasing or decreasing the mmr would be more suited. Like matching that player with players that do the same. Aka stay a lot afk/suicide on first hook/dc often.
No system is perfect. But decupling kills escapes from the mmr and just base it on actual skill would be fairer than what we have now.
No?
Killing and escaping IS the win condition.
What else is there to go by? That is the GOAL of the trial. You removing killing and escaping as the win condition and suddenly everyone plays like potatoes and doesn't bother to do their objectives. Killers end up forcing you to farm every game and everyone is stuck with trolls every single match, which all take 20-30 minutes to finish because everyone who farms is so damn slow, standing over gens emoting instead of just rushing them out.
You are playing Dead By Daylight, not a farming sim.
If you win the game, by defeating your opponent, your MMR should increase, so that you get opponents to who not so easy to defeat. That's literally the purpose of EVERY MMR system in existence.
"Just make it based on skill, easy!"
You cannot define skill in this game. It's impossible. There are too many different playstyles, and different factors to accommodate for. Do you have to be proficient in flashlight saves, 360s and looping? What about stealth? How about gen efficiency? How do you quantify these things?
Pips and emblem progress are only an approximate of skill, and ONLY when everyone is playing to win. You throw in the prospect of farming into the mix and it all falls apart.
What if you just like farming bloodpoints with farming killers and score a ton of pips that way, even though you actually suck at the game?
Plus, if you do everything right, if you play as skillfully as possible, if you score as many BP as you possible can and secure a double pip, but you still die. Why the feck would you want your MMR to increase?! You're already going against killers who you can't beat, even though you're literally doing your best, and you want to go against tougher killers who beat you even harder?
You quantify skill by match results. By kill and escape rates.
If you are more skilled, you are more likely to survive the trial, as an average over the course of many many games. The more RNG there is the larger the sample size needed to define the average, and DBD has a ton of RNG, but it gets there eventually.
-
The change doesn't need to be made to Decisive Strike. It needs to be made to the killer's power, on a case-by-case basis.
There's more than just DS that's ineffective against Nurse and Blight, every method of stun is just as pointless.
Keep DS at 3 seconds, or maybe buff to 3.5 or 4 seconds. But then you address killer powers and implement a stun penalty on their power use and recharge.
Nurse: Upon being stunned loses all her charges and her recharge becomes 5s per charge instead of 3s.
Blight: Upon being stunned loses all his tokens and his recharge becomes 3s per token instead of 2s.
Spirit: Upon being stunned loses all her charges. (it already takes 15s anyway)
Not only does this increase the value of DS against these killers, but it also increases the value of pallet stuns and Head On.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3363558#Comment_3363558
Thats why i said the system needs to change. Under a previous rank system, just getting 4 kills without any chases, wouldn´t be considered a win. It would have even been a depip.
But that was a win. You won the game, and the survivors lost.
This is why it HAS to be this way, otherwise you get games where the killers win the game, the survivors lose the game, everyone's MMR goes down, and nobody gets anywhere. The killer who's using cheap tactics for easy wins is getting lower and lower, and facing lower skilled survivors, for easier games, and making it impossible for those survivors to win any games. Low MMR brackets would be nothing but camping and tunnelling. This is what campers and tunnellers want. They want noobs to wreck.
On the other side, you could lose the game, you could lose every game, but you could do a bit of everything, score 2 gens, 2 unhooks, 2 heals, a few chases, but still get killed due to some endgame build, and your MMR would go up. You'd keep losing games, but still keep facing tougher and tougher opponents, and basically never win a game, ever.
This is exactly what happened under the old ranking system. Discounting to 5-10 days after reset where the game was an unplayable mess because everyone was rank 20 and playing as sweaty as possible, I would eventually climb to about rank 5 at which point I would get stuck. At rank 5 I would face opponents I had no right to be facing. Constantly sweaty SWFs, constant Nurses and Blights, because I was on the edge of the Rank 1 and general Red rank catchment. I couldn't climb any higher, because I didn't stand a chance against my opponents, and I couldn't lose rank, because I was still scoring BP and making emblem progress, keeping me stationary. Stuck in purgatory. I basically had about 10 days a month where I could comfortably play the game, between the reset rush and reaching SWF hell.
Again: MMR is not a prize. It's not something you are awarded with for playing well. It is an entirely neutral process that involves putting players together who are equally likely to win.
This whole collective idea that MMR is something you need to increase, that it's a goal to reach higher MMR is an absolute myopic misunderstanding of the system. MMR is not the goal. Pips still function the same way they always did, and if you want a goal to strive for, it's reaching top grade for that monthly bonus. That doesn't involve camping and tunnelling or cheap tactics for easy wins. That involves playing well in general.
-
Most interesting part of the update.
-
Kind of a nerf to solo survivors.
A scream halfway across the map won't tell you if the killer is running Make Your Choice or Dragons Grip.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3363445#Comment_3363445
Basement Bubba isn´t exactly try harding.
Why would he deserve to be matched against better players? Standing around isn´t exactly skilled. While it may not be the optimal, i think it might get boring fast for those Bubba players to only face "low mmr" players.
At least i would get bored fast.
More effective at killing = deserves to be matched against players who are more effective at surviving.
It's not about skill, and it's not about reward. MMR isn't a prize, or an indication of skill, it's a reflection of how often you win.
-
I believe it scales to an average of 3 attempts per trap, which is then pooled between them.
So if you have three traps, then you get 9 attempts in total, with whatever permutations allow for those traps to have either 1, 2, 3 or 4 attempts each.
Two traps = 6, five = 15, and six = 18.
Effectively, this makes increasing and reducing the number of traps less impactful, as fewer traps = more consistent search numbers (with two traps basically being a 50/50 between 3/3 or 2/4) and more traps = less consistent (six traps allowing for multiple one/two-shot removals).
-
I wish everyone, including the devs, would stop using the term 'skill-based'.
MMR is in fact 'kill based', and that's a perfectly fine way of doing things because that is the core win condition of the game (most other MMR systems only use binary win conditions too)
It serves as a proxy for skill, because the higher skilled you are, the more likely you are to win, on average.
And it's fine that it favours those who commit to tactics like camping and tunnelling, because then it pushes those killers to higher MMRs where they face survivors who are more effective at surviving.
-
@HarlockTaliesin said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3362604#Comment_3362604
The thing is, a large chunk of that playerbase doesn't play anymore. With many of the vets gone, how awful matchmaking is now as a result of post perk overhaul exodus, plus no events going on to bring people in even temporarily, another round of testing/polling needs to be done.
Previously I'd have voted for quicker lobby times, now I'd wait 10+ minutes in a heartbeat to get something close to a balanced match.
In the prior testing they ran a different setup each day, which is very limiting for both sample size and giving players a solid sense of the differences. They should take the top four setups players voted for the last time and run each for one week over the course of a month, then have players rank them one through four. The two least voted for options get dropped, and a new vote is held for the top two (so anyone that voted for one of the two dropped options can at least vote for the lesser of two evils that are left to them).
You think you would, but you wouldn't.
Higher accurate matches actually made the game more sweaty. When you literally 'meet your match' you have to sweat to stand a chance. That was one of the major complaints when they trialled it. Longer waits, for sweatier matches.
A wider range of matches (within reason) is better for the game, because it generates more variety in playstyles.
You don't want to wait 10 minutes for a game when every game is a sweatfest. Waiting 3 minutes for a game when only every other game is a sweatfest is much better, in both aspects. Less sweaty games in general, and less waiting around for those games.
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3363389#Comment_3363389
Surely they could just consider a kill to grant whatever hook states remain on that survivor, just like the HUD does.
Yes that's how it currently works, but that's the issue Tsulan was getting at, that one instant kill isn't necessarily equivalent to 3 hooks. It could be the result of camping or survivors leaving their team mates to die on first hook as well.
-
@Tsulan said:
I think the problem is, that the devs base their balance decisions solely on kill rates and not hooks. So on paper the killers look stong.
While looking at a hook-to-kill ratio could potentially be a better metric, it falls apart on killers that can bypass hooks.
Myers, Pyramid Head and particularly Onryo.
Scoring condemned mori's instead of 3 hooks is not failing, you're stilling winning the game.
-
All these complaints are just pissing in the wind if the actual data doesn't support it.
Perks get changed when they significantly affect the kill rates.
If DH isn't actually winning survivors any more games, then it's not going to be a priority.
This doesn't discount the issues of whether or not it is 'fun' though.
Frankly, while the perk still has issues, a lot of these complaints are whack, and that doesn't help. If you can't rely on the data to back it up, then you have to make fair arguments, not hyperbole.
The perk is objectively better than it used to be. Now it doesn't give free distance, it doesn't whiff killer powers, and it causes deepwound, which has the compound effect of being prevented by deepwound, so the killer has a way to play around it. It's so much better than it used to be.
That doesn't negate the issue that it fundamentally changes how a killer approaches survivors, is a similar but lesser way to how survivors had to 'not repair gens' to avoid eruption, but that doesn't mean a ton of issues haven't been fixed with this new version.
-
@Doomzilla said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3363351#Comment_3363351
This killer is not a comparison to knight, you people do this every chapter “X is another Y!” You don’t even play X. If the new killer is bad, just say that.
There are distinct similarities in the mechanics of the power though. You place your power in a particular spot, this creates a radius survivors have to avoid to prevent triggering the power, if they do trigger it, they're potentially forfeiting a health state.
It's like putting Ghostface's stalking mechanic onto one of the Knights Guards and having them stalk for you.
-
Visual design: I'm not bothered one way or the other. I don't think the killer or survivors look bad, the survivors actually look pretty good. I'm not vibing with the killers bejazzled half gas mask though, and her "trying to be sexy" strutting animation looks really weird.
Power design: I really, really wanted to like this. On paper this is my sort of killer. I main Ghostface, with a bit of Myers, Pig and Dredge, and another killer with stealth, Expose and some way of zoning is exactly what I want right now. But this power is just fundamentally flawed. As the killer, you have no control over the core aspect of your power, Exposing survivors. You just have to gamble on the survivors playing poorly and getting themselves exposed. She's like Knight, but worse.
Perks: Nothing is standing out to me, and the fact that we have two survivors without any real justification for them is a huge negative for me. This just results in more bad perks being added to an already oversaturated perk library, and frankly, it just seems like an excuse to charge 50% more for the chapter like the Stranger Things and Resident Evil ones. Maybe if the 'Teamwork' perks actually had some kind of synergy I could see it being justified, but they don't, and the fact that "they're siblings!" is a narrative to justify the design decision.
Map updates looks great though. They're free so I don't need to buy anything!
-
@VikingDragonXii said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3363204#Comment_3363204
Killers Primary Objective is to Kill Survivors
Secondary Objective is Protect Gens From Being Repaired.
Survivors only have one objective...Repair Gens to escape. Totems would be at most considered a optional objective since they are not required to be done to complete the Main objective.
On most maps losing 3 gens in quick succession does usually mean the Killer will lose that match because the Gens would be so far apart trying to apply pressure would be very difficult unless the Killer goes for a 3-Gen Def or Survivors 3-Gen themselves.
This is a bit of a misrepresentation of objectives. Both sides have complementary objectives.
Killers primary objective is to down, hook and ultimately eliminate survivors.
Survivors primary objective is to repair gens and escape the trial.
Each of these primary objectives serve as the secondary objective for the other side.
Killers secondary objective is to prevent gens being repaired in order to prevent the exit gates opening.
Survivors secondary objective is to evade the killer and maintain their health and the health of their team mates to prevent being eliminated.
It is a give and take mechanism for both sides. You either play defence and prevent repairs/prevent hooks, or you play offence and score hooks/gen. Getting the balance right is what wins you/loses the game.
The killer does have basekit tools to play both ways, injuring, downing, slugging, hooking and chasing generates pressure and slows down gen repairs. But it is an asymmetrical game, so this is supplemented by other objectives that slow down survivors, such as totems, and dealing with killer powers that either aid in offence as chase powers, or inflict slowdown. But this does not mean that killers ability to defend their secondary objective has to come solely from perks, they are supplementary. The core mechanism of applying pressure with basekit tools still exists.
-
Hopefully not. You'll kill Myers and Ghostface.
-
@MrPeanutbutter said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3362247#Comment_3362247
The real reason they won’t show MMR is because it would reveal that the system doesn’t work at all, putting players together in matches that have no business being matched together for the sake of shorter queue times.
Which is the system players preferred when it was tested last year during a blind trial.
No one wants to wait 10+ minutes for a game that only lasts 5 minutes anyway.
-
You might be happy to wait 10 minutes, but the majority aren't.
This was tested last year. The system we have is the one the playerbase preferred in a blind trial.
-
Does Dredge have a significantly higher kill rate than other killers?
BHVR have this information, and if so, can nerf him.
If not, maybe you're speaking out of your proverbial?
-
The old system raised your MMR even if you didn't win.
The current system is tied to kills/escapes, because that's the win condition. Why would you want your MMR to increase if you're not actually winning?
You could gain pips, because farming BP is the goal for everyone, without actually winning, and get catapulted into high ranks even though you're not winning games.
I was perpetually stuck in high Green/low Purple ranks, because I played for BP, but my games were always miserable SWF bully squads, because Red ranks could only be matched downwards, and I was right on the cusp of Red rank matches. This meant I couldn't progress any further, and all of my matches were sweaty.
Now that I have MMR tied to kills instead of BP, I get much fairer games, because I don't play sweaty.
The current MMR system is supposed to be invisible to players, so that players don't game the system. It doesn't encourage people to sweat at all, because there is no incentive to increasing your MMR. It is not a trophy, it's not a badge of honour to be high MMR, you're not even supposed to see it, it just means you have tougher opponents.
The emblem/pip system is still there as the only tangible reward system. The more people stop caring about their own MMR, the less sweaty everyone would play.
The old system was good for people who played sweaty, because it meant they got matched with lower rank players and got a lot of easy games. (ergo, it was bad for mid-low rank players)
The new system is bad for people who play sweaty, because now they have to face opponents of equal skill. (ergo, it's good for mid-low rank players)
That's the reality, and it's much fairer for it.
Everyone who gave the slightest ######### about their MMR was irrationally desperate to raise it as high as possible in a fit of pure insanity, and now they're stuck in SWF hell where they belong.
-
Reminder: No it didn't.
The old rank match making was no better, and for some, including myself, it was much worse.
Take off the rose-tinted glasses.
-
I'm so torn between wanting this to be a reserved, simple slasher plot with just the Trapper as the killer... and complete fanservice including Wraith, Billy, Huntress and Nurse.
-
@martinj97 said:
Don't make any changes. Someone might find an exploit!
Applies to every change. Not really constructive IMO. I like your other idea about reworking some of the least used offerings/add-ons, but that rarely happens.
Conversion
This would fit well with a crafting system, allowing players to craft up in rarity, or craft across in rarity.
I wouldn't dismiss Blueberry's point entirely like that.
Crafting systems are prone to these sort of exploits, and an infinite supply of your favourite Iridescent add on isn't a healthy addition to the game.
My suggestion was more limited than a full on crafting system that allows you to pick and choose what you want. Instead, you're still ultimately limited by what is available on the bloodweb, it just has the scope to be a bit more generous in the way it distributes functional add ons, in a way the devs can fine tune to give the level of scarcity that they want for maintaining balance.
-
Alternative suggestion:
- Remove some or even all BP offerings from the bloodweb.
- Provide the ability to convert any other items/add ons/offerings into BP offerings of the same rarity. (maybe with a small 4% chance of a lucky rarity upgrade)
You'll get more of the stuff you do want (because those BP offering slots on the bloodweb will be taken up by useful things), and less of the stuff you don't (convert all the things you don't use).
This is an indirect refund, as it still requires you to play and use that BP offering to get some use out of it.
The devs can adjust how much more prolific the functional items and add ons are by how big a proportion of the bloodweb BP offerings are converted. Let's say BP offerings on the bloodweb are reduced by 50%, that's increasing the proliferation of add ons and items by roughly 50% itself.
-
This is why I can't play ranged killers.
Nurse, Pinhead, Huntress, Deathslinger, Trickster and even Plague are virtually unplayable. I literally only manage with Plague because A. she can infect objects and B. her projectiles are so janky anyway even for PC players.
-
I'm usually somewhat excited for every chapter, there's always something I'm keen to make use of.
This is the first time I've had zero inclination to use anything included in it.
I wanted to like Skull Merchant. On paper she's my sort of killer, and the first stealth/expose killer we've had since GhostFace. But her power is fundamentally impotent, she has no control over it, it's worse than Knight.
-
@KatyAlex said:
Or you could just bait the hit
This is like saying "you can just let go of the gen" in response to Eruption criticism.
As TC rightly says, this means you cannot use a Lunge attack without risking a DH. You're denied half of your basic tools for injuring survivors.
-
While I'm all for gen time scaling based on survivors still in the trial, these numbers seem a bit whack.
For starters, if you want to encourage killers to focus on hooks over kills and avoid tunnelling, then hooks shouldn't decrease gen times.
150 seconds is pretty insane, nearly double the current gen times, and this would make a 4-man escape pretty much impossible.
I think a more reasonable alternative would be 100 seconds at base, and the maximum charges for a gen should decrease by 25 or 20 for each eliminated survivor.
This is only 10s more per gen than what we currently have (which itself is only 10s more than last year and we all know what little effect that had), so it will make it marginally harder for four survivors to open the exit gates. But it would mean three survivors only have to spend 75/80 seconds per remaining gen, and two, only 50/60 seconds.
This would greatly reduce the chances of snowballing after eliminating survivors, encouraging killers to prolong eliminating a survivor as long as possible. It would make 4-escapes and 4K's both more difficult to secure, and make 1, 2 and 3K results more common.
-
Just combine Dying Light with Furtive Chase, the latter is useless anyway.
- Instead of gaining tokens from non-Obsessions, you gain a token every time you hook the Obsession.
- When the Obsession is rescued form the hook, the rescuer becomes the obsession.
This way you're focussing on different survivors, and are forced to not tunnel if you want value out of the perk. Each 'safe' survivor that gets rescued form the hook receives the repair penalty, so you want them on gens while you chase the new obsession.
-
@Anti051 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3358142#Comment_3358142
Not if the survivor has already lost the core aspect of the game.
How cool would it be if Killers had a perk called 'Sure Strike' and could press E 0.5 seconds before a pallet stun and make the survivor take damage anyway even though the survivor won the mind game? Then if the survivor just waits it out, the killer steps through the pallet, body blocks them and hits them that way too?
It would be lambasted as complete, unskilled, game-breaking bs.
The Survivor version of 'Sure Strike' is 'Dead Hard.'
This literally already happens.
I can't count how many times I've been hit by a pallet AND injured/downed the survivor. And it's by design, there is a small window between "pallet falling" and "pallet hitting" in which hits can and are meant to be able to connect.
-
@martinj97 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3358481#Comment_3358481
Otherwise a 3K automatically = 4K.
The 4th survivor has never escaped through the exit gate after a 3K? Do you really think that?
In my experience, once the killer closes the hatch, either of the two remaining exit gates are virtually impossible to open without some kind of distraction, or employing the "open to C" then hide method, which requires getting lucky, and flat out doesn't work against high mobility killers. The killer has nothing left to do but patrol the exits, which is your only way out.
So no. And I don't know what game you've been playing if you think otherwise.
-
- To force the game to end by triggering the EGC when it's closed.
- To provide the final survivor with a chance of escaping. Otherwise a 3K automatically = 4K.
-
Because they only designed 100 prestige icons.
Seriously, it's all arbitrary, why does it matter? Why did you rush to P100 anyway if not for the P100 badge to show off in every lobby?
@Veroles said:
I don't get it too because there is no reward on p100 so it's just a number which changes with every + - 1m bp. Does give me absolutely no motivation to give this system attention at all. They also could say the max is p9 and thats it. You gain all rewards.
That's the idea. They don't want players pressured to get to P100, P9 IS fundamentally the last prestige, anything above that is just extra levels anyway.
-
Wouldn't this be misleading information if there's obstacles, such as walls, in between?
-
How would this information be displayed exactly?
Distance should already be discernible by the size of the aura, and using the space around you to judge depth (triangulation by lateral movement). You know, spatial awareness.
-
A reasonable reward for getting to P100, would not be something exclusive to that one character IMO, as that would drive a need to P100 everyone.
I think a charm, or two of them, for attain P100 on any Survivor, and on any Killer, would make the most sense.
-
It's power creep.
There was a time when Inner Healing was considered a good perk. When killers could play a hit and run style without tunnelling or throwing the game. When gen regression was limited to either Ruin (counterable) or Pop (limited), so survivors didn't have to genrush to stand a chance.
The more effective tools you give either side, the more you limit the viable tactics the other can employ.
They really need to start focussing on game health additions. Rebalancing existing perks to incentivise healthy playstyles, and new perks that discourage camping and tunnelling. Old BBQ with it's secondary win condition of collecting 4 stacks. MYC, a perk that literally cannot be used if you camp or tunnel. Gift of Pain, if it wasn't outclassed by other perks like Pentimento.
The extra 10s to gen times across the board was a bad idea. Because 'buffing killers' in general does just make camping and tunnelling more effective when those buffs don't discriminate. But an increase to gen times that scales with how many survivors are currently in the trial, would have an impact on tunnelling.
For example, increasing the maximum charges of a gen to 100 (currently 90), but then reducing the maximum required charges of every gen by 25 for each survivor eliminated, bringing it down to 75 for 3 survivors, or 50 for 2 survivors (and 25 for 1 but that's neither here nor there). This could make it slightly more difficult to get a 4-man escape, but it would drastically reduce the killers chances of snowballing if they eliminated survivors early on. Killers would be incentivised to spread hooks around, and wait until later into the game before eliminating survivors.
This sort of change, that puts the 4K/4E results into the extremes, and makes 1,2,3K games more likely, creating a normal distribution of win conditions, would be a much better environment to play in, for either role.
-
@Anti051 said:
The Chase is the direct pvp part of the game, right?
Looping becomes the core aspect of the pvp interaction.
The contest in looping is played based on mind-games.
Whomever outplays the other at the mind-game either avoids a hit or lands one.
Is it not true that 'Dead Hard' virtually grants the ability to remove yourself from the core aspect of the pvp interaction?
Does it really make sense in an activity based on mind games, that in exchange for a half second of timing, you are immune to mind-games?
Does 'Dead Hard' in the current form not break the game at an elementary level?
Isn't knowing when to time your half second immunity not a mindgame in itself? Isn't baiting out the Dead Hard a mindgame?
-
Can you throw in Swamp too? That map has like, 5 lockers.
-
As always, the carrot is better than the stick.
Give a BP bonus for playing one of the five least played killers.
-
It's already self-limiting by the fact that any less than 4 injured survivors is basically useless. Therefore it deactivates itself when the killer starts to win.
This de-incentivises tunnelling out a survivor, at least least limits the killers impact (one less perk) when they do.
Old Thana might have been useful with fewer than 4 survivors, so that might have made sense as a Hex, but not the new version.
-
Yes. For the umpteenth time.
Distraction Bloodpoint Scores
While in a chase, or while hanging on the hook, if the killer is within 32 meters, every time a generator is repaired or another survivor recovers a health state, you receive 50% of the BP score awarded for that action.
This would allow survivors who are tunnelled and camped, for whom the killer makes it impossible to score Objective/Altruism points, can still get some scores in those categories.
-
I would much rather the effect of Boons be more impactful (more powerful), and have Shattered Hope as basekit, than the situation we have now with infinitely relighting CoH in a distant corner.
I've said many times, that I think Boons should be more difficult for killers to find, and less telegraphed (no thunder sound notification), so that survivors get more use out of them, before the killer destroys them. This would also put cleansing and blessing on the same page, as both will take 14s, disable the Hex, and destroy/consume the totem, meaning there is no conflict when it comes to other totem interactions such as Hex perks or things like Inner Healing.
But that ship has sailed, this is how Boons have been designed and I don't see them changing them at such a fundamental level any time soon.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
If you'd said make the 'bloodpoint bonus that was removed from bbq base kit' I'd be 100% on board with that idea. I think that would be a relatively minor change that most reasonable players should have no objective to, and it could be a positive incentive to some killers to deter tunneling.
But no, not the aura reading of the perk itself.
If anything, we've already learned the lesson that 'buffing killers will reduce the need to tunnel' is just completely untrue. It just buffs tunneling. (See: 6.1.0 extra gen time, etc.)
There's more nuance than that. Just as "any buffs to survivor is a buff to SWF" isn't necessarily true, as the HUD icons disproportionately favour solo's over SWF, and are intended to close the gap between them.
I don't see how giving killers the location of the furthest survivors after scoring a hook could inadvertently lead to either tunnelling or camping. Maybe some opportune slugging if there's another survivor close by, but not in most instances.
I don't necessarily think the aura reading of BBQ should be basekit either, but some watered down version (like the bubble of the one furthest survivor) could be more or less a balanced addition.
-
@legacycolt said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3357480#Comment_3357480
Yes but the devs don’t want to change the nurse sadly. They mentioned it in recent patch notes.
...they literally just did...
-
@Basement_Bubba420 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3357455#Comment_3357455
I agree.
I shouldn't have used competitive mode as the other mode. I understand the community doesn't view the competitive aspect of this game the same way I do. I should have called it immersive mode. When I said competitive I meant that from the perspective of the solo survivor player. An individual will have to be consistently technically and strategically better to see success in solo queue than they would in a SWF that has multiple other people to cover for and know of any mistakes.
The UI changes take away a lot of the chaos and uncertainty that are in Solo Q. Knowing that someone is working on a gen that is 80%, watching them get into a chase, and having seen that person 20 seconds ago can give you a good idea of where the gen is and the priority of completing it. Much of the atmosphere of the game they've been creating over the last few years will be lost.
The UI changes just make each decision in the game more of a routine optimization problem than before. With more information, there is less uncertainty, and each decision becomes more rote. The player knows what happening ahead of time and can plan and react accordingly.
The point I am trying to make is that the actual competitive aspect of the game doesn't come from being in a SWF and planning out perks ahead of time and communicating with teammates. It bypasses the very design of the game. If the community wants to call it "competitive" to bypass the design of the game, okay fine, but I disagree.
To me, it would be more interesting to see a tournament without these things. A large pool of people and each match would consist of four random solo survivors who are anonymous in the game to prevent their teammates from knowing their preferred strategies. Each person would be competing against everyone else in the pool for the highest score. The score would be based on performance across rounds like hooks, kills, saves, gen progress, chase time, etc... Performing well with unconventional builds and strategies would grant more points than gen regression nurse or DH/COH survivor.
Anyway, this seems to be more of a problem with the community in general. It's not competitive to bypass the very design of the game.
Ok, that does change things a little.
I still think this 'immersive' mode would be very underpopulated compared to the main game mode, but it definitely has merits to it.
It would likely end up being options for Custom games though, simply due to the issues with populating queues for it, and with custom games you're more likely to at least have voice chat.