Seraphor
Seraphor
About
- Username
- Seraphor
- Joined
- Visits
- 9,011
- Last Active
Comments
-
@AssortedSorting said:
I assume all FoV altering Perks and addons will be retired/reworked? What will their new effects be?
How would you address people that still want a higher FoV than what you think the limit should be?
What is the best FoV limit to address most motion sickness issues?
How long are you willing to wait for every 1st person Killer model to be reworked to accommodate all levels of FoV?
What kind of LoS bush-like objects should be added to loops so survivors can retain some ambiguities on location while the Killer performs a vault or a break action?
- There's two perks that alter FoV. Shadowborn and Monitor and Abuse. The latter would be fine just removing the FoV change, I run it and I don't notice the FoV change all that much, it's pretty useless in only being active during a chase anyway. Shadowborn could take some inspiration from Dredge's Nightfall, perhaps it could make survivors slightly more illuminated with a white glow around them when they're within x meters or something.
- This is a slippery slope fallacy. Most first person games run at about 90-100 degrees FoV as standard. There's no reason to go beyond that, you'd end up looking through a fisheye lens.
- 90-100 degrees
- Not necessary, as Shadowborn already increases it to 102 degrees, all killer models must already be set up for 100 degrees.
- Not necessary, as stated several times already, the difference between 90 and 100 degrees in terms of what you can hide behind, doesn't change anything.
-
I liked the flying survivor animations when the game thought you were being carried but you were just walking normally.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248413#Comment_3248413
The increased gen times has no correlation with the situation the OP is talking about. What you're suggesting punishes the killer for killing.
It does correlate, because this didn't happen this much before gen times were increased. Survivors feel hopeless if there's only two of them left.
It doesn't 'punish the killer for killing', because killing a survivor is still in the killers favour. This is no worse than killing a survivor weakens Thanatophobia. Yes it technically does, one survivor dead is one less survivor injured, but you've eliminated a survivor, so it's a net win.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248375#Comment_3248375
Why do you think it is my first instinct? This is not a new question that never before was thought of, you know.
And yes, if it affects game balance, it has to be considered. Thats why, when i asked for a color blind mode, i explicitly proposed changes that would affect my colorblindness, but would not affect game balance, even though i would still have a disadvantage that way.
And thats why i ask the people with motion sickness how they would compensate the balance change they ask for, but it seems most people just dont care about the balance that doesnt affect them.
"And thats why i ask the people with motion sickness how they would compensate the balance change they ask for, but it seems most people just dont care about the balance that doesnt affect them."
It's not that. The issue is the balance factor, while it exists, isn't a significant one.
It's like reducing the time it takes to kick gens by 0.25s. It makes the motion feel more fluid but ultimately doesn't give killer much of an advantage, and certainly isn't worth using up a perk slot on, as it's less impactful than a tier 1 Brutal Strength.
Similarly, providing a FoV slider that goes to say, 100 degrees maximum (let's concede the 2 additional degrees from Shadowborn), wouldn't significantly enhance general killer effectiveness, or hinder survivor Stealth plays. Because generally, if you can evade the killer with 87 degrees of view, you can evade them with 100 as well.
I am absolutely in favour for retaining the stealth aspect in this game, but 10 degrees of view for the killer isn't going to kill that.
-
Playing Trapper is likely a large part of it.
His power is more strategy-based than dexterity, and being a basic "M1" killer besides his traps means your general gameplay is relatively 'simple' (not in a bad way, just less nuance than things like aiming with ranged killers, etc.)
Your success in any given game is likely mostly down to your trap placement, and the mistakes the survivors make around them.
That's not to say you don't also do well with other 'M1' killers, but I expect you don't do well with say, Nurse.
For a similar reason, I play console, and do amazingly well with killers like Dredge and Ghostface, but suck as all hell with ranged killers, or killers with fine-tuned aiming mechanics like Blight and Oni.
-
On 1 and 2, agreed.
"3. MMR- this ######### is ass. Not trying to he a troll but it really is. Atleast change it back to rank/grade based for now idk."
The old rank based matchmaking was worse than the current MMR, and if you think otherwise you're blinded by nostalgia.
There's still several problems with MMR, but not all of them are fixable:
- Matchmaking will always be constrained by the number of available players within each MMR bracket. So matchmaking has to be flexible enough to account for this during off-peak times. This leads to the unavoidable reality of poor match ups. The alternative means longer queues and most would prefer shorter queues with sub-par matches than longer queues with closer matches. This is mainly because closer matches actually result in sweatier games. Basically, you don't actually want what you're asking for. This was determined during the last bunch of MMR tests in the spring.
- Backfilling, as a consequence of lobby dodging, is going to require more lenient matching as well, otherwise players who already waited for a lobby will end up waiting even longer for that survivor who left to be replaced.
The main issue with MMR that does need adjusting, is how survivor MMR is calculated. For killer it's not too bad, because it's based on averages and each game gives you four variables to calculate, over the course of say 10 games, that's 40 data points, and it does end up being a more-or-less rough estimate of your 'ability to kill'. For survivors however, whether you die or escape is only partially under your control.
By fixing survivor MMR, despite the above-mentioned 'unfixable problems', it should result in more successful matches. Because what the game 'thinks' is a good match up will be closer to an actual close match, with more accurate MMR data.
So it needs to take into account more than just whether or not you escaped. It needs to factor in; Time spent on objectives, Time spent in chase, number of stuns/blinds, and then whether or not you escaped. You can't factor in healing or hook saves as those could either be at the mercy of other survivors, or lead to survivors farming each other off the hook. It needs to be in relation to survivor-killer interactions. Time spent on objectives determines you ability to avoid the killer outright, time spent in chase determines you ability to run the killer and avoid basic hits, stuns is self-explanatory, and then an escape on top of that would determine if it all paid off. Four scores, equal weighting, averaged, multiplier applied for relative difference to killer MMR, bam! You have your MMR adjustment for that game.
This would still allow you to secure a half-decent MMR if you were chased all game and died. You could get 0 for objectives and 0 for surviving, but your chase and stuns would be on point and you'd come out MMR neutral depending on the level of the killer.
Just a bit of brainstorming for fun:
Objectives: 4 points per gen or totem, capping out at 20. -10 if you fail to make any objective progress
Chase: 4 points for every 30 seconds, capping out at 20. -10 if you aren't chased at all
Stuns: 5 points per stun/blind event, capping at 20. (blast mine counting for one) no penalty for failing to make a stun
Escape: 20 for an escape, -20 for dying.
Divide by 4, giving you the potential to hit anywhere between -10 and +20, before the killer relative multiplier is applied.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248455#Comment_3248455
That would allow injured survivors to purposely do generators while injured, with the knowledge they could just heal with eruption goes off. And eruption doesn't have a 100% success rate, because killers don't 100% kick every generator on the map before knocking someone to the ground.
Again, nerfing SWF without nerfing solo is healthy for the game. It's the good way to bridge the gap between solo and SWF. Making eruption affect SWFs should be seen as a good thing, because SWFs shouldn't be able to bypass so many game mechanics when they use voice communications.
But blocking the gen instead of causing incapacitated does just that. Nerfs SWF without nerfing solos.
Giving Eruption some form of AoE effect just moves the problem somewhere else. Instead of 'letting go of the gen' when their team mate is about to go down it's 'let go of the gen and move 8? meters away'.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3247988#Comment_3247988
The perk is designed to be a surprise. The fact that SWFs can bypass this mechanic doesn't change this.
The fair solution would be to make eruption an AoE incapacitate, so it can affect solo q and SWF more equally. This solution shouldn't affect solo q very much, since it's very unlikely they would know exactly when to let go of a generator. Solutions that nerf SWFs, without nerfing solo q, are very healthy for the game.
But Eruption is currently balanced around the fact that it doesn't have a 100% success rate.
The fact that it doesn't have a 100% success rate is almost purely down to the discrepancy between solo and SWF. If you made it so even SWF was effected by it, then it would be too strong, and would require a nerf.
So why not just change the effect to something else that achieves both of those things? Block the gen instead of inflicting survivors with Incapacitated.
-
@Shartley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248436#Comment_3248436
We (or rather good, competent developers) don't balance games off of guarantees we balance games off of potential, otherwise the skill ceiling becomes unbearable - which it currently is. Ultimately I'm afraid this conversation will devolve into whether or not the game should be balanced for casuals or people who actually utilize mechanics to their fullest. It's fine if this game wants to be Mario Party with killers, it just needs to make up its mind what it wants to be, because right now its "trying" to be both - though if you take BHVR by their actions/game design the decision they made is clear.
You're right, you should balance games for their potential, not an average. But you need to account for the casual player base too, or the average skill level, whatever you want to call it.
There are ways to balance the high end without negatively impacting the middle.
Instead of short-sightedly grabbing the low hanging fruit and 'handicapping SWF', which comes with collateral damage, how about working around the issue to find a solution that does that?
Which is exactly what I've been saying. Buffing solo players through QoL information/communication tools, that don't increase the capabilities of SWF, is perfectly possible, and achieves the same goal. It narrows the gap between solo and SWF. Once that gap is smaller, you have a position with which to balance the survivor v killer equation.
-
@oporopolist said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248440#Comment_3248440
I don't believe that to be the case. My nephew isn't a "press button to win" player. He will grind to get better. But he's only going to grind to get better if he is having some fun while doing it. Make the whole expereince as unfun as it has been for him this weekend and what is the incentive to even want to play the game if you can't enjoy it while you "git gud"?
So what's not fun? Is it not fun simply because you didn't get to walk out of the exit gate?
What about everything else that lead up to it? Evading the killer, the chases, stunning the killer, making rescue plays.
You're playing a horror game, you should be able to appreciate getting killed.
If you're not having fun now, you won't be having fun when you can play the game either, because you'll still get killed half the time.
So many people complain about solo survivor, at all skill levels, simply because they can't accept dying in a horror game. This is what you need to learn to accept, this is why I enjoy playing solo survivor while there are tons of players who think it's "literally unplayable", despite us playing the exact same game.
-
@oporopolist said:
@Seraphor Well, I do call it a game issue. And if the point of the free weekend is to get more people playing to cut down on queue times..... It's a FAIL, because these new players are having such a horrid time that they are not going to carry on playing it. So great, reduced the queue times for the veterans this weekend, but none of these new players (that spent this weekend being cannon fodder) are going to stick around to reduce the queue times next week, or the week after..... Remind me again how VHS died? ;)
Again, this is a player issue, and maybe a generational one too. It's all immediate gratification. Press button to win.
-
@Shartley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248425#Comment_3248425
Then they are free to do that. I think that's a significant enough pain in the ass to prevent a sizeable majority of players from doing it. I also completely disagree with the basic premise of your argument that SWF doesn't provide an inherent advantage. Simply knowing who the best player on your team is provides an advantage, simply knowing that at least ONE player on your team won't hang you out to dry when you're on hook, simply knowing that if your friend isn't doing gens when they should be you can tell them what the right play is. These are all significant advantages, and don't even come close to the level of coordination that high level SWF can utilize.
"I also completely disagree with the basic premise of your argument that SWF doesn't provide an inherent advantage."
Reread what I said.
I never said it doesn't, I said it isn't a guarantee.
My personal experience: I'm far more successful in solo queue, because I'm not bombarded with ######### talk from my friends in one ear that distracts me and drowns out key game sounds, and can actually focus on the game I'm playing. I play with my friends for fun, because they're my friends, but we don't succeed more because of it. I play more cautiously as a solo survivor, and I tend to escape more often than not because I run things like Kindred and Sole Survivor. When I play with friends, like most SWF, we're overly altruistic and end up dying trying to save each other.
If I'm further handicapped for playing with my friends than I already am, then that's going to make me resent playing with them at all.
-
@oporopolist said:
@Seraphor with the greatest of respect, telling new players that the only way they are going to get a fair game, is by playing against their complete beginner friends in a custom game? And BTW, although this weekend is the free weekend, if you wait a month or two you'll be able to play with bots......
I suspect that matchmaking is completly skewed to minimise queue times, to the point where any killer who has been waiting long enough, and one of these survivor "noobs" presses the ready button..... they are just going to get thrown into that game, regardless of their MMR, skill, or playtime. That is a game issue, not a player issue! They would have been prepared to have longer lobby times for a "fairer" game.
You can call it a game issue, but the alternative is players waiting for 10, 20 , 30 minutes to queue into a 5 minute game...
That's how VHS died, absurdly long queue times.
What's better? Playing the game but losing the first few times until you learn how to play (like literally any game, grow a pair), or not being able to play at all because the game is coddling you like a baby and won't let you near the dangerous killers because they might hurt you?
-
@Shartley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/352545/how-can-we-buff-killers-if-well-buff-solo-q
I have no problem with solo Q, its SWF that I need a handicap.
This is backwards.
You can't handicap people simply for playing with their friends, and SWF doesn't guarantee an advantage, it only provides the possibility of one.
That possibility is significant, and the advantage is significant, but it's not guaranteed. It's also provided by the innate ability to coordinate via communication, which can't be prevented and is basically the cornerstone of all team based games.
Even if they implemented some kind of tangible handicap for SWF, all players would have to do is lobby dodge until they queue into the same lobby, exactly like they used to, in order to avoid the handicap.
SoloQ needs QoL improvements to provide information, and the ability to coordinate, at a similar level to SWF. That's the only way to balance it fairly. But this would mean bringing soloQ up to a similar level as SWF would result in a decreased kill rate and more sweaty killer games, thus the need for some kind of adjustment in the killers favour. But how much that needs to be likely can't be ascertained until soloQ is closer to SWF level. It may not be much at all.
-
@oporopolist said:
Escape every time? LOL They are not escaping at all! Losing is fine, if it is losing a fair match! They have no issue with that. Putting them against people with skill and experience, which makes for a completely one-sided game, and then telling them to get used to it, "someone has to" lose, and they should "learn how to lose". Anyway, I learned my lesson and wont make the same mistake again.
Find a new killer player to go against then. Matchmaking is telling you they don't exist. The game cant create players that don't exist. This isn't a game issue, it's a player issue.
Play custom games (soon to come with bots btw) until you learn how to play, then you'll get your fair matches, when you can play at the same level as other players.
-
This is partly why I was against a flat increase to gen times. Gens were going too quickly, but simply increasing gen times across the board makes survivor less engaging and leads to situations like this.
Instead, there should be a dynamic scaling system, that makes gen repairs quicker when survivors are eliminated, or slow if gens are repaired without any survivors being eliminated.
-
@oporopolist said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248398#Comment_3248398
If they play enough? That's the point. They won't become regular/veterans if this is their experience of the game. If that is there introduction to the game they are not going to carry on playing it. To quote my nephew, "It's just not fun to play", when I asked him why he wasn't going to play anymore.
That's on the player.
We can all watch others playing on twitch or youtube, you know it's not that miserable once you learn how to play the game. But you have to learn how to play the game before you get there, you are going to die over and over again the first handful of games you play. You need to accept that, and if you don't, you're not going to enjoy this game at any level. Hell there's masses of survivor mains at higher levels who still whine and moan about the game because they don't get to escape all the time. You're not meant to be able to escape every time. Learn how to lose, it's a PVP game, someone has to.
How do you play single play survival-horror games? You die, over and over again, you reload your save each time, and replay it until you don't die, and then you move on to the next threat, and so on. Carry the same logic over to DBD, and accept that you have to die a lot to start with.
-
In order for new players to be matched with other new players, there has to be other new players to match with.
The age of the game, player retention rates, new player growth rates, etc. simply don't allow for that to be a significant number. Any new player will eventually become a regular/veteran player if they play enough.
-
Most killers don't need buffs across the board, they need individual tweaks, add-on passes, etc. Any general killer buffs just make the top tier killers better disproportionately to how well they buff the lower tier killers anyway.
One thing however, would be QoL enhancements like a FoV slider. Not game breaking at all, but it frees up a perk slot for Shadowborn users.
Other things could be removing the recoil on Trickster knives so that he can be used on console, and the implementation of joystick deadzone settings so ranged killers in general are more viable on console. As console killers are disproportionately at odds with PC killers, compared to PC vs console survivors.
-
@Lobos said:
And why do people play killer more often than survivor now? Why is the incentive almost always on Survivor? Or why do people feel the need to only play "Survivor with their friends?" It's not a difficult conclusion, playing Survivor is not very fun most of the time and is mostly extremely boring and tedious.
Speak for yourself. I enjoy solo survivor. Cleared all of the halloween and current tome survivor challenges that way.
The key is to 1. not play so recklessly, and 2. expect to and learn to handle losing. It's a pvp game, you should lose roughly 50% of the time, accept it. Escaping isn't everything. If I've completed my challenge, had a good chase, done gens, made rescues, and made a decent score, I couldn't give two shits if I walked out of an exit or not. I'll likely still gain a pip, and my actions could have secured the escape of my team mates.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248347#Comment_3248347
Technically stretched res did have advantages for killer, but only very specific cases and only due to its change to the vertical and not horizontal view. Nurses could use it to be able to see a bit better while fatigued due to it having more viewing potential at the top of the screen, same with any other camera locks that force the camera downward like billy's chainsaw. Nowhere near the same thing, but it was more than nothing.
That said, don't bother with the arguments. People thinking that higher FoV means no stealth don't even understand how FoV works, its relation to human FoV (roughly 135 degrees when including peripheral,) the physiology of why FoV issues cause motion sickness, or even simple concepts like not every player uses the same display size/distance. They're ignorant at best, disingenuous at worst. You can explain it all day but if they disagree they'll be right back in the next topic spewing the same misinformation.
I said exactly this about Nurse on the previous page.
But I think it needs to be said, if not for those 'arguing' back about it, then for general awareness and to get the devs attention so they can see the support for it.
-
@sulaiman said:
yes it would negate, because a lot of times you have to rely on turning a corner and ducking down and the killer not seeing you at once. That is a thing, even if you claim it shouldn´t be a thing. Do you have any arguments why not?
Also, any sources to back up the claim people only use shadowborn for mothin sickness and never for advantage? I mean we had people claim in this forum they only used streched res for astetics, not for advantage.
Because it's simply not worth taking up a perk slot. I never see Shadowborn run personally at all, and I would never use it, because it doesn't give you any advantage. Evidenced by the fact that stretched res (which does the same for first person view as an increased FoV) didn't offer any advantage to the killer.
Try working out if the killer has Shadowborn based on the angle of their red stain. You can't. It's negligible. But in terms of ease of playing, in terms of quality of life, it would make the game feel much better.
Base is 87 degrees, Shadowborn is 102 degrees, basically 90 vs. 100 illustrated below. If you can evade the sight of a killer with 90 degrees FoV, you can evade that with 100 too.
And yet the difference between 90 and 100 degrees is significant for first person gameplay and precisely why so many other games have a FoV slider.
-
Then play survivor when survivor has the bonus, and then swap to killer when killer has the bonus?
That's the entire point of the bonus, to balance the queues. If more people would do this, it would be more even between the two roles.
-
Agreed with visible load outs while in the game.
You can't guarantee everyone will look at them, but it'll be a huge QoL improvement for those that do.
-
Iri Tombstone is 'fine'. In that it's fine for an ultra rare add on to provide a killer as limited as Myers with an effect like that. However pairing it with an add on that allows you to stalk more or faster is not 'fine'.
Much like Iri Head Huntress was nerfed so that she couldn't increase her capacity above 1, Myers should also have the stipulation that running Judith's Tombstone means his minimum required stalking time never drops below a certain threshold, so it takes a minimum of say 3-4 gens or several hooks in order to acquire it.
Syringe should get the BNP treatment. Over the next 16s, the survivor will passively gain 50% of a health state, and require a skill check or it fails. This means you need to recover 50% first, and then the survivor being healed has to complete the skill check to receive the additional 50%.
-
@Nos37 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248122#Comment_3248122
Survivors' undetectable is lockers. Killer Instinct reveals survivors in lockers.
You realise this is an asymmetrical game right? Killer is supposed to have the upper hand, and nowhere is supposed to be 100% safe for survivors.
-
Maybe if this was consigned to specific perks, that worked at specific ranges. Something akin to I'm All Ears for survivors, in which 'Gut Instinct' showed the killer when within 24m for x seconds after x action or something, and there weren't a load of different perks that provided it, only one or two. This would allow killers to play around it and know when to expect it, so stealth killers could still function.
In terms of giving survivors more info that wasn't blocked by blindness and the like though, I'd much rather 'Survival Instinct', in which it shows survivors the locations of other survivors. This could be used to provide solo survivors with information similar to that which SWF gets for free, without providing SWF with any additional information they don't already have.
Any info you provide to survivors about other survivors is ultimately stuff SWF already have access to. However any additional info you give to survivors about the killer, is info that can be shared and quadrupled via SWF, making SWF even stronger relative to solo.
The wider the gap between SWF and solo, the more unbalanced the game becomes, because killers need to be buffed to be able to cope with SWF, which makes solo even more unbearable. You end up balancing 4Ks against solo's, with 0K's against SWF and calling that an 'average 2K' where no one is ever actually happy.
-
@sulaiman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248253#Comment_3248253
But some of us still like to be more stealthy, and i think it should still be a thing. Again, i am not against accessibility, but where it the thing you give to stealth players to compensate?
It would still be a thing. The extra 15 degrees (7.5 either side) from Shadowborn is not a game changer, otherwise killers would actually use it as such. As it stands Shadowborn is only used to alleviate motion sickness from playing with binoculars strapped to your eyeballs, or to prevent the niche scenario of a survivor 'hiding' on your toes, which shouldn't be a thing anyway.
You know how we're always talking about giving solo survivor QoL info and then buffing killers in turn for bringing solo closer to SWF levels? This would be an ideal way of doing that. It wouldn't negate any survivor playstyles other than hiding on the killers toes, and would more or less just be a QoL enhancement for killers.
-
Cheaters can't add assets to your game client, so there's no way a cheater could have created a 'Spectral' perk tier with a unique colour unless it was already in the game.
Maybe it's in there for testing purposes or something. Allowing devs to test different variables without needing tp update the game.
The {0} and {1} are placeholder values for variables, they've appeared before when a bug fails to confirm the perk tier and displays it as tierless or tier 0.
As for why it's appeared, could just as easily be a bug or a cheater.
-
It's about 5 seconds.
-
Dredge. Can't beat his map control unless you play Nurse/Blight/Billy. Love his loop mind games. And Nightfall is just the cherry on top.
-
@Grandpa_Crack_Pipe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248100#Comment_3248100
Wasn't having a better view a problem with stretched res?
Stretched Res didn't actually help the killer at all. It only gave one killer a tiny advantage, Nurse could still see the survivors feet when she was staring at the ground during her fatigue.
This is because of the difference between first and third person view.
Shadowborn doesn't actually make it any harder to be stealthy as a survivor, you still need to break line of sight whatever you do, because killers can just turn around, and they can turn around quicker than you can move out of the way.
In fact I don't think I've ever seen anyone run Shadowborn for a gameplay advantage. It's always for comfort, or quality of life. Does that warrant using up a perk slot?
There is one scenario in which Shadowborn does help the killers in terms of stealth, and frankly it's one I think should be 'basekit' anyway. It's when survivors hide directly in front of you, crouching on your toes, and you can't see them.
It's an absurd form of "stealth play" and should go the same way as Flashlight saves, via enabling a higher default FoV.
-
It should be 4 seconds, and work twice, once for each hook state.
3 seconds is too short, to the point that any killer with mobility just catches right back up to you 3 seconds later. And if it worked on each hook state, then it would be a true tunnelling deterrent, as the killer would know you had it the second time.
-
I literally faced a facecamping Bubba yesterday.
-
I go against more bad Nurses than I do good ones. There's a reason why her kill rate is so abysmally low. She's not a pressing issue, and when they do come to look at her, they have to be very careful not to change things that will impact lower skilled players more than the higher skilled ones, otherwise her kill rate will just go down even further.
The only thing I'm kinda on board with, is the idea of resetting her charges when she get's stunned. This means higher skilled survivors (who are more likely to face the higher skilled Nurses) will be able to slow her down more, as they're more likely to get Pallet stuns, Head Ons, and DS stuns.
-
Any time you're getting value out of it.
The only time it wouldn't be allowed if is everyone is slugged and you have no reason not to start hooking at least one of them, but you don't. Then you could potentially be reported for griefing.
-
@Rudjohns said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3247345#Comment_3247345
Imagine not finding gens boring?
You're playing a horror game, where your main objective is to repair gens to escape. You're meant to be on the edge of your seat, holding onto that gen as long as you can, wondering if the killer is going to suddenly appear and kill you.
I'm personally having tons of fun playing solo survivor. It's killer that's boring.
Running around and around and around a safe pallet 50, 100, 200 times because the survivor refuses to drop it unless they're 100% certain it's going to smack you in the face.
Yawn.
-
Will you be complaining about how 'unfun' it is that they taking away Slugging when survivors get basekit unbreakable?
Slugging is fun for the killer, you get to watch the survivors suffer for 4 minutes! Fun!
-
Stop dealing with other peoples problems! Sort mine out first!
-
@Chocolate_Cosmos said:
If you read it you know you would not play it unless you heavy relly on your other Scourge Hooks or you just play all 4 of them. That perk just adds extra location for Scourge Hook and the other effect is usualy garbage anyway.
Pretty much this.
I'd imagine facecamping Bubbas get value out of it via Pain Res on a basement hook. Maybe Floods in the case a rescue is made, particularly if it's not a Bubba who's facecamping.
-
Skill checks can only appear once every 3 seconds at most. So wait until you get a skill check, then let go before the next one.
-
It's by design, pallet drops aren't instant. It takes half a second or so for the pallet to fall, and the stun occurs about half-way. So if the killers attack connects in the first half, both the stun and the hit go through.
-
@Gorik said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3246694#Comment_3246694
I play PC and console and I have no issues on either. I use to on console until i turned my sensitivity down a bit.
Unfortunately you need sensitivity turned up to full for pretty much everything else.
-
Everyone on console would like to disagree.
If flashlight saves are "so easy" on PC, why can't they be easy on console too?
-
Nah, the more people who play both roles the better. I'm fed up of "Survivor Mains" and "Killer Mains" who think the opposing side drown kittens for a living.
-
No, because this game tends towards snowballing.
If survivors are better than the killer, it's very easy to get 4 escapes or at least 3.
But if the killer is better than it's substantially easier to get a 4K or a 3K.
4K's might be rarer than 3K's due to the hatch mechanic, but 2K games are probably the rarest.
-
@Ghoste said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3245123#Comment_3245123
Maybe. I still think running perks that depend on your team being dead is a bit selfish and hurts the team's chances overall. But hey, play how you want.
I usually run at least Sole Survivor as a solo survivor, though my other three will be things that can help all of us. Just as an insurance policy against an otherwise unwinnable game. I can afford to lose 1/4 perks if we do well enough to all escape, and if we don't, then I get Distortion-light and a decent chance of getting an exit open.
-
@TeabaggingGhostface said:
Can they just remove the hook and gen bubbles already
Or just cut their time down from 4s to about 2s. This should be quick enough that the killer is still within Kindred range and you can tell which way they go.
-
@Ghoste said:
It's unfortunate that this build probably reduces your team's chance of escaping overall. No exhaustion (not counting Adren), no anti-tunnel, no healing, no gen speed.
It's a great build if your team throws the match early, though.
Anti-tunnel isn't necessary if you're playing to survive to the end game anyway. That is, you're playing cautiously and not putting yourself into danger unnecessarily.
I routinely opt out of running an Exhaustion perk, especially in solo queue, because the way you have to play as a solo survivor means you shouldn't be getting into unnecessary chases.
And over all, survivor is perfectly playable with no perks whatsoever. Hell I did exactly that completely by accident yesterday, when I jumped on Rebecca for the first time. No perks, or item, and still escaped. Did I get lucky? Sure, but that's what this game is about.
You don't need +5% healing to be able to heal, or +5% repairs to be able to repair, when the way you play in the game itself, and the way the killer plays specifically, can have a relative effect of +/-50% to the success of either of those things. They just give you a slight edge, and maybe you'll end up needing that edge maybe you won't.