SuzuKR
SuzuKR
About
- Username
- SuzuKR
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
Meh, there’s nothing inherently wrong with camping. It’s a risky strategy with ups and downsides that can be punished.
-
Yes. If you don’t want to play, don’t queue up and ruin the game for 4 others.
-
If this existed, it would need to be in a separate queue mode.
The killer would need to be hidden so people can’t just counterpick the killer.
And there would need to be perks that cannot be banned for quality of life. Probably Borrowed Time and Corrupt Intervention as the only two.
-
@zarr said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737930#Comment_2737930
And I appreciate the detailed response, very cool to see.
I know you ran this by the team and your response is informed by that, and I won't pretend to know more about this stuff than the dev team does, but I do want to clarify on some things here, and be it to get another response that can clear them up for me instead.
You say it is uncommon for games these days to have the server handle the hit registration process, but above I linked articles regarding two of the most popular FPS games out there, and they explicitly state they use the server to calculate and confirm hits, and as opposed to DbD they don't even let the clients do prediction on that. I could find similar info regarding Rainbow Six Siege, Apex Legends and Unreal Tournament. Am I overlooking something, or are these games an exception?
With regards to players having to predict or lead shots, games usually solve that by employing lag compensation on the servers, i. e. having them roll back game time calculatively according to time stamps of the client info coming in, and checking whether the game state allowed for a hit to happen at the time of the input, thereby taking into account both players' real-time positions and the hitter's view angle.
But even without lag compensation I can't really see that it would be a big issue at normal latencies to have the server decide whether a hit happens. Yes, the killer on their own end still appears ever so slightly closer to the survivor even at low latencies than they are on the server, but at <50ms and with taking into consideration extrapolation on the survivor position, I have a hard time imagining that killers would regularly get overruled hits here. At those latencies it should only at all happen for hits connecting at the very last "pixels" of the attack range, and those are rare instances, instances that can regularly be avoided by the player, and instances in which getting overruled hits if they do happen would not seem very off either, since the player is going for very ambitious attempts. You could also refrain from having the killer client predict hits, such that they won't even get false feedback in these instances, or apply whatever you are doing to make false feedback on validated Dead Hards less frequent an occurence to these instances as well.
And while it is true that killers would have to account for their latency more if they have a bad connection, by making sure they are getting a bit closer to the survivor on their screen before they go for a hit, there are a lot of situations in which that is possible, there's not always a pallet around the survivor can get to just because the killer did not go for a max. range lunge beforehand. And regardless, with the current system survivors of course do have to account for latency, "predicting" how much closer to them the killer is than it appears on their screen. And so even if overruled hits would be a more frequent occurrence even at relatively average latencies with a server-based hit system, I wonder why it is deemed okay for players on the survivor side to have to compensate for latency (and not only their own latency but the killer's as well), and to receive "impossible" hits frequently, but not for killers to have to account for (merely their own) latency and get overruled hits.
I do appreciate the fact that you actually tested a server-based hit system and of course can see and experiment with things in action that we can only theorize about. But I would still like you to reconsider whether making the server the authority on hits isn't still desirable, and more frequent overruled hits simply the trade-off in a fairer system that leads to less impossible hits from the other perspective. Lag compensation might also be something you could look into.
Apart from that, I would like to ask you to at least reconsider whether the current general hit validation implementation should not already be used at latencies below the ~300ms threshold it seems to currently fall to. Players are already experiencing severe disadvantages facing killers with latencies of 100+ms, and as such I think making 100ms the threshold would be more reasonable.
The very least you could consider doing for players is show the killer ping to survivors, either already in the lobby, or in the in-trial match details overlay. This would allow players to at least better adjust to the latency disadvantage in the respective match.
Bullets are way faster than movement speeds in any of those games. This is not applicable to DBD where almost the entirety of relevant movement is on drastically slower scales. Shooter games are not as forced to track ghosts because the bullet fires so fast there would be next to no movement difference possible between fire and hit time (and none technically, in hit scan). In games where it’s essentially a cat chasing a mouse through physically running at comparatively snail-like paces, that would be extremely problematic because of exactly what Peanits said. No matter what it does, it would not favor the killer because all information they receive is late significantly.
-
??? It sets it apart from other asymmetrical games BECAUSE you cannot fight the killer. The killers are literally magically super steroided by a literal evil eldritch creator god that can freely alter things like laws of physics as it pleases in its realm. The entire point is that since you cannot fight them, you have to outsmart them by delaying them in chases so others have time to power the exit gates. They are not something you are even able to dream of the capability of fighting directly.
-
@Sonzaishinai said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2736949#Comment_2736949
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be an impossible task to make it work without it "ruining gameplay"
Not now ofcourse, when the game was made originally
This game was never balanced or designed around PVP. So no. It would ruin gameplay regardless of what point it's done, because it's literally the antithesis to the core design of DBD. If you want a PVP Asymm, there's F13th (which is basically dead) and VHS as the two better known ones, and probably a few others.
-
Literally the worst idea I’ve ever seen. One of the things that sets DBD apart is the specific fact this is not possible.
-
Yes. Sensitivity doesn’t matter. Just means wider+quicker flick when using lower DPI.
-
@DragonMasterDarren said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494717#Comment_2494717
See the above statement, neither side is ok and shouldn’t exist, the difference is is that one side still plays within the game’s rules (however loosely they follow them) and mechanics while the other throws 90% of the intended defence tools the other side has in the dumpster
Nurse turns the game and chase into a mindgame that doesn't rely on mechanical aspect. It's entirely about who can out-mindgame the other, and any LOS blocker helps with that. With her, "weak" tiles are less weak and "strong" tiles are less strong, because it's not about the mechanical limitations but rather who can better out-mindgame the other with the given tools to gain/block LOS and inconsistent reactions to playstyles.
-
@DragonMasterDarren said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494706#Comment_2494706
I’m talking more about average players, I.e the people the devs actually want to balance around
tournaments are a entirely different can of worms that the devs don’t care about, and I will admit that surfs have the advantage there, but like I said, they don’t matter
the devs won’t fix Nurse because she’s too much for average players to handle, simple as thst
Tournament-level SWFs are too much for average players to handle too by that exact same logic. The other thing is the number of said players that can play at that level regardless for survivor or killer are an incredibly tiny percent of the playerbase. The chance of actually facing them in the first place is next to nothing, so they're near irrelevant for overall balance.
-
@DragonMasterDarren said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494703#Comment_2494703
That says more about the game’s ######### balancing in general more then anything
or rather it’s ######### balancing for something it was never meant to be, which is a competitive game
Or... that Nurse even without experiencing bugs isn't unstoppable by any means against good teams?
-
@DragonMasterDarren said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494692#Comment_2494692
Yes, unless it’s a Nurse and the bugs cease existing that match, in which case, the Nurse wins
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494693#Comment_2494693
I’m not happy about Nurse matches being decided by ######### coding. But if I was to make the choice between inconsistent bugs keeping a monster of a power in check, or letting that monster loose with nothing to keep it in check, I’d take the inconsistent bugs any day of the week
The tournament teams crushed the best Nurses in the world regularly even without them experiencing bugs lol.
-
@DragonMasterDarren said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494685#Comment_2494685
That’s because Nurse is a broken mess, if she wasn’t she’d win tournaments every single time if the Nurse player is good enough
Yeah that's why tournament SWF teams have regularly 3-4 man escaped against some of the world's best Nurses though :v
Marth got 4 man escaped against (forget the team name, it was one of Hexy's tournaments, Shift-W? Instant DC?), would've been 3 man escaped if not screwed by second blink bug at the end.
Alf got 4 man escaped against Oracle.
Xeno lost against Eternity completely.
-
@DragonMasterDarren said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494344#Comment_2494344
Do keep in mind that Nurse, even after receiving a cooldown to her power, nerfing the majority of her addons, AND having all of these bugs, is still capable of completely steamrolling every single match she is in on account of essentially playing a entirely different game to the rest of the cast
the bugs are honestly the one thing keeping her in check and half the time they don’t even matter, so the devs have to either make the choice between fixing Nurse or leaving her as is, and they pick leaving her as is because actually balancing something that ignores 90% of the survivors defences is a goddamn nightmare
She's balanced WITHOUT the bugs holding her back. The bugs don't happen every single time so they're not factored into balance. Fixing the bugs changes nothing except making her perform at the level she is SUPPOSED to be performing at/is balanced around.
-
She needs her bugs fixed (like the one preventing using your second blink), nothing else.
-
The second blink bug is excruciating.
-
@Apollos said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494522#Comment_2494522
No Mither doesn't leave pools of blood, but it leaves blood orbs. It's weird that they're two different mechanics.
Blood Orbs are from being injured. It has nothing to do with being Pools of Blood which is why Hemorrhage doesn't make more Blood Orbs spawn either.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494543#Comment_2494543
To which I agree- it would make zero sense to force the killer to chase a survivor and throw the game in the process, all to avoid being reported. That would just be harmful for the game.
Which is why I take my stance of "It's not a hostage situation as both were trying". It's a battle of attrition at this point- who will make a mistake first. The game is guaranteed to eventually progress as a mistake is guaranteed to be made, after all, and both sides are attempting to progress the game forward.
I feel like there should be some form of mechanic that at least just auto-ends the game after a certain duration. Chess has a similar thing called draw by repetition where if the same position occurs 3 times, the game can be ended as a draw, just so the game does not last infinitely long doing nonstop back and forth.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494493#Comment_2494493
Not quite. The survivor's job isn't to do generators, the survivor's job is to escape. To survive. That's it. The generators are a means to an end.
The killer's job isn't to sacrifice survivors, it's to prevent their escape. You could argue these two things are too closely linked to make a real distinguishment but there is a difference there (look at Pyramid Head or Moris, for example).
Stealth is a valid tactic to escape (hiding in a bush, for example), however it's when they do nothing that it becomes a hostage situation. These survivors were still acting and, again, it can be assumed that if the killer had chased one the others would have began generator repairs. Which is why I don't think it is a hostage situation- as the game can still progress easily. By the killer going for a survivor.
The killer having to chase after bait like that is throwing the game though. That’s just giving away generator progress for free after the killer successfully 3-genned them when it was entirely preventable before it got to that point. That’s my point of contention. I agree with what you’re saying, but it would also seem unreasonable to mandate a killer to chase in that situation.
-
Not sure why it matters at all but I’ve had it happen with pretty much any killer I play normally (Trapper, Wraith, Nurse, Doctor, Legion, Demogorgon, Oni, Pyramid Head, Blight, Trickster, Nemesis, Pinhead) at one point or another. With the absolute majority of cases, people just hide in the complete opposite corner of the map and never ever touch generators which I already know is reportable/bannable, but I wanted to know whether this specific case would be reportable or not from official word-of-mouth. I’ve had cases like these where they’d make the world’s worst chase baits but never touch generators anyways.
-
@oxygen said:
If they're approaching but running away that probably still counts as trying to do a gen, as I'd assume if one of them actually gets chased the other would hop on a gen. Not really any different to the killer not taking the bait and staying by the gens.
Not exactly fun for anyone involved, and in my experience very rare as it usually doesn't take long for one side, the other or both to get bored.
The problem I’d have with cases like this is people run at me to try and make me chase them, but the second I turn to do so, they run completely away from the 3-gen which makes it stupid to chase cause that’s giving up the gen for free. So I don’t, and patrol gens. But even when I’m at one of the three gens, no one is trying to repair either of the other two I’m not at. Like yes, I would make my way over eventually at which point they could run off, but I’d be okay with THAT because they were at least repairing.
-
@ggallinftw said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494468#Comment_2494468
If you stay by your 3 gen and refuse to chase them when given the chance the you are technically holding the game hostage just as much as they are.
Except the killer’s role is both sacrificing survivors AND preventing escape (via preventing gens from going, hence the Gatekeeper Emblem). Survivor role is to finish the generators so they can escape. One is intended play. Hiding on the opposite end of the map and never touching generators is refusal to participate in normal gameplay, hence the example Peanits said is bannable. This is why I’m asking BHVR staff whether just chase baits and never touching generators is fine.
-
@ggallinftw said:
It is definitely not against the rules to try and counter a 3 gen strat. It would be silly if the survivors had to feed themselves to every killer who sets up a 3 gen.
That’s why I’m asking if bad chase baits is enough or if actually touching generators is required, from an official BHVR staff member. Refusing to touch generators or do anything at all and hide on the opposite end of the map is an example of something Peanits said is bannable.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2494424#Comment_2494424
i agree.
but here. read this again
" Specifically if they’re making no attempt to finish generators "
it is an attempt. whether it's useful or not is not the point
(but i mean put yourself in the survs shoes. that bait is the only way to guarantee a win. even if it doesn't work first or second time. they could keep doing it until one of them baits too hard and dies. or the killer actually falls for the bait and loses. a 3-gen situation is very manageable for any killer. so holding them would probably give you good odds of winning)
I guess I’m just more the mindset people should be repairing whatever generators of the 3 the killer isn’t at at a given moment, as someone that plays both survivor and killer evenly and considers 3-gens as always preventable ahead of time/a result of failure of prevention.
Some form of maximum time limit in this case would be nice in my opinion just so games cannot go on ridiculously long in this sort of situation. For instance, an 8 minute timer or so once only one generator is left. Playing out a game that long at that point in such a 3-gen is just painful for both sides in my opinion.
Either way, at this point I just want to have an official confirmation either way so I can know for sure.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
counterargument: You're taking the game hostage by not letting the survivors finish the gens. and refusing to chase them!
on a real note. an attempt is being made ( a bait which you're refusing to take )
it's not bannable.
A bait that does nothing and gets nowhere if the killer doesn’t decide to throw the game willingly, because nobody is touching generators. It’s why I wanted to get an official BHVR response on the matter the way Peanits responded the first time around.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
I do not believe this counts as a hostage situation because an attempt is still being made to complete generators. The survivors do not wish to be hurt, and so will attempt to run the killer away from the 3gen, however as they keep returning over and over it's showing they are making an attempt, and were the killer to follow some bait then generator progress would be made.
However, as I'm unsure, I'm pinging in @MandyTalk in hopes she can shed some light into the situation.
I would agree if survivors were repairing and left when the killer came by, but in this case, the killer would literally give up the last generator for free to chase people not touching generators at all. So without the killer throwing the match, it still ends up as zero gen progress.
-
@Manky said:
I posted something about this a few hours ago and I think you have nailed it. One of your last points confuses me though as the hatch doesnt spawn until the number of survivors + 1 of all the generators are repaired, so with all 4 survivors alive the hatch wont even spawn until all 5 gens are done so needing half the gens to be done doesnt seem needed. But yeah, I love this.
Yeah, I realized that a few minutes after posting it and edited the main post to reflect that.