TAG
TAG
About
- Username
- TAG
- Joined
- Visits
- 9,205
- Last Active
Comments
-
I would argue that referring to it by diameter does the opposite of that.
-
@RainehDaze said:
I'm saying the radius is only useful insofar as it lets us derive information that is more relevant to the balance of it. Either area if you want to do the direct calculation, or diameter if you want to hack it together in 5s with no actual maths. Approximation has a place.
Though I think this thread was made because of people saying "only 24m". That's quite a lot if you can have that placed multiple times (the downside of BBQ is the exact same thing: < 40m radius from any hook on a surprising number of maps is "everywhere").
"I'm saying the radius is only useful insofar as it lets us derive information that is more relevant to the balance of it."
This is exactly why the radius is more useful. Even if you want to do an approximation, that's still easy to do with the radius. Like I said, there is NOTHING the diameter accomplishes that the radius doesn't.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2646153#Comment_2646153
And yet, people will still get radius intuitively wrong no matter how simple the maths is.
The centre of the map or the outer edge are likely the same across in most cases anyway. Because that's square, and that's simpler. And this is making assumptions for simplification for estimation.
As for why use the diameter in this case? Because if we're trying to do broad, super-quick estimates using squares, diameter maps to side length, radius doesn't.
I don't know what you're arguing against here. I'm not saying change the description. I'm saying it's not the useful value for most purposes related to boons and all its derived values are more practical.
"And yet, people will still get radius intuitively wrong no matter how simple the maths is."
That's their fault for getting it wrong.
"The centre of the map or the outer edge are likely the same across in most cases anyway. Because that's square, and that's simpler. And this is making assumptions for simplification for estimation."
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you somewhere because from how I see things, that's DEFINITELY not the case.
"As for why use the diameter in this case? Because if we're trying to do broad, super-quick estimates using squares, diameter maps to side length, radius doesn't."
If you have the radius, you know the length anyways. And from there, you can also calculate the area. The diameter doesn't accomplish anything meaningful that can't also be accomplished by the radius.
"I don't know what you're arguing against here. I'm not saying change the description. I'm saying it's not the useful value for most purposes related to boons and all its derived values are more practical."
I'm saying that the radius IS the useful value and that the diameter is the non-useful value. The radius tells you how far away you can be while still being under its influence. The radius tells you the actual area of influence. The radius tells you how many totems are needed to fill the range of influence with precision. I'm arguing against your claim that it's not the useful value because I think it is wrong because I think referring to the diameter can actually be misleading. If you refer to the totems range of influence as 48 meters, then someone else says "Oh, so I have to be 48 meters from the totem to get its effect?" Then you say "No, you have to be 24 meters." Then that person says "Oh...so why didn't you say that to begin with?"
Just to make a point about the misleading part:
"All boon totems cover a 48m area in a bubble"
This here is wrong. The area being covered by the boon totem is NOT 48 meters.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2645525#Comment_2645525
If enough people understood enough of maths, and had the ability to apply it on demand, that this mistake wouldn't happen, lotteries would probably be way less popular than they are.
"If I tell you a map is 100m across..." Pretty sure I already explained that part only one post earlier. Now, if I then grab the diameter, it's two totems to cross the map from side to side. Keeping to this rough estimate, if we then assume the map is square and use the diameter as the length of a square, we can estimate that four totems will give you most of the map covered--nearly 100% by the estimate.
And if we then use actual calculations, it's 10,000m^2 and 1809m^2, so those four totems actually cover ~72% of the map. Not bad for an estimate that required no actual specifics. Then compare with the size given for e.g. wreckers just now, and all the numbers line up pretty well.
"If enough people understood enough of maths, and had the ability to apply it on demand, that this mistake wouldn't happen, lotteries would probably be way less popular than they are."
They only need to apply the definition of radius. That is, at the absolute most, intro math in high school. We're not talking calculus here.
"If I tell you a map is 100m across..." Pretty sure I already explained that part only one post earlier."
Across what? The center of the map? The outer edge? Only now are you actually bothering to mention the shape.
"Now, if I then grab the diameter, it's two totems to cross the map from side to side. Keeping to this rough estimate, if we then assume the map is square and use the diameter as the length of a square, we can estimate that four totems will give you most of the map covered--nearly 100% by the estimate.
And if we then use actual calculations, it's 10,000m^2 and 1809m^2, so those four totems actually cover ~72% of the map. Not bad for an estimate that required no actual specifics. Then compare with the size given for e.g. wreckers just now, and all the numbers line up pretty well."
Why use the diameter? Why not use the radius? If the answer is "it's confusing," I refer to my statement about intro high school-level math.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2645500#Comment_2645500
It's on them, but it's not like it's an uncommon mistake; basic geometric knowledge isn't floating around the back of everyone's mind, and I'm sure some people are just using radius=range in their head.
As for the 100m not telling you anything, I mean, it does: it tells you how many totems you need to bridge it from one side to the other.
When we're doing quick and dirty estimates rather than exact calculations, mixing radius with lengths is asking for issues. If we're doing rigorous calculations, then we're not the people who need the reminder how radius and diameter are different. Also,
"I'm sure some people are just using radius=range in their head."
The radius is the range. That information is indeed correct.
"As for the 100m not telling you anything, I mean, it does: it tells you how many totems you need to bridge it from one side to the other."
What is 100 m? Length? Width? Diameter? Hypotenuse? What shape we talking here? Like I said, does not tell me anything.
"When we're doing quick and dirty estimates rather than exact calculations, mixing radius with lengths is asking for issues"
Only if you don't understand basic geometry. If you understand what a radius is and what a diameter is, you shouldn't be getting this wrong. If you do get it wrong, that is your fault for not understanding it, not the game's for using the radius.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2645358#Comment_2645358
Better coverage estimation?
If I tell you a map is 100m across, and the radius is 24m, then you might mistakenly think 100/24 ~= 4, so 4 totems needed to cross a map. But diameter is more useful there (you can fit two boon totems across the map). And then if you square it for area, you're off by a factor of 4 (thinking it'd take 16 boon totems to get majority map coverage, not 4).
Of course, this all relies on people's mental models being faulty, but if we're comparing with square maps, it's perhaps easier to rough it out as squares of length diameter rather than circles.
"Better coverage estimation?"
That's called the area. You determine the area using the radius.
"If I tell you a map is 100m across, and the radius is 24m, then you might mistakenly think 100/24 ~= 4, so 4 totems needed to cross a map."
If you tell me a map is 100 meters across, that doesn't tell me anything unless the map is a perfect square. I'd need to know the area of the map and then divide that by the area of a boon totem's influence (which, again, uses radius) to figure out roughly the minimum number of Boon totems are needed to cover the whole map.
The only way someone makes the mistake you are alleging is if they are confusing radius with diameter, which is on them.
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2645358#Comment_2645358
Radius is from the edge of the circle to the middle so if you only look at Radius your only looking at half the circle
That's not how area works at all. By using the radius to figure out the area, you are indeed looking at the whole circle.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2645331#Comment_2645331
And I'm telling you, it's not audible for 24m. It doesn't really matter what the description says there.
The formula for area involves the radius (that is how one describes a circle), but that doesn't mean that thinking about the perk in terms of its radius is a good one for balance.
"The formula for area involves the radius (that is how one describes a circle), but that doesn't mean that thinking about the perk in terms of its radius is a good one for balance."
This doesn't make sense. If figuring out the area a Boon perk covers flat-out invovles the radius, then what makes the diameter more useful for perk balance? What does the diameter demonstrate that the radius doesn't? Not area. Not range of influence. So then what?
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2645293#Comment_2645293
Pretty sure that killers don't hear boon totems within 24m; you need to be almost on top of the boon before it's going to be audible.
And when talking about how strong/weak boons are, the direct radius is only a proxy for relevant feature--map coverage. Basic range is more important for instantaneous effects: how far away before it does/doesn't activate. For boons, the question is: how much of the map can/cannot be blanketed at once?
Going by the perk description:
"Soft chimes ring out in a 24 meter range."
"how much of the map can/cannot be blanketed at once"
As far as I'm aware, the mathematical formula to determine that answer involves the radius, not the diameter.
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2644442#Comment_2644442
Not inaccurate to say it has a range of 24m no, but it's a little disingenuous.
Most other perk or powers that have an area of effect deal with survivor-to-killer or survivor-to-survivor interaction, where you're concerned about the distance between two dynamic points. Thus the radius is the relevant measurement.
Boon totems establish a fixed area of the map with the qualifyer being that you are within that area, and as such the relevant measure is the area of the map this takes up. So a diameter would be a more suitable measurement.
Boons aren't exclusive in this though. Arguably some perks such as Jolt, especially from the survivors perspective of getting the killer away from any gens it could affect, would be in a similar boat.
Basically if you're concerned about two points of interest where neither of those points are YOU, then diameter would be useful to take note of.
As far as perk descriptions go, standardising them all with radius is perfectly fine. It's not difficult to multiply by 2.
Strongly disagree. A range of 24 meters is exactly what it says on the tin. To a Survivor, it does not matter that the diameter is 48 meters because they have to be standing within 24 meters to get anything. To a Killer, it does not matter that the diameter is 48 meters bexause they have to be standing within 24 meters to hear the Boon Totem, and they know that a Survivor has to be standing within 24 meters to get anything. If you have two points of interest, you don't care about the diameter; you just care about the distance between them. Drawing a circular shape between you and those points of interest doesn't accomplish anything.
Also:
"the relevant measure is the area of the map this takes up. So a diameter would be a more suitable measurement."
The formula for the area of a circle is "pi times radius squared." You only need to know the radius of the circle to know the area, not the diameter. So I would argue that diameter is the less suitable measurement.
-
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2644462#Comment_2644462
But it doesn't cover just just 24 meters
It has a range of 24 meters. This is undisputable fact. No one is being misled when they are being told this. No information is being left out. If anything, saying "48 meters" is more misleading because 48 meters is the total diameter of the AoE, not the range that any individual Survivor has to be in to be affected by the Boon Totem. 24 meter range gives the exact amount of information all players need to understand its range of influence. Saying that the diameter is 48 meters is no better than a cashier telling someone how much their items cost entirely in cents.
-
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2644442#Comment_2644442
I'm not saying they're wrong but is the the full picture isnt not just 24 meters is 24 meters in every direction from the boon.
The full picture is "24 meters from the totem." Logic dictates that it would be 24 meters regardless of direction.
-
Report them?
-
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2644356#Comment_2644356
Its simple math but people see 24m on the perk and just repeat its only 24m
The perk description says it has a range of 24 meters. No one is saying anything inaccurate when they say it's 24 meters.
-
Can't wait for the big crossover collaboration where the Survivors in The Breakers have to team up with the Z Fighters to fight the Entity itself. Dead By Daylight will get a charm of a broken scouter lens.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2643711#Comment_2643711
Pretty sure it's bleeding players like crazy from all the hilarious bugs
According to Steam, it is currently the third most-played game at the moment (with #1 and 2 being CS:GO and Dota 2 respectively). Take that as you will.
-
@Raccoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2643539#Comment_2643539
Its usefulness is not tied exclusively to her stealth.
Most killers can benefit from it.
5s of exhaustion any time you approach or push someone off a gen is huge.
I don't think I'm capable of changing your mind at all, sorry.
I From my experience, the only thing it did was just stop Sprint Bursting off the gen (which isn't nothing, to be fair). I guess my main question with regards to it is "How do you prevent a Survivor from just waiting out the few seconds at a pallet or two?"
Maybe I'm being too pessimistic about it, idk.
-
@Raccoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2643503#Comment_2643503
I've used it on Pig recently to great success - I think it's pretty good on any stealth or speed killer.
Corrupt + Deadlocked is also amazing on Pig if you have not tried it.
Corrupt + Deadlocked is pretty nuts in general, imo, as they're uncounterable and add literal minutes to games.
How is it good on someone who has to go at molasses speed to qualify as a stealth killer, if I may ask? Of all the stealth Killers in the game, Pig's is by far the worst, and having to leverage it seems like a bad idea IMO.
-
Would you recommend it for Pig? I've tried it before and have always felt very disappointed by it.
-
@Nathan13 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642404#Comment_2642404
it’s a 5 second stun.. once you take it then the perk is gone. It’s not that bad.
I don't think the five second stun is overkill or anything. But a five second stun is pretty significant. But that's not where my problem lies with DS. My problem lies with the fact that you can get punished both for playing around it and for playing into it.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642404#Comment_2642404
I disagree with too fast. Just burn through it like a Chad.
Then I fundamentally disagree with the entire premise of your argument.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642394#Comment_2642394
It's not playing around the perk though.
Killers are expected to simultaneously force DS to avoid having to deal with it in the end game and avoid triggering it to avoid having to deal with it during the rest of the game. "Playing around the perk" means killing Survivors fast enough but not too fast. At that point, it's pretty much just "the counterplay is to beat the Survivor who may or may not have it."
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642385#Comment_2642385
...I literally opened this conversation with anecdotal evidence. I was offering a suggestion to the OP about what I do about DS, and now we're here.
You told me that not proc'ing DS intentionally is not playing around the perk. That's not anecdotal at all.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642381#Comment_2642381
Lemme tell you all about the consistent 3/4k's and how I'm punishing myself, and how I don't have DS in EGC.
Lemme get a book, hol'up.
Anecdotal evidence don't mean squat.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642370#Comment_2642370
I mean, I've said like, several times now that I just tunnel through it. I don't know how else to reword it.
The fact that you intentionally punish yourself for tunneling does not mean that it's suddenly not a punishment.
-
Am I wrong? DS wouldn't have the reputation that it does if was ineffective at buying the Survivor side time.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642355#Comment_2642355
I don't see the problem with tunneling through the perk. It does such a great job of preventing it and all. lol. In fact, I think I even opened the conversation saying to/that I just tunnel through it. Glad we agree that works, apparently.
It does not work without some degree of incompetency on the Survivor side. If it did, then DS would not be a meta perk by any stretch of the imagination.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642344#Comment_2642344
...But now it's out of the game, and ideally around when gen first gen pops, if not sooner.
[edit for clarity]
1) It did its job. In fact, it did its job in arguably the second best time for it to do its job (with the only better time being at the end once the gates are powered). The fact that it's single-use only doesn't change that.
2) If you're in a position where you can get two downs on the same person without losing a gen, then either that player is bad, you're hardcore camping/tunneling, or both. That's not a point in favor of DS being non-problematic IMO.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642294#Comment_2642294
I think removing it from the game and nullifying it is the opposite of that if you do it as soon as you feasibly can.
Activating it is the opposite of nullifying it. Activating it is making it do exactly what it is intended to do, which to prevent a single hook and heal one health state.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642294#Comment_2642294
I mean if survivors didn’t unhook that survivor with DS, that killer would have only had 1 kill anyway.
So the best thing to do is to force a trade. Which is equivalent to securing a 1k. Sometimes that can also turn into a snowball.
I don’t know how they would change that considering the alternative when survivors don’t run DS is just to die. Because survivors do not have built-in counters.
So my opinion is that at that point it becomes very situational on both sides. Because even when you have DS if the door is not close enough, there is no way they are getting out.
One kill is still one kill. Or it could be missing out on the second kill.
Also, hook trading is not terribly reliable at the end of the game (unless you are a Killer with a built-in one-shot), from my experience. Particularly not if there are multiple Survivors crowding at the hook.
I don't think there should ever be a situation where the Killer has zero chance to prevent the escape, even if the hook is right by the gate. Even if a SWF team goes into full-synergy mode, that's still not as much of a guarantee of an escape as someone with an active DS while close enough to an Exit Gate.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642208#Comment_2642208
I guess we already disagreed on the definition of playing into it, huh.
If the perk is actively designed to disincentivize tunneling, then intentionally forcing its activation is absolutely playing into it.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642182#Comment_2642182
I'm sorry, what is the problem?
The fact that part of "playing around it" involves directly playing into it.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642177#Comment_2642177
Glad we got that out of the way. I can see we won't agree, because it really is as simple as disable the perk as soon as you can.
"disable the perk as soon as you can"
And that is the problem.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642116#Comment_2642116
I mean, I feel that denying a DS two minutes into the round is not playing into it. And I think completely disrespecting it is also not playing into it.
Giving them a free DS in EGC because you're afraid to pick them up is playing into it.
"And I think completely disrespecting it is also not playing into it."
That is where I disagree. In fact, I would say I disagree with that completely in that completely disrespecting it is the exact definition of "playing into it."
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642111#Comment_2642111
Tunnel through it like a Chad.
So the way to play around it is to intentionally play into it.
EDIT: Or to just sit around and doing nothing while gens fly. Am I understanding this correctly? This is the counterplay to DS?
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642094#Comment_2642094
If they make it to EGC with the perk still up then you didn't play around the perk. You gave them a free DS in EGC.
So how do you play around the perk?
-
So what you're saying is that the penalty for DCing for Survivors should be that they don't get bloodpoints a single time, correct?
-
@SonicOffline said:
So their perk is supposed to be disabled because you couldn't confirm an earlier kill? How is that fair?
DS shouldn't be a perk that punishes both Killers who try to kill someone too quickly and Killers who try to play around the perk. When "don't let DS activate" and "force the DS activation" are two actual pieces of advice when trying to figure out how to counterplay the perk, we have a problem IMO.
-
@DbDPlaya said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2642052#Comment_2642052
I can't think another online game that has a bad dc penalty system as DbD. The DC penalty system should erase over time due to good behaviour. People shouldn't have to wait for days for DC penalty to reduce. Currently I should either not play or be lucky to not disconnect from a match for 5 straight days for DC penalty time to completely go away. (6hrs->1hr->30min->15min->5min) This is a very stupid design.
"The DC penalty system should erase over time due to good behaviour."
It does, to my understanding. As long as you keep playing games without DCing, the penalty should recede and eventually go away.
-
@ImBlissful said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2641295#Comment_2641295
I initially made this thread as an opinion piece made on morality.
To me, as well as to a solid group of other players I'm guessing, the thought of someone who enjoys making the game boring/unfun for others with nonstop facecamping is not a nice one, because in my own opinionated and morally driven experience (which should honestly be encouraged when playing a GAME for entertainment purposes), I don't like the idea of bubba campers giving themselves a pat on the back for the mere idea that they could be ruining others' fun.
My point with this thread is that, based on my own personal standards of morality when it comes to playing games, people who seek enjoyment out of the perceived suffering of others should have to find enjoyment in something less pointless at best and less harmful at worst.
I am of the belief that, barring any active rule breaking/cheating, players are not responsible for making sure that their random online opponents are having fun because the standards of what might be considered "fun" can radically shift from person to person. The camping Bubba is not obligated to care about the fun their opponent is having and vice versa. The only thing that matters is that no one is cheating or breaking rules. Beyond that, how each player wishes to handle their game is up to them.
As far as this particular issue, the solution is generally the same as it would be with other camping Killers: Gen rush and force the Killer's hand. "I don't want to potentially give the camping Bubba the satisfaction of successfully killing someone" sounds to me more like a personal problem of yours because that is the standard you are holding yourself to.
-
@Kiikii said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2640491#Comment_2640491
Your information on this is incorrect it's 60 seconds.
It hasn't been 60 seconds for a while.
-
@alaenyia said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2640542#Comment_2640542
I think with 50k people BHVR could find a happy medium. I still want to know why in probably 40-50 games I have seen the same 3 people for a third of that game play. If DbD is unwilling to deal with these people they should at least give the players some way to manage the situation on their own. I had a random survivor pop up in 4 of my lobbies today out of around a dozen games. He played fine, but again why am I seeing the same randos repeatedly?
"I think with 50k people BHVR could find a happy medium."
Considering that Overwatch tried the same thing and backtracked on it because it was abused, I doubt that a happy medium exists.
-
@ImBlissful said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2640590#Comment_2640590
you're missing the distinction between a win according to the game and what everyone else thinks, and a win according to a troll who wants to upset people
Why does it matter what the troll considers a win?
-
Pig still has about the same number of trash add-ons as she did before her add-on pass, so...
-
Agreed. It should have also been tossed out when they got rid of the ability to sabotage Trapper's Bear Traps.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2638942#Comment_2638942
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/3IRB3640ZKLZ/screenshot-20211113-185015.jpg
The only ss I have left is the one with a blurred name but here's the post
"The counter to _________ is to not lose."
-Some genius, probably
-
@Kurri said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2637865#Comment_2637865
It's like Resident Evil. Dead by Daylight having a Killer featured in the game for a specific franchise is strictly only advertising that the license owner is being paid for. Which the owner of the Stranger Things license is Netflix. They are pretty smart, and I highly doubt they would look at Dead by Daylight being competition over free advertising, like it is for every other license that Dead by Daylight pays for.
If I am putting my money on any reason why BHVR didn't renew the license was because the chapter wasn't making enough money. Demogorgon was never a very strong killer, and personally I haven't seen them played much. Either the characters. Up until they started to talk about how the product was leaving the store. It was all a money making idea on something that wasn't bringing in a lot of money. When Stranger Things is popular again on Netflix, we'll see the License come back on Dead by Daylight.
"They are pretty smart, and I highly doubt they would look at Dead by Daylight being competition over free advertising, like it is for every other license that Dead by Daylight pays for."
I can very much believe that they would see DBD as competition, especially if they decide they want to make a game similar to it in the future. Which is very much in the realm of possibility since they've got Stranger Things.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I don't understand why they removed the decreased rarity effect.
I could be misremembering, but if memory serves correctly, that part of the effect was bugged. They didn't know how to fix it, so they just opted to remove it instead.
-
@anarchy753 said:
The issue is that people don't want to run a perk that doesn't have tangible effects.
Ok you hear a boon destroy your hex. You don't go "well gee, I sure am glad they spent 48 seconds on that totem!" You still lost your hex, you still have to deal with a boon, and you had no way to counterpay it because you only know your perk did something after the fact.
It's still counterable by doing dull totems to drastically reduce the slow. It's also counterable by just cleansing a hex instead of booning it. It's also counterable by the fact that IT IS A HEX and may itself be the first hex removed, leading its grand total time wasted to be 14 seconds all match.
48 seconds is a LONG time, to be fair. That essentially means that the Survivor is spending more than half a gen's worth of time blessing one totem.
-
1) Honestly don't really know how to answer that question as far as best. As far as worst, I'd say right now ain't lookin' too great? That said, I didn't play the game at the earliest time of this game's life, and from what I can tell, that was nothing short of a nightmare.
2) Either map design or the bloodweb grind. Not sure which I'd put over the other.
3) Ehhh, not too thrilled. It seems like too few Killers are able to stand up against competent Survivors, and the gap between soloQ and SWF is pretty big in terms of play experience with not enough to close that gap.
4) Habits? It can be fun.
5) Shirtless Clown. Preferably pantless as well.
6) Probably a mix of both?
7) Don't remember how many hours I've played, and I can't check atm. How often do I play now? Every now and again, when I am in the mood.
8) Ehhhhhhhh...each time I see this question, my answer gradually shifts closer to no. The trend continues here. The game is painful if you are new to Survivor in soloQ, and the better you get as Killer, the more prominent the game's balancing issues become.
9) Probably either just as toxic or more than the average online game.
-
@DangerScouse said:
And we wonder why people have stereotypes of gamers 🤦♂️
As far as I am aware, the stereotypical objects of desire for DBD players are Felix and Shirtless Myers.
