TheSubstitute
TheSubstitute
About
- Username
- TheSubstitute
- Joined
- Visits
- 6,661
- Last Active
Comments
-
Your MMR starts too high and there's too wide of an acceptable gap since there aren't enough killers.
As you're new and are probably tempted to get kills by any means possible you might be tempted to camp and use NOED. Don't.
The reason why I say this is because getting kills will increase your MMR which gets you harder games. Before you move on to harder games, you need to learn chasing, map awareness, keeping track of gens and when to drop chase. If you camp, tunnel, and use NOED you won't learn these skills as fast.
I'm not saying never do those things but, if you do those things as a new player they're effective enough that they'll put you up against survivors that you have no chance against since you skipped over learning game mechanics. It's a design flaw in my opinion. Learn the proper time and place to use them before you do. It's short term pain for long term gain.
You will get tbagged and mocked even when you're playing nice, especially as a new killer, but try to focus on the good games; not the dbags who just try to make people miserable.
Anyway, that's what helped me. Good luck and I hope that helps you out.
-
I do but mainly on weekend days and sometimes right after work because the queue takes too long otherwise. My killer queues range from instant to , at worst, less than a minute. When I get frustrated I play something else (mainly Planetside 2 and Civ 6)
-
@k0reant3a said:
I find dead man switch fine it’s boil over that kind of annoying by swfs really
That's exactly it. It's not the occasional survivor with it that's a problem; it's that it's used by SWFs to abuse locations where they can't be hooked. I saw it save a survivor from a hook once or twice in regular play, which is what I would expect from a perk, but when you get squads with it whose only goal is to waste the killer's time it's a problem.
If they'd just do the gens and leave it wouldn't bother me but the annoying part is the camping the RPD library and just not moving off the upper level there period.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2776136#Comment_2776136
Lets hope BHVR fix both perks.
Boil Over is okey but it is abusable on some maps. They can fix this problem with adding more hooks to this maps.
DMS is okey but it is issue on Artist. They need to look Artist for fix this problem.
But i think this will end with both perks being nerfed.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2776145#Comment_2776145
She is not far from hook while she is sending crows. And plus she is not losing distance. She can put crows, she can back hook and then she can just click ctrl for send them. You should try yourself for one game at least. You will see what i am talking about.
She definitely can but I'm so far seeing the only difference between the Artist and another camping killer is that some gen pressure can be applied but not massive gen pressure due to crow cooldowns. I haven't run into this combo while playing survivor though. It seems like to counterplay it have a survivor move near to the Artist once a down is about to happen and unhook as soon as she moves away. That way we're back to can the survivors finish gens faster than the killer can do effective chases. When I run into it, I'll try it out. My idea might work but I won't know until I see it in practice.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2776111#Comment_2776111
This is exactly what i said pal. Why Artist is problem?
She can spam crows to generators while she is camping. So you need to leave generator (it will block) or you will stay on gen and next crow will hit you. So i think DMS should not nerf, it is fine on other killers. But they should nerf Artist like this:
Artist can not snipe anymore far than 32m. I mean you can still check generators with crows. Crows still can catch survivors and they will still need to repel. But even you hit survivor with crows far than 32m, this will not be hit anymore. This will kill Artist's camp potential. She will need to leave hook for value of DMS. And if she stay on hook, survivors can do gen without risk of sniping.
But if she's sending crows and leaving the hook to do so you can unhook. So wouldn't it work if Artist sends crows, survivors unhook, and then people do gens while the Artist chases a survivor? She can't send crows at every gen at the same time.
-
Here's something that's confusing me. If Artist is sending crows she can't facecamp. Proxy camping is definitely possible but crows can't be sent out near a hooked survivor. So why doesn't someone unhook the survivor while she sends out a murder of crows?
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/307286/unfun-killers-to-go-against
Because people fall into a comfortable routine running a Myers around the same loop for half an hour or stealthing it out and slamming gens, and really don't like having to do something different.
If you play any of the less conventional killers a lot (Hag, Demo, Pinhead, Artist, Doctor) - you'll see what I mean. So. Many. DCs.
I'd say this is it. I actually get more than my fair share of DCs on Trapper as well. I think that's due to me playing solo survivor a lot so I trap all the strong loops. My DCs are mainly from overconfident and/or BMing survivors who tbag and then run into a strong loop to find out I trapped it at the beginning of the match. They can't pull their usual stuff at that point so they DC.
-
It's terrible for both killers and solo queue survivors. The first group I ran into was a 3 person SWF with No Mither, Boil Over and a RPD offering. I thought they would try to save the one random but they left the random to one hook. As I play solo queue as well I know how incredibly unfun that is. I just ended up slugging them and letting them bleed out slowly.
Another survivor with it and the Ormond offering got their group 4K'ed as well since they would run to the second floor and I'd just slug them and leave immediately to kill the survivors doing gens. Absolutely no value to their time.
I did run into a person using it normally without the height drop aspect and they got out of one hook which was some normal value to the perk but the other times I ran across it it was a waste of the killer's time and a waste of their non SWF teammates time.
It should be disabled until the abusable portion of the maps are fixed.
-
At least it helps show how appealing the killer role is right now to the most of the playerbase. My survivor queues are getting worse and my killer queues are instant to almost instant.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768587#Comment_2768587
Though if they did say that, we have to admit there's something of an issue with the goal they're setting up: two escapes would mean the Survivors must always complete their objective (do gens and open exit gate), but the Killer must only half complete their primary objective (Kill Survivors).
The math does work. The problem lies in what you just alluded to; two games, one of which is a 4K and the other is a 4E, achieves the goal of a 2K 2E average. Neither of these games are fun for both parties.
It really highlights some of the game imbalances though and what I consider to be a problem. Someone who is just a locker gnome will get harder killers until they end up escaping half of the time. A facecamper will get harder opponents until they regularly get stomped half the time. Neither playstyles though are fun and it would be super frustrating for both the locker gnome and face camper to relearn how to play the game. Most likely result in my opinion? They stop playing since frustrating a player usually doesn't result in the player trying harder but rather quitting. It's recreation time which should be fun.
This negatively affects the game since a lower player base gives longer queues and worse matches. Long term effects? The game becomes worse.
I think a lot of the issues arise because there seems to be a focus on balancing matches for MMR on BHVR's side instead of just asking if MMR makes DbD more fun or not.
-
@PlaysByShady said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768256#Comment_2768256
I hear what you're saying, and this boils down to a phenomenon known as "The Curse of Knowledge", in that people who are very familiar with a subject often forget the nuances they're implicitly aware of when explaining to people outside of the knowledge circle.
In other words, Patrick is a developer, and understands the background mechanics of what's going on. Because of the way the questions were posed, he only explained bits and pieces of the system at a time, rather than the whole, which made it harder for people without the background knowledge to understand what he meant. I'm a developer, and I've worked with this kind of stuff before, and I understood completely what he was saying. It all makes absolute sense. But unfortunately the general community didn't.
I also do believe there are some bad-faith actors who've deliberately stirred things up for sensationalism. His hockey analogy was absolutely correct... there's no need to count/measure shots on goal when you can just measure wins overall as an indicator of a person's skill. If they're winning, they're obviously scoring more, and if they're scoring more, they're obviously taking more shots. It's all inferred, so you can cut out the middle dynamics (he said this almost verbatim).
The strimmer I happened to see comment on this literally went on a rant of "hockey is a game of equal sides, people in different roles, blah blah blah" which has absolutely nothing to do with the analogy he was making. This is a straw-man!
What's a straw-man? It's where you oversimplify the point to such a degree that it bears no resemblance to the original, and you defeat the oversimplification. You might be handy with a rifle, and you can shoot straw-men in the field all day... but when you're up against real soldiers who are shooting back, that's a completely different point.
Reducing and dismissing the point of "hockey is a different" game is exactly the same... his point wasn't about hockey! His point was about not needing to focus on the individual inner-game mechanics when the outwardly result (i.e. win/loss) is a good enough indicator as to what happened. It's the same analogy regardless of sport... but too many people who didn't understand the analogy got fixated on the wrong point and made their rants based on that. And that's embarrassing.
I don't think the reaction is embarrassing but rather misplaced. As it is Patrick didn't explain things as well as it could have been, which I understand, since he's a game developer and not a soft skills professional. He was attempting to be relatable but it backfired since the differences between the two are so great and it confused the issue. The point isn't goals, the point is DbD is defining a win condition.
For a video game like Dbd, that's quite a bit different as other people have different win conditions but the majority would think kills on one side and escapes on the other means they achieved what they want for the majority.
For a video game, calling it skill based though carries a lot of baggage that could be avoided by saying only match making. To those who suffer from RNG it sounds like an insult and to many in the gaming community saying you're bad at a game is a cutting insult. Whether someone thinks video game skill should be a point of pride or not many do feel that way and calling something as inaccurate as measuring all the variables in a match as the MMR system we have skill based would create pushback.
It just boils down to better communication skills with the caveat that, no matter how perfectly phrased or made something is, at least a few people will still complain. And the main question for the devs to ask themselves, in my opinion,is 'is it more fun than what it replaced?'. People sometimes get too wrapped up in details but the goal is to improve how fun the game is and items such as MMR are just tools to try to achieve that end.
-
@PlaysByShady said:
The recent controversy over Patrick's comments embarrasses me; it just highlights the mob-mentality of the DBD community and I absolutely empathise over why the devs refuse to comment on matters... because too many people screech in response about things they don't understand. And right now it's MMR, like everyone has suddenly become experts in how it works and are therefore qualified to comment on it.
Sadly, this is not the case, and let me explain why.
Warning: this will be slightly complicated, because that's just the nature of how these things are. But I'll do my best to simplify.
Short background: I've been a software dev for 20+ years, been involved in some mmr systems in the past (did some collab with the original MS Trueskill researchers back in the day), and generally deal with s/w that support large amounts of concurrent users.
So... let's start at the basics.
The system is known by multiple names, the two common ones being SBMM and MMR. I'm going to use 'MMR' because the term 'Skill' in SBMM is a loaded term that can be misinterpreted. It doesn't mean skill in the way you would mean in natural use.
The purpose of the MMR is to provide Match-Making... hence the MM in the name. More importantly, it's to provide MM between parties who are considered "equal", so that matches will be "balanced". You'll notice those terms are in quotes, because they don't necessarily mean what you think they mean. They need to be defined.
Before we do that, let's also point out some assumptions the system makes:
1) Both sides are attempting to achieve their overall objectives, i.e. killers are trying to kill, and survivors are trying to survive.
2) There is 1 killer and 4 survivors (to begin with)
3) A desirable match (i.e. what the MM should aim to produce) is one where all players have equal chance of achieving their (diametrically opposed) objectives... either the killer kills, or the survivors survive (on a 1v1 basis, i.e. per survivor... the killer either kills the survivor, or the survivor survives).
Now... you can argue with those assumptions if you like, but that'd be a separate discussion altogether
So, how is does the MMR system match people together?
IT REDUCES YOU TO A NUMBER!
That's literally it. To the MMR system, you are just a number! All your skilled plays, jukes, strategies, etc are distilled down to a single number which represents your "skill" or "level"!
That's the first thing to understand and get over. The system knows-not, and cares-not, about how you played, the incredible saves you pulled off, how you sacrificed yourself to save your team, how you did or didn't tunnel/camp, etc. It just cares about what your "level" is so that it can find suitable players to match you with for the next game. Anything else is just noise.
For those that want to argue whether it should be this way, I would invite you to please design a system... heck, even an Excel spreadsheet with basic formulas, that'd take all the data you want to count and be able to not only interpret it, but also provide some objective mechanism to determine how it should affect your level or how it affects who you're matched with (in an absolute mathematical sense, not some vague description of wants!)
What is the number you'd give to a person who had a 5-gen chase and chased, such that no-one else would get that number from escaping via other means? It can't be done! When you reduce things down to a number, it loses all of this nuance!
Software isn't magic! Computers are not people. They don't understand nuance, or intention. Everything that happens to affect any calculations has to be written/coded to accommodate that!
There's a lot more to be said on this, but for the sake of brevity and sanity, I'll leave it there for now.
So, now you're just a number. Here's another important point to understand. YOUR NUMBER DOESN'T MATTER!
Think about it. If your number was 10, 100, or 1000, what difference does it make? You might be tempted to answer "well, 100 is obviously more than 10", but lets say your peers where in the range of 9-11, or 90-110, etc, it still puts you in the same spot, i.e. smack-bang in the middle.
So I'll say it again... YOUR NUMBER DOESN'T MATTER!
What does matter is where your number stands in relation to everyone else's.
If yours is 10, but the player-base only ranges from 5-15, then you're firmly in the middle. But if the player-base averages around 100, then your number (or level) is severely below average. Your number doesn't matter... where your number fits in relation to everyone else is what matters!
The MMR system produces matches by trying to fill a lobby with players who have similar numbers, i.e. they're within a specified range of each other. That range could be determined by a number of factors, and we also know it increases the longer you're in the queue (so you'll match with more players whose level are further away from yours).
Now, here's what too many people fail to understand. In order to do any match-making... any system has to have some way to rank or equate players so that it can determine what is a good match vs a bad match. How else are you going to compare players with each other without some common comparable criteria between the two? Think about it! You need some objectively measurable indicator that you can ascribe to both survivor and killer in order to compare them with each other to match-make! Otherwise you're literally comparing apples and oranges.
So now you're in a match, and the match plays out. You either survive or die, or as a killer you get kills or not. At the end of the match, THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS HOW MUCH YOUR LEVEL MOVES! Remember, the MMR system doesn't care about your amazing plays, because there's no objective number it can ascribe to it. It just needs to know whether your level should be adjusted, and if so, by how much.
Remember, you and your plays are just being reduced down to a number!
Here's where there's a lot of room for confusion, misinterpretation, and a range of opinions. There are many ways to skin a cat... and there are many ways to determine what that adjustment should be.
Maybe it should take hooks into account, or how many chases won/lost? All great ideas. And I'm sure BHVR have tried these out - we've had a number of MMR tests in the past year or so. I strongly suspect that, at the end of the day, the results they produced weren't as good as what would have been desired.
Or, more likely, they discovered something else... but before I mention it, let me point out another mechanism of the system... THEY'RE DESIGNED TO WORK OVER A RANGE OF MATCHES!
There is literally NO ranking system anywhere in the world that will accurately place any player after a match or two. That's impossible. There's simply not enough data points to determine where you fit in the ranking overall, unless you play enough matches to provide as much.
And the second point... YOUR LEVEL FLUCTUATES!
No-one is the same "skill" all the time. You're either a newb, and your skill increases. Or you've been away for a while and have adapted to the new mechanics etc, and your skill decreases. See, by the time you've played enough matches for the system to know where you rank in comparison to others, bear in mind that their rankings have changed too! Perfection is a moving target, and a good working system is one that can accurate match-make based on the data it has at that time.
You will never have any system that accurately places players exactly where their rank is for all time... the system just tries to get as close to an ideal as possible given the current data!
At the end of the day, if the system produces a match with an even 50/50 result, then it's done it's job. The 4 survivors had 50/50 change of surviving or dying... 50% survived, 50% died, that's an even match! Hence BHVR mentioned back in the day that they consider 2-kills+2-escapes an even match.
Note: as a gamer, I recognise how stupid this seems, because we know that once two survivors go down, the other two have a harder job to survive... unless the deaths are occurring in end game which probably means the killer had a stressful game. I get it. It seems completely counter-intuitive. But the maths checks out... 4 survivors, each with 50/50 chance to win/lose will mean that 2 "win" and 2 "lose". It's mathematically balanced so should be a "good" game, as far as one can predict.
So, back to mechanics of how to reduce the game to an adjustment for your level... it appears BHVR have noticed that a persons average kill/escape ratio appears to correlate with other more complicated mechanics... so rather than fiddle around with the complicated mechanics, they can just take the shortcut and go with the clearer/easier kill/escape mechanic.
And herein is the misunderstood point... Patrick said that it's an indicator of skill, and when you consider that the MMR self-calibrates over a series of matches, it appears to prove an accurate one.
So let's clarify some things bearing this in mind:
A face-camping Bubba is more skillful: No, that's not what he said, nor is what he's suggesting. Firstly, ignore the term "skill", because it's confusing... the devs and players are using the same term to mean two different things. What he's saying is that if the killer is consistently getting kills - howsoever they're getting them - then they should go against "better" survivors who'll be able to resist their strategies and provide a more even match. They're not saying "wow, great plays"... they're saying "fine, we'll match you against better players, now let's see how you do!" The "skill" is in Bubba being able to catch the survivor in the first instance (and then however the rest of how the match plays out... maybe he loses 5-gens 'cos of the camp, maybe altruism gets the team killed). Either way, the Bubba will be adjusted to go against teams better suited (in theory).
Losing a 5-gen chase is low skill: Again, no! If you lost a 5-gen chase and died (which could be for a number of reasons, maybe your team just left you to be one-hooked, etc) then one of two things happened: (i) it was a completely fluke chase against a bad killer which you won't be able to repeat, and you're fine as you are... or (ii) you are that skilled that you can do it again, and over a series of matches your level will increase because you will do it again!
Again, straw-manning the point and expecting the system to produce an accurate result on a match-by-match basis is stupid. It's not going to do that. It's not designed to do that. It cannot do that, because the data fluctuates anyway!
Perfect example is Patrick's hockey example... he mentioned that for hockey players you could rank them by how many shots they take on goal... but if they're winning games (i.e. scoring more than others), then you can already presume they're taking more shots because how else are they getting the goals? You don't need to do the complicated calculations when there's a much simpler indicator that correlates closely enough. For any sport, if you look at their league tables, you can infer the teams (consistently) at the top have the best players... because how else did they get there? You don't need to know the ins and outs of each player, etc.
But of course, the DBD community are just like "waaah... hockey is not dbd, waah!" completely missing the point of what he's saying!
There is also the factor of diminishing returns to consider... the more "fine-tuned" the system is, the more effort it takes to maintain that system, and the less useful (i.e. different) data is produced. Whilst it is technically possible to build the system around hooks, or chases, etc... it requires so much more investment in time/development, the results aren't worth it because they don't produce anything that is fundamentally different from just looking at kills/escapes. So why adopt the harder method?
So... back to the adjustment at the end of the game. Adjusting your level by kills/escapes is very simple, and a reasonable indicator of where you need to be. If you're killing everyone, you need to be moved up to match against players you struggle to kill. If you're escaping every match, you need to move up to face killers that can better catch you and do something about it. And vice-versa.
Stop thinking about the MMR system as an ego-boost, the way some strimmers say they are "max-mmr"... there's no such thing. If the system matches you with players that'll give you a "balanced" match (as per how it was mathematically defined), then the system works as intended.
One other minor interesting point to note: Patrick mentioned the adjustment to a survivor's rank is also based on the order in which they died, because they recognise that a 4v1 death is different to a 3v1 death, etc, so you "lose" less if you died later (in order) rather than earlier.
The system, as a whole, is supposed to self-calibrate. It requires you to play a number of matches, and so long as you play consistently (for the most part), it'll do it's job in matching you with players that'll give you a 50/50 chance of achieving your objective. But bear in mind other player's levels are moving too, so it'll never be perfect. And there are always ways to "cheat" the system by artificially lowering your rank over a series of games (how is the system supposed to know though?)
Again, I've glossed over a lot, and simplified things a lot, to make it easier to understand... not to make it easier for people to provide strawman rebuttals. As a community, I wish we'd try to understand things properly before passing judgement/comment... and not just wildly complaining for the sake of complaining because we don't know what we're talking about.
I personally hold three beliefs about this:
(1) The devs could benefit from improved communication skills.
If, instead of saying but what if you did all that and survived something more along 'Yes, and doing that would show you were a skilled survivor and, although you died in one match, the system is designed to take its data over a range of matches. As someone who could do all that the chance you could do all that and still wouldn't survive most games would be exceptionally low. Someone as skilled as that would be escaping the majority of their matches. The locker gnome would die in most matches since they wouldn't normally be carried so hard'. A few seconds longer, same end message, but the tone is more conducive to getting a better overall reaction.
(2) If it had been called MMR instead of SBMMR some of this contention could have been avoided. It doesn't, and can't, take every factor into account but 'skill' is a very loaded word in the gaming community and just referring to match-making rating acknowledges better the system doesn't accurately measure skill.
(3) The professional sports analogy was misplaced for a variety of reasons. It was more like comparing apples (video games) to hamburgers (sports). They're both still food (entertainment) but there are way too many intrinsic differences for the comparison to not just muddy the waters.
I understand what the devs are saying but the main question for them, I guess, is but is it overall more fun and more likely to attract and retain new players than the Emblem system? I have no idea on that myself.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2763571#Comment_2763571
They would shift the balance updates. It would be nothing but survivor nerfs and killer buffs patch after patch. The kill rates are basically above 2k average mostly because of altruistic survivors during end game. I think the game would be a lot more fun if the game did end when gens were complete just because killers would get so jacked to compensate.
That is, I would say, 100% accurate. Altruistic plays bump up the kill rates and obscure the actual implications of the kill rate data. I think that's one of the reasons I find the dev's balance decisions so confusing at times.
-
@dictep said:
then remove bloodlust and transform it to a perk. Same as survivor must use ds it bt
You don't have to use them as a survivor just like a killer doesn't have to tunnel and camp. You just have to be okay with losing games you would have won otherwise. The issues with Dbd aren't one-sided; they're game mechanic issues and not an exclusively killer or survivor thing.
-
It sounds more like you're upset with (a) an SWF being toxic or (b) MMR placing you against a team you shouldn't be facing. It's frustrating but, unfortunately, BHVR doesn't care about toxicity driving away players unless it's a comment in end game chat.
-
The most ridiculous one is the waiting on hatch to tbag. It's like yes, you're on death hook, your teammates are all dead, the gens aren't finished but you find the randomly appearing hatch first so you must have totally outplayed me. Definitely.
-
@Junylar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2757791#Comment_2757791
How is hitting survivors on the hook "trying to win"? Also, camping leads to losing, so it's only done to spite one survivor. Nice gymnastics though.
Game mechanics don't really agree with your statement about camping. If the survivors have nearly perfect knowledge about the killer's location and stay on gens and the killer doesn't move when it would be counter productive to continue camping then camping is hurtful. All other times, it's helpful to the killer.
-
@SuzuKR said:
It makes no sense to nerf her though.
Clown and Pig would like to have a word with you
-
@ThanksForDaily said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2758351#Comment_2758351
Not this...
So you're telling me that you haven't lost from a bad killer in dead by daylight. Losing my brain cells.
And yet the survivors still lost. I wonder how that happened if they were so much better than the killer.
-
B. She's a Meg. Run Meg Run
-
@Junylar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756170#Comment_2756170
Yeah, except teabagging doesn't ruin the game for the killer, unlike camping and tunneling for the victim survivor.
SBMMR forces killers to either tunnel and camp to progress or to be okay with throwing games. It's a game mechanic issue to be dealt with by BHVR, not a killer issue that can be dealt with by players. Tbagging is just giving a middle finger and doesn't advance the game. That's a huge difference.
I'm in the second group for killers but I certainly understand why I get camped and tunneled when playing survivor and don't blame the killer for following game mechanics.
The fact that being camped and tunneled sucks doesn't change the fact you can't blame people for trying to win at a PvP game. Asking BHVR for game mechanic changes instead of blaming other players could be more productive.
-
What's up with the fire?
-
I'm a Meg. Gens and helping people are for Dwights and Bills. Run baby run.
-
@Clevite said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2755209#Comment_2755209
Gotcha.
Yeah, I tried playing chill for a while after SBMM, no killing and no escapes.
But my teammates and competition became way to noob like to enjoy.
So went back to killing and escaping, and it's all sweats again.
Can't find a middle ground
I still sometimes get sweats but what mostly works for me is alternating every hook (so no survivor can possibly die before five hooks - if I see the survivor I just hooked I slug them and leave them for their teammates to pick up while I patrol gens), running meme builds, and, if I haven't secured a kill before all the gens pop I just open the gates and try to maximize BP.
It's weird for a PvP game but actively trying to win feels more like a punishment than a reward right now. By doing above I don't get total potatoes and I also get less sweat squads so the games are more fun.
-
Fighting dirty is kind of a given if you care about getting kills or escaping. Eventually, MMR will force you to unless you're okay with throwing games. It's a game mechanic issue.
-
A character based on Elizabeth Bathory.
-
It's fairly humorous with Plague when the survivor infects the locker going in.
-
@kingbojenbo said:
I took a break from the forums a few months ago because at the time I felt like the killer mains here just complain about EVERYTHING. I also took 2 months away from the game and came back to it about 3 weeks ago. Well today I decided to play killer. I never liked playing killer because of the first person view but I went through with playing a few games.
Killer mains....I'm sorry. I doubted you guys and now I see how irritating the game can be for killers. I feel like it's worse than I remember it being. The game was rough before but now it's almost intolerable. The worst part is now with the new pay off for grade reset, tryhards will try even harder.
Now I'm not saying buff killers to the point of being gods but they need more than a little help. The issue is to not make them too strong but I'm not really sure Bhvr can manage that. I don't say that as a slight on the devs, it's tricky to do. I have some thoughts on how to maybe help alleviate things on both sides but the changes I have in mind wouldn't be quick easy ones.
Killer mains enjoy as much of this game as you can, if you can. I thought I'd come back to the forums and say I understand the killer perspective little more now.
Thank you for doing that. I think a lot of the problems with DbD would be greatly alleviated if more people tried both sides.
-
I'm all for removing depipping. There's no reason for it. If it's playtime, it should be primarily playtime. While the pipping system can be pretty generous and I find that pipping up to Iri 1, even with throwing matches if survivors ask for mercy or bring streamers/cake, as killer is just casual play for me attempting to pip up to Iri 1 as solo survivor is frustrating once red grades are hit.
Honestly, pips do feel like a participation trophy for me for solo survivor until I hit red ranks. Afterwards, too much depends on other people to make a lot of progress. Did the killer afk or lose connection but looks like they're still in the game? Depip. Did someone not rescue me on hook? Depip. Did the killer find you first and then tunnel or camp? Depip. Was the killer so outmatched they couldn't do much or vice versa for the survivors? Depip.
Removing depipping wouldn't hurt killers or SWF but it would be a nice quality of life boost for solo survivors. Get rid of it.
-
@Shroompy said:
because shes a crackhead who does the most adorable squeal every time she gets stunned
who can take her seriously?
I like playing Pig just so I can run into pallets.
-
Emblems are a new Ranking Mechanic that was implemented with Patch 1.9.4 into Dead by Daylight . The Emblem System is a replacement for the Victory Cube for Killers and the old Bloodpoint-related Rank Mechanic for Survivors. A Player's Rank is now decided by their performance in a Trial and independent of the Bloodpoints they gained. Emblems replace the old Bloodpoint Category circles in the Ranking section of the Tally Screen. Successfully obtained Emblems come in four Qualities: Bronze, Silver
Here's the link that discusses what you need. Also, an important point is that staying within 16 meters of a hooked survivor reduces your chasing score after 10 seconds.
-
@AnObserver said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2747824#Comment_2747824
RE: Facecamping and Tunneling
If Killer has not spread Hooks, give Survivors DS/BT
"But Survivors now have open Perk slots to genrush better!"
Implement Parts.
That sounds good
-
From the responses, it doesn't seem I'm getting the point across. It's not a one-sided proposition; if killers kill quickly then the gens go faster. If survivors do gens too quickly the gens go slower. After a preferably short period of time, it doesn't matter. It shakes up the meta on both sides. Killers are incentivized more to spread hooks. This lengthens the game. Survivors can't just slam out gens and leave so the killer has the time to spread hooks around and still get kills. Currently, the best way to win is to play ugly and playing clean means you throw games.
Unfortunately, just making it easier to down survivors won't, in my opinion, reduce camping and tunneling. I think it will increase it. The way to replace camping and tunneling is by providing something that makes it less efficient and effective than more fun options.
The problem here is that gens can be done too quickly and camping and tunneling prevents a player from playing the game. Both survivors and killers have legitimate complaints about how the game is and both sides would be better off if they couldn't be prevented from playing the game.
The game already tries to incentivize this as the most BPs and pips are gained by spreading hooks around. This would increase the incentive.
Conversely, I don't see slugging as a bad thing. It delays the game and gives altruism points to the survivors. It also allows pressure to be put on the survivors but in a way that allows the survivors to interact with the game and gain BP.
What I suggested wouldn't stop a snowball but it would allow survivors to actually play as long as all 4 aren't slugged at the same time (in which case nothing is different from the current game and my suggestion above).
I do like the parts idea as a replacement but I find what is missing is how to counter facecamping and tunneling. Gen speeds are fast because survivors can be camped and tunneled. Camping and tunneling exists because gen speeds are fast. Gen rushing prevents the killer player from playing. Camping and hard tunneling prevents a survivor player from playing. It doesn't matter which came first; what matters is that it's prevalent and not fun.
In the end, gen speeds can't be addressed without addressing camping and tunneling. The converse is also true. Right now, in my opinion, the main issue is that winning in the most efficient way possible involves doing something very unpleasant to the players on the other side.
-
When I play Bubba, I like to go totally against the stereotype, only two hook, neither camp nor tunnel, and drop survivors off at the exit gate. It's actually kind of funny to see people's reactions
Of course, when I play survivor over 90% of the time I wait until someone else is chased, finish gens and get out while Bubba is still in the basement.
-
On the subject of other games, I think WoW is a great example for this thread as a cautionary tale. I played WoW from closed beta to partway through Cataclysm and the player base was overall decent then. WoW has become a lot more toxic since then and it has also lost a huge amount of players including to FF XIV; a more welcoming game.
A more welcoming and less toxic community means more players and it baffles me that this isn't recognized.
-
This is the part I don't get. League had their Tribunal. Planetside 2 has their mentor bonuses, says toxicity is bad and made it so you can't squat on another player's body. In Dbd, the new players are bullied, BMed and insulted.
The health of any business depends on getting new customers and player retention. BHVR is good at getting new customers (eg Epic) but keeping players is more and more of an issue.
Making a statement would help. Increased moderation would be even better but BHVR doesn't do even the initial steps towards combating toxicity.
I'm not going to say Dbd is dying or anything melodramatic like that. It has too many licensed killers but the game could be healthier and it's not. With opportunities given up also comes a loss of revenue that could have helped address issues. However, Dbd won't get better unless they (BHVR) actually do something to help. And, honestly, it's frustrating to try to bring new people into a game just to have them quit because the environment is so toxic and unwelcoming to new players.
-
I like everything I read about old Undying as long as its interaction with Ruin was adjusted to make it not as punitive to survivors. With the exception of Devour Hope at three stacks and Ruin, most survivors I face don't even bother to look for hexes. As tokens would disappear, old Undying's interaction with Devour Hope would already be restricted. Even with New Undying, I normally can't get 5 Devour stacks before it's cleansed so I don't see it making an insurmountable difference with old Undying.
Ruin, on the other hand, if I can stop it being cleansed makes it an almost guaranteed 3 or 4K. That would be too powerful with old Undying.
I'd be incredibly happy with new Undying though if it stopped my hex totems from being overwritten by boons. It would also make Pentimiento useful with more hexes other than Plaything.
-
@Murgleïs said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2737762#Comment_2737762
I am from europe too. Watch his video dude. Look at his nurse match where he got 4k for exemple, he got the game which is insane for nurse. Survivors perks were : only 1 dead hard, 0 ds, 1 UB (yellow) and only 2 BT (1 yellow tho). This is NOT what high mmr looks like at all. I am nurse player in EU and I extremely rarely get less than 3 dead hards in my games.
There are two possibilities for Otz that I see. The first is that Otz spends eight hours streaming, another 8 hours playing anonymously to tank MMR, doesn't completely burn out for some reason, fits sleeping and all daily life activities into eight hours and still can get survivors with thousands and thousands of hours in matches for some reason.
The second possibility for strange match ups is that SBMM isn't working as intended.
Imo, I think the second sounds a lot more likely.
-
@Tiufal said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2736984#Comment_2736984
Someone whos saying camping is the most viable strategy obviously has no idea how to play killer properly. Typical case of git gud.
That's not completely true. Even Otz's video examining the issue showed that camping, tunneling and NOED generally results in multiple kills. For myself, I don't do it because I would rather have a 4E than do that. It also leads to a situation where MMR inflates enough that the average killer player who camps has weak enough chasing skills they get taken apart by a coordinated SWF and ends up in a lose lose situation ( get stomped by sweaty groups at least half of the games or deliberately lose a large amount of games to lower MMR). However, not camping or tunneling is my personal choice and the only person who has to play by my rules is me.
The problem isn't that DbD is survivor sided or killer sided; it's that it rewards doing something that's horribly unfun for the other side. That's not the designers' intent as the most fun way for everyone also gives out the most BP so they're trying to reward engaging gameplay but the most efficient ways to kill or escape are also strategies that hurt BP.
I'm not singling your post out for this comment; it was just the most convenient to respond to. Imo, rather than people doing an us vs them, I think it would be better if people worked on ideas to shake up the mechanics so camping, tunneling and gen rushing weren't so viable and it would be easier for both sides to have fun.
-
@Adjatha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2736388#Comment_2736388
Yeah, but virtually any killer buff is going to always disproportionately affect newer players over more experienced ones.
Other than separate queues for SWF (which they won't do), the only thing you can do to buff killers against pro players without harming newer players is something like Bloodlust. If Bloodlust never dropped off, charged up faster, and eventually made you immune to stuns or whatever, THEN you might see M1 killers being able to catch high tier survivors (and new players get caught without ever hitting bloodlust 1, so solo queue would never even see the difference).
But they were actively looking at removing Bloolust in its current, very weak iteration, so there's no chance of that.
I agree, I would just like to see a buff to Pig that helped her out with more than just new survivors. I think Pig needs more ability to down survivors or a way to better track survivors as RBTs are useless if you can't get a down to begin with.
-
Honestly, I don't think 8 RBT would do that much. To put them on, Pig would first have to down each survivor twice. In a close match, it could make a difference but as an M1 killer Pig can struggle. If there are only three downs all match it wouldn't help that much.
In my opinion, the better argument against it is that it would only help Pig out a lot against newer survivors and wouldn't impact matches that match against mid-level and up survivors.
-
Do bones. Since I started Dbd, I've always wanted to say that in a necro'd thread.
-
I just got Iri 1 as a solo queue so I could unlock the achievement for it. I think extracting an impacted wisdom tooth I had was more pleasant than deliberately attempting to pip up once I hit Iri 4 due to teammates letting me one hook, going to second stage, or just hiding in lockers for the rest of the match as soon as they were on death hook. It was three pips forward, one or two pips back, for most of it. It was painful.
-
I think you missed the Halloween movie where Myers survived a hail of bullets, massacred multiple cops, and then had his face smashed with a piece of wood wielded by a petite, twerking Asian woman wearing a bunny jacket. Afterwards, Myers went to a corner for a time out. Once you've seen it, get back to us.
-
I despise tbagging but I'm completely fine with removing Claudette's face. Racist slurs are much worse than just being told to go f.. yourself. This does raise two questions for me though:
(1) Why not remove just Claudette's face and add in a cosmetic with Ace's cap or Jeff's beard or something similar? Claudette's face was the most distinct so it was the most widely used by people who didn't have racist intentions. So stuff the racists, get rid of Claudette's face, but provide something that is obvious such as Ace's cap instead.
(2) Why not also beef up moderation in-game and provide a moderation system that works to prevent toxic behaviour? Nothing is stopping both from being done at the same time. The quick fix is removing Claudette's face but what is being done to stop toxic people from being toxic? A beefed up reporting and moderation system would help.
-
Also, please include a 'I just don't give a damn' icon for survivors that are on gens 10 meters or less away while the killer is 32 meters or more away from a hooked survivor.
-
For solo queue, please make the hiding in locker icon entertaining so we have something to watch while we one-hook.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2725754#Comment_2725754
What I have said before, previously, is that if you are being that aggrevated by BM through in-game actions (clicking, tbagging, kebabing, nodding, etc) that you suffer physical pain and break things then you most likely have an underlying issue that you should at least consider looking into. I speak from personal experience there- getting annoyed enough at a video game to break keyboards and punch holes through a wall eventually allowed me to contact my local GP and got referred to a councilling service for anger management, and they recommended therapy to help work through the underlying issues.
There's a stark difference, imho, between BM through in-game actions and actual, genuine toxicity through words. I do not BM, I hate it, I would never do it without serious provocation first, and I'd like that made clear. However, I also accept that you can never remove it from online games, and so in circumstances like that it's best to try and seek help for yourself, either through taking breaks from the game, or seeing a medical professional.
In circumstances like this, however, where people are going through previous names just to harass your appearance, or mocking the fact that your significant other died of cancer, or telling you to (in less polite words) commit scooter ankle, or any other form of harassment like that, it should never be allowed. In both scenarios, the blame is placed on the perpetrator of the actions, and in both scenarios they are dicks for doing so. However, in one, they should be punished, and in the other, it cannot be realistically removed or punished without affecting normal gameplay so looking for alternative methods for coping with what you feel is the best case scenario.
I hope that makes sense? Small amounts of BM are unavoidable and if it's causing major distress there's probably another unaddressed issue there you should look into for your general wellbeing (I know my knuckles appreciate it much more when I don't use them to break the wall, and having healthier ways of coping has helped me outside of DBD too). Large amounts of genuine hatred and other such harassment should never be tolerated, and the perpretrators should be punished. It's not the fault of the person being harassed in either case.
Okay, cool. Thanks for explaining your position. That makes a lot more sense now.
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2724949#Comment_2724949
Because some people are affected by things differently than you are. Everyone is shaped through their past experiences.
It's entirely the fault of the toxic ######### that can't handle losing a video game and resort to dropping slurs. It's not the fault of the person being called a slur who doesn't want to be called a ######### slur.
I agree with your statements completely but I'm a bit confused. My apologies if I misremembered but weren't you defending tbagging and BMing in game before? I completely agree that people are affected by things differently, everyone is shaped by their past experiences and it's the fault of the toxic person, not the other party, so, if I'm not confusing your remarks with someone else, I hope you also see why I would find these statements to be contradictory with defending tbagging and BMing.