Thusly_Boned
Thusly_Boned
About
- Username
- Thusly_Boned
- Joined
- Visits
- 5,944
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Vorahk08 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3901767#Comment_3901767
If that's how they want to spend their time, I guess we can't stop them. It's kind of a waste, though. We're all sharing our favorite parts of the game. So what if someone disagrees? They should make posts instead and be a part of the conversation!
Speaking of favorites, what drew you to Onryo as your main?
I ended up maining Singularity because I like the elements of setting up my network, serveilling the whole map at will, and the fast-paced teleports and chase mechanics. He feels really rewarding with good camera placement, while also putting a unique twist on chases with his Overclock.
I'm a big JHorror fan; that's also why Spirit was my first main. I was brand new to DBD and didn't know anything about her power or rep in the game, I just gravitated to her because she was an onryo like Sadako or Kayako. I am deaf in one ear and really struggle with audio tracking so I have always been at a major disadvantage playing Spirit, but when she was nerfed I couldn't even get the prediction hits I used to, and I stopped using her as much. I had probably 700 hours invested in Spirit when I "dropped" her.
I was super psyched when the Ringu chapter was announced, and when Sadako dropped, it was an obvious natural fit. She's obviously not very strong, but I play more for fun than winning every game. I'll still play as Spirit on occasion with the cherry blossom, but not often.
-
@Rickprado said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3902279#Comment_3902279
To be fair, is not to punish survivor for disliking the game, but making "going next" to try to find a "better match" a worse option - or even am impossibility. The problem is not that someone is not having fun and should be punished, the thing is someone is throwing their matches for ANY REASON, literally any reason, harming the game of 4 others.
Going next on killer is harder because:
1) Killer queues are longer - at least in my region. So if you just throw your match, you will need to wait 5 to 10m to get another match. So its better to play the match you have than trying to find another one;
2) Killer don't have any way to go next as fast as survivors do - they need to wait for survivors to get out before they can go to another match. And when the killer just give up, survivors tend to farm points before finishing the gens - they are right, they deserve this BP - which only makes the killer "go next" impractical.
I hope that with the changes BHVR wants to implement people tend to play the game with less frustration and if they are not in the mood to play, go play something else. I rather wait 10m to have a good match than have a 5m queue to get a 2 minutes match because someone decided to "go next" after the first chase.
Exactly, the intent here clear seems to be making it less of a pain to finish a match out than to go next.
And yeah, going next as killer is really impractical.
@ChuckingWong said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3902299#Comment_3902299
You didnt see the previous 5 games where it WAS the issue.
You guys have to think a bit more macro to understand this.
Maybe the last 5 matches was throws, unfair addons, bad behavior, and now they loaded into a match with someone running no mither, running to the basement and activating invocation crows, along with 0 prog on gens within the first down.
Id agree with the above poster about treating the symptom and not the problem. Ie 0 coordination tools, no lobby loadouts, bad killer behavior (excessive humping while slugged), and maybe even tunneled (skill issue sure, but MMR is broken in this game), int challenges/archives, etc…
When you say YOU dont see it you are correct. You dont personally see it, and I hate to say it, but its because you arent asking why and just assuming "well they are just terribads/grumpy"
quotations used above as that is not EXACTLY what you are thinking, but in the general sense these people are just dismissed.I play both sides pretty evenly (well, probably like 60/40 surv:killer at this point) and I see it from both sides.
And it's just my own experience, but I don't see much cause for most of the going next I see on either side. When playing killer I don't tunnel, I don't camp, I don't play hated killers (well, except maybe Plague), and I only sweat even a little against obvious SWFs.
Even with that being the case, I see a fair number of people going next. Or trying to; I will not comply with a surv who wants out. I save them for last. And I don't see much cause, it's usually really early and for seemingly no reason.
And while I do see teammates quit because of killer BS when I'm playing surv, most of the time it's for no reason I can see. I mean, there's only so much that can happen in the first 90 seconds of a match that could be a rational reason to quit. And that's when I see most of them.
If a person is generally annoyed to the point that they can't just play each match as a standalone thing, they should finish their current match and do something else rather than ruin the next match for everyone else.
And I'll keep saying this: if DBD's BS makes a person not want to play, that's totally understandable. But they shouldn't go next, they shouldn't queue up.
-
Without question. An hour on any survivor is essentially the same as an hour of any other survivor.
There is a basic killer game sense that is universal, but most killers are distinct enough that proficiency with one doesn't translate fully to another. Which is why killer MMR isn't universal like surv MMR is.
I'd argue killer MMR should be even more killer specific than it is.
But yeah, if we're just talking about probability, a P100 killer player is more likely to be better than one who isn't.
-
@UknownShredder said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3902263#Comment_3902263
I would like to know that trick becuase i put 800 hours into ghostface and i am P80 and i win most of my games and i use 100% bonuses and played through all these events relentlessly.. I could understand it as survivor if you are a grp of 4 during event and everyone is stacking 100% bonus points on top of the 300% but as a killer is pretty RNG.
Yeah, I ran some back of the napkin math and that was a gross underestimation on my part. My bad.
Still, if you figure 25K a match (seems like a fair killer average) plus the 100% bonus you should hit P100 at about 400 hours, not counting bloodhunts, bloodfeasts, stacked BP offerings, BP giveaways, monthly grade bonuses, and events. So if you play decently and hit up most or all of the events and always use offerings, it should take 300-400 hours (of actual play) to P100 a character.
As for how that's relevant to the topic, is even 400 hours enough to master a killer? In most cases I would say no.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
They're approaching with this issue backwards imo. Treating the effect, and not the root cause isn't going to change anything.
The best hope is to address why people give up on hook, at least some of the reason. The biggest being that the meta is not allowing survivors to actually play the game.
Hopefully, the anti camp, anti tunnel, and anti slug they've announced will do something, anything meaningful to address those issues, and the problem should lessen.
But they're implementing this in phase 2, while "anti go next" is phase 1. So I guess we'll see.
Ideally they'd fix everything first, sure. But there are some issues here:
- What needs to be "fixed" (and why people are going next) varies depending on who you ask
- These fixes aren't going to happen overnight, no matter what BHVR chooses to do
- People going next all the time is actively ruining people's games, and for some is worse than slugging/camping
- Some people will find reasons to go next, regardless of the state of the game
Sometimes you have to triage and stop the bleeding before you do the complex surgery.
-
@UknownShredder said:
Okay but lets move on from you guys saying the same thing.
New question. If someone has prestige their character to P100 playing them only. Would you say you are likely to go up against a strong opponent ?Probably, but that also depends on how they play the game. Some people play casually, while others play studiously, trying to learn all the ins and outs and master their power.
It's not unlike Grade. Grade is essentially based on playtime, but not everyone plays the same. Now I don't think Grade is as useless as some claim because there almost has to be some correlation between the time you put in and the skills you develop, but much depends on how you are approaching that time.
Prestige is similar. Odds are better than not that if a player is P100 or Iri 1 they are probably better than most, but it's only part of the equation.
And then there's the the question of whether the time it takes to get to P100 (even dedicated strictly to that character) is enough to become an expert/master of them. I would say that depends on the killer. For many of the killers, you could P100 them twice and still not master them.
I mean if you're just playing a single killer and shoving all your BP into them, you can get them to P100 pretty quickly. Well before you master them. Or even get all that good with them, even.
One could be brand new to DBD and get a P100 killer well inside of 100 hours. And by most standards they'd still be pretty bad.
-
As others have said, it doesn't necessarily mean anything at all since a person could just dump all their BP earned elsehwere into a single character. Or you you could have someone who earned all their BP as a surv into a killer having never before played as killer. Not sure why anyone would do that, but there are some odd ducks out there.
One of the worst killers I ever faced was a P100 Nurse, of all things. I remember it specifically because my team (solo, no less) just bodied this poor killer, and I thought wow, that is a baby Nurse, another SBMM fail, but in postgame saw they were P100.
And I've seen hordes of bad P100 survs.
So it might mean something, or nothing.
-
@LordGlint said:
With all the voiceless they added with Chucky... I want a Freddy skin that TALKS. While not having classic Freddy is tragic, having a SILENT Freddy REALLY breaks it for me. Would be great if they gave him lines when he downed someone or when someone stuns him or something.
Yeah, I figured that part was implied, lol. OG Freddy's trademark was his mouth almost more than his glove. If an Englund Freddy were to come, he'd have to talk smack all match.
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
I need OG Freddy as well as Freddy from Wes Craven's New Nightmare as well as more cosmetics for Nancy Wheeler
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/H07L5AEWPN8C/1-3.gif
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/IICC9ZSJHEL5/wes-cravens-new-nightmare-281994-29-julie.jpg
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/SERDIIBN2QEF/screenshot-20250327-234836-gallery.jpg
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/EXVSKDNHCY3O/tmp-la5cze-06dc75b6f5f30659-nancy.jpg
If we're looking at Nancy skins, I like the ones here, and also:
And I'd also like to see the anime versions of Trevor and Sypha from Castlevania
-
@TicTac said:
In general from a survivor perspective.
And if yes, which killer or circumstances let you enjoy it more or less?
If not, how do you play around it?
Yes and no; killer interaction is the only real action you get as a surv player, but stock standard looping does get old. So I do also enjoy killers that disrupt that. In doses.
It's a weird thing; imo chase is the best thing in DBD for either role, but the times where I have felt the most like "man, this feels like groundhog day and I might be over it" is when I'm looping or being looped.
Not sure what I am trying to say here, maybe just the I wish there was something more to the gameplay loop.
-
@cesspoolechochamber said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3899104#Comment_3899104
If you need to ask that question than go play solo q for like 20 matches. I bet you don't even get 10 matches in until you want to dc or give up. You'll do realize you need for 4 survivors to 1 killer to play a match. Have fun playing against bots. This is the attitude that puts people off from even posting on here
I've been playing solo queue for 3K hours, and I haven't DC'd or went next while there was any doubt about the outcome of a match since early 2020, probably.
Do I often feel like it? Absolutely. I'm sure everyone does sometimes. But so long as there are other people still in trying to win, I won't leave. It's impulse control. And because in recent times, the single thing that makes playing solo the most frustrating for me isn't anything the killers have or do, but my teammates leaving winnable games because they got butthurt. It didn't use to be this bad, but it has gotten out of hand.
At this point it's a bigger problem than the bad game design that people use to excuse it.
As a killer player, I don't even really care when people go next. No one is screwing killers or sending BHVR a message by going next all the time. It's mostly just screwing other survs. DBD is full of BS, and not wanting to subject yourself to it is totally fair. But don't go next, just don't queue up.
If go next prevention compels a few entitled "go next" addicts to stop playing altogether, matches will still go on and DBD will be better off.
-
@Caiman said:
Ashley and Luis with their RE4make designs. Josh Stone from RE5 would be good too. And I'd like to see Brad Vickers and Barry Burton to round out the STARS members. Billy Coen would be a long shot since Capcom likes to pretend he doesn't exist but he'd be cool too.
Jill's winter uniform from Umbrella Chronicles, and Leon's jungle fatigues from Darkside Chronicles. Rebecca also has plenty of other outfits to add to the game, still.
Young Ash Williams from Evil Dead 1/2.
The white version of Pyramid Head that Masahiro Ito designed.
If they ever figure out how to add new outfits for legendary characters, I'd love to see Cybil and Lisa get their outfits from Shattered Memories, with the winter cop uniforms for Cybil and the nurse scrubs for Lisa.
Barry and Sheriff Breaker from Alan Wake as legendary skins.
Yeah, I'd like to see more RE characters (and Rebecca skins), but I feel that's almost being greedy at this point.
Also glad to see more support for young Ash.
-
@ChuckingWong said:
Better than observing these things is asking why.
You dont know why they are:
DCing
Or go nexting
Or avoiding gens
Or crouch hiding in a corner
Or opening chests/doing dull totems
Or standing still on load up to or even past first hook
Or refusing your heal
etc etc etc…
For every bad reason you assume from these things.
I am leaning more on the side there is a good reason, whether experience is a factor or not, for these types of behaviors from survivor players.
How they are treated in game, probably being the number one reason.
Chaos shuffle is rampant with it.I don't feel like there are valid reasons for DCing/going next beyond an IRL issue, actual bug or network issue. Or your whole team is getting bled out (though that won't be problem for long). But the killer not playing a way you like is not an acceptable excuse to leave the game. Most of the time it's just a middle finger to your teammates, and I will die on that hill.
All the other stuff I agree with to varying degrees. It's one of the downsides to solo queue that you can't communicate things to your teammates. You might have just used a syringe and turn down a heal, you might have a perk that is activated by cleansing a dull totem, have a tome challenge, etc., etc.
I usually reserve judgement about anyone until I see their loadout at the end of the game, and even that doesn't tell you everything.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
I hear so many people complaining about op killers, op perks, game is killer sided. I have been playing survivor alot recently and I have noticed survivors are often responsible for their loss. They DC, go next, avoid gens, many don't even bring an item and they wonder why they lose. Reason being the killer is equipped and prepared while survivors seem to think they can go into a match with poor perks, no items and not touch a gen and think they can still win then they get salty when they lose. This is from a survivor point of view playing purely soloq survivor the past month.
That the biggest problem in solo queue is other survivors isn't a revolutionary new development (and I think that's mostly down to SBMM being what it is). And then you have people working on tome challenges, which is often tantamount to throwing and results in some seemingly inexplicable behavior. This is all "normal".
It's the solo queue experience, and what you are seeing are evidence of three things that are objectively true:
- Most games are solo queue games
- Most players are very casual gamers
- SBMM throws just about anyone together
So yeah, welcome to solo queue.
@cesspoolechochamber said:
First off no one is complaining about a specific killer or perk being op. Second off i can say that about majority of killer players who resort to camping or tunneling. You can win with out doing that or better yet you can play the game and have fun without winning. Lol "this is from a survivor point of view".
Yeah, a lot of killer mains aren't trying to hear that, though.
A lot of killer players can't really wrap their brains around playing sub-optimally because their mindset is built around trying to minimize the risk of losing any given game by going into all of them with the same approach. That's not meant to be a character judgment, but it's just how some people play because they prioritize winning above all.
Speaking for myself when playing killer, I play in a "take it as it comes" way, knowing that while I will lose some games because of that, I will still win most of them because most games are against solo teams, and they're, well, solo teams. I would rather lose a few games here or there than play every game the same way.
I don't see DBD as being a serious game, so I don't take it seriously (most of the time). Many people do, and many people don't. It's one of the reasons this game is so chaotic.
-
@Vorahk08 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3901868#Comment_3901868
The MMR in DBD really feels it's at a half-way point between a ranked/competitive system and a quickplay system, but won't commit to either.
On the one hand, it adjusts player matchmaking scores based on whether they escape or how many kills they get, seemingly on a game-to-game basis. On the other, it seems to throw a lot of that out to keep wait times short. I don't have a particularly strong leaning either way, but it feels like the current system is inconsistent. You can go from a balanced game to a blatant stomp with a P100 Billy against a team of 2 baby survivors very quickly.
If I remember correctly, they did a set of "matchmaking tests" where they tinkered with the live matchmaking software a few years back, didn't they? I'm pretty sure that's how Otz got his Artist winstreak done. What were the goals/results of those tests?
As for the original topic, that inconsistent MMR system is likely throwing streamers like Otz and Hens into unbalanced matches like it is for most players. I think a major factor for them winning more is that they are experienced enough to make a lot of "unbalanced" matches where they might lose ultimately work in their favor, given the amount of time they've put into the game.
Edit: Edited for clarity
It's not just all of that, but the backfilling, which will pretty much drop anyone into any lobby to speed things up. BHVR has all but said explicitly that accuracy is being sacrificed for speed in matchmaking. And that is not limited to midranks.
It seem to be really hard to accept for some people that we're all subject to this, but there isn't a single person playing public matches who isn't experiencing some level of unevenness in matchmaking. Even people playing the game for a living.
-
I think there are two main camps in Chaos Shuffle:
- People just having fun because of random builds
- People obsessed with winning in spite of their random build
Obviously the latter of those two are gonna have be sweatlords
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/441170/are-content-creator-tanking-their-mmr
I truly think something is going on with a lot of them.
The only one who seems to consistently go against the kind of survivors that i consistently go against as killer is tru3ta1ent. But when i watch otz, or scott, its clear that they rarely go against the godly survivor teams. Sure they get them from time to time, but not neary as often as i or tru3 do.
I suspect this is some kind of combination of region/time they play and less to do with matchmaking. I doubt they tank their MMR as that would be pretty obvious from looking at their shard count among other things. But i really do think matchmaking has something going on, maybe it has to do with the matchmaking delay option? Or streamer mode? But i don't really know.
I plan on recording all my matches when the ghoul comes out and posting them on youtube to try and see a comparison as time goes on.
I don't think Tru3 goes against better players, I think it's power of suggestion because all he does is talk about how good his opponents are. It's a big part of his schtick. But when I did watch him, I didn't see any appreciable difference between the quality of players he was facing and any other streamer.
@xGodSendDeath said:
I know it's conspiracy territory, but I do think BHVR gives content creators softer queues. They already made it so content creators can't get matched with people with a lot of exploit reports (to prevent them getting matched with hackers that hold them hostage). Back when MMR was tightened up a lot of killer content creators were getting absolutely stomped over and over on stream. Not good for their content or for the game to lose over and over then they lowered the soft cap sometime after. You can revisit these times with the suffering with skill based matchmaking YouTube series
Not for a second do I think BHVR is able to precisely manipulate SBMM that way, even if they were inclined to. I mean they might technically be able to, but they've done nothing but demonstrate an inability to make SBMM work well in general, so I don't buy it.
The reality is that we all face a hodgepodge of teammates/opponents due to loose SBMM. That's really not great for potatoes who get thrown in the deep end, but for experienced players, we all do a bit worse in situations where we're matched against players at our level than when we have potatoes sprinkled in. Better players benefit from bad SBMM in general. It's quite literally the only reason we see long winstreaks, or people winning 90%+ of the time.
When SBMM was tightened up, a lot of people did worse than normal.
Content creators are no different.
-
@ExcelSword said:
I had been playing on Xbox for years and never cared about messages. Until I picked up Dead by Daylight. This game alone caused me to change my privacy settings. People are ridiculous when they lose in this game.
Not just when they lose, either.
People act the fool in postgame over anything. And what's wild is that a lot of the time it's the worst players slinging the most crap.
It's just better not to subject yourself to it, imo.
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3901767#Comment_3901767
Sometimes I wish we could see who upvoted and downvoted posts, just so we figure out who's being weird.
But that might be a bad idea overall.
It's not a wild idea, pretty much every other forum I post on that has an up/down vote system shows who votes, up or down.
But tbh I'm not sure why the downvote option was even added here after all these years, and it does seem like people downvote things for inexplicable reasons. But the posts in this thread are totally innocuous.
-
What miserable person is downvoting all of these posts lol
-
@jmayer33 said:
How do I prevent people from messaging me after a game? I know I can block people but I don't even want to give people the opportunity to message me at all. I see there are so many people who I can't message after a game but they can message me. Is this just because I am on console and not PC? Please help so I can stop people from messaging me.
Not sure about XBOX, but if you're on PS go to your profile > privacy settings > Communication and Multiplayer > Who can interact… and choose friends only
Or "No One" if you really want to be a hermit, lol
But be aware that really determined people will often send you a friend request so they can message you if you accept
-
Surv: Kindred (at least in solo)
Killer: Corrupt
-
First Main (Killer): Spirit
Current Main: Haddie/Yui and Onryo
Fav map: Midwich
Favorite perk: Lucky Break
Favorite item: Medkit
Favorite chapter: Stranger Things
How many P100s: Haddie, Yui, Yun-Jin
Hours: Approx. 6K across platforms (pretty evenly split between roles)
-
@Thesevenspirits said:
Then let those who don't want to message or receive messages play against other players let that too, and let the rest who want messages play against themselves.
So people actually want interactions in games
I find it absolutely fascinating that people care about being able to message someone enough that to suggest creating a whole other queue where chat participation is mandatory. It's actually amazing how disordered this thinking is.
Nothing anyone in this game has to say is important enough that others need to be compelled to hear it.
I wonder if people like this just sit there malding because they can't force another player to hear their feedback in a video game.
-
@Kill_Yr_Idol83 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3901211#Comment_3901211
Maybe. But maybe SWF just seriously is the issue that's been ignored for over 8 years. Killer is easier tlin comparison to that meta you used as an example but those days also didn't have 40+ more survivor perks, including more 2nd chances and more gen speed, giving them insane advantages especially for SWF. Too many killers aren't viable with this current interaction of the game which has does play into your point that the fun has been sucked out of it.
Yeah, a really strong, coordinated SWF is playing as a massive competitive advantage. That much is beyond rational dispute, and it feels bad to be on the wrong end of one of those matches.
But I don't think they're common enough to ruin the killer experience overall. Now SWFs in general are common, but there a lot of 2 and 3 man SWFs, and even your average 4 man is just kinda mid. "SWF" isn't this monolithic thing, there are tons of SWF permutations, and that makes it hard to meaningfully and fairly address.
The majority of matches, even at "top mmr" are mixed bags. There might be days when you are unfortunate enough to run into a few of them, that's not the rule for anyone, even if it feels like it.
And the reality here, right or wrong, is that BHVR isn't going to nerf SWF regardless. It has been, as you point out, eight years. If they had any inclination to do so, it would have been done by now. They will continue to buff solo, but I'd be gobsmacked if they ever address SWF with with targeted nerfs. Especially since the single greatest advantage a good-great SWF has, voice comms, is completely beyond BHVR's ability to regulate.
We just have to accept it for what it is. Or move on.
And while I will maintain that it's beyond reasonable debate that current killer is in it's strongest state ever generally, and the heyday of truly OP survs ended with 6.1.0, many killers aren't viable even outside of SWF matches. And that's a bigger issue.
-
This forum never ceases to amaze me
Somehow survivor is unplayable and simultaneously killer is a miserable.
Might as well just shut the whole thing down, lol
But seriously, OP here says "things never change" but also the game has "become" miserable for killers. That doesn't compute.
And contrary to the topic here, killer is as easy as it has ever been (I am not saying it's "EZ MODE" or anything stupid, but it has never been easier). I cut my teeth as a killer main back in the OG DH/DS/UB/IW/BT meta, and killer now is a day at the freaking beach compared to that nonsense.
I think the real issue here might be that after eight years your patience has waned and you're just burned out. Not to be a downer, but at a certain point the fun can't be brought back for us, because we're just cooked. All of us will get there at some point.
-
@UknownShredder said:
Ive been watching some content on killers, I wont say all is like this but when i watch it i feel like they are playing against extremely low MMR survivors that get stuck in walls and do not know how to loop properly and generally disoriented. Meanwhile i face coordinated groups with every meta perk in the game 4000 hours on their survivors and they loop flawlessly , You really nee to powder your nose and have coffee to even stand a chance.
So my question is basically, Are they tanking for content or what is going on ? The survivors they face is like when you pick up a new character you never played but yet have 1000+ hours primarily as a killer so its just slaughter.I'm sure a few are, but generally speaking they're just subject to the same scattershot matchmaking the rest of us are.
Despite what some of them might have you think, no one is playing in a mythical tier populated by golden gods. Potato matches happen to everyone.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3900711#Comment_3900711
Every single time BHVR creates a macro style killer, survivors complain until it gets reworked or nerfed to uselessness.
Meanwhile, survivors also continue to complain about killers like blight and billy who have high mobilitiy
Meanwhile, survivors also continue to complain about killers who are anti loop, like dracula, and houndmaster.
Meanwhile, survivors also continue to complain about killers who give information, like doctor, and old freddy.
Meanwhile, survivors also continue to complain about killers who thrive on hit and run, like legion, and wraith.
Meanwhile, survivors also continue to complain about killers who are good at slugging, like singularity.
Meanwhile, survivors also continue to complain…. and it goes on.
My question is always, what killers DO YOU FIND FUN TO PLAY AGAINST. Because reading this forums, and reddit, and people's reactions in game, there is no killer that is fun to play against.
Sure, there are going to be a decent number of surv players who are going to take issue with any killer who doesn't just roll over for them. That's just a given. But I think once you get past that noise, I think most people have killers that they enjoy facing.
But the level of disdain for SM is/was pretty unprecedented. And not just from surv mains, either. Speaking for myself, as someone who plays both sides extensively and sees the value in just about every killer, I almost never took anything positive from a SM match. Just a tedious experience, usually compounded by teammates going next.
She is less popular than pineapple pizza in Italy.
I think the SM situation is several steps beyond the typical level of hate relatively unique killers get, and that's why we're seeing this degree of overhaul.
She just wasn't going to work. And like Pulsar, I applaud BHVRs willingness to essentially delete and replace a killer power, even if I don't love the changes themselves. I'd argue it's something that should have been done with at least a couple of others, and I didn't think they had the fortitude to do it. But I also think this was the case that makes the most sense; very few SM mains, and historically unpopular amongst those who aren't SM mains.
Best case, the rebuild is successful and she sees some level of acceptance and more people play her. Worst case, she ends up essentially like the Twins, all but forgotten. Probably the same fate that awaited had they done nothing. They're just trying to salvage something here.
It's a tough pill for players who sank a lot of time and effort into her, and I feel for them. But it's a numbers game.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3900811#Comment_3900811
I suppose we won't know until we try and trying is better than doing nothing.
SM mains seem pissed, a lot of people seem mixed but hopeful.
That's about the breakdown.
Yeah, and we're probably looking at several months before this even makes it to PTB, so there's plenty of time for refinement.
But I do feel for SM mains who put in a ton of time learning to play her, because if nothing else, this indicates that old SM is dead.
-
My advice is going to sound like trite BS, but it really boils down to not taking the game seriously, because it's not a serious game.
It is often said to try not to get too worked up about stuff you can't control (easier said than done, lol), and success or failure at DBD is mostly down to stuff you can't control. RNG, SBMM, etc. are the most determinant factors, with skill lagging behind.
In my early days I used to get hella tilted, then I realized that DBD isn't like games that have things like balance and good matchmaking, and it probably never will. Once I really internalized that, it allowed me to chill the f out. Now I'm largely unbothered by this game's nonsense like 95% of the time.
I also always have another game or two I am playing concurrently, so I can switch gears when the burnout starts to creep in.
All that said, eight years in one game is a long freaking time, and DBD isn't super deep. It'd be perfectly natural to just be done with it. Probably healthy, tbh.
-
Lightborn isn't OP, lol. Good grief.
Regarding flashlights, the counterplay is pretty effective like 99% of the time once you get it down. I have conditioned myself to the point that I approach every single pickup as if a save attempt is incoming, even if I haven't seen a flashlight. And I think maybe 1 out of every 50 or so save attempts actually gets me. That's because flashlights are actually really weak, and I love to see them in the lobby as I know the survs are gonna waste a ton of time trying to get saves.
Current Flashbangs are another story since you can't see them in the lobby like a flashlight, and sound (or lack thereof) is an issue. But not bothersome to the point that I feel compelled to run Lightborn.
Someone in this thread compared Lightborn to Distortion, but I disagree. Lightborn doesn't do much that you can't accomplish yourself via mindful gameplay (neutering flashlights). Distortion
hashad an effect that can't be approximated.Full disclosure: I will on rare occasion run it against a flashlight team, but not because I fear the flashlights, but because I am feeling like a scamp and like to pretend I don't have it (putting my face in walls, looking up, faking pick ups, strategically picking up, etc.) and then in some crucial moment "carelessly" pick up in the open just to have the resultant would be save fail and leave the surv hung out to dry.
The idea that they think they are about to make a game saving play just to have it backfire tickles me.
-
I think it's decent, but I'm not excited by it. Its primary appeal lies simply in that it's something different than old SM. As others have pointed out, it just seems like it makes her into the Twins, which isn't exactly a popular model, to say the least.
I hear that is\t removes her uniqueness, but that uniqueness was uniquely despised. I know that's not what SM mains want to hear, but I think the one thing that is (or should be) patently obvious is that old SM isn't coming back. They haven't done what they've done just to roll it back; there is no future for Skull Merhcants past.
As was said the post above, the only path forward for her is/was total overhaul. I sympathize with people who really loved her "identity", even if I can't understand it. But this was always going be a teardown and rebuild, and expecting another round of tweaks would have been cope.
Even an approximation of old SM is persona non grata for like 90% of players.
As for me, if they were going to rebuild her power, I would have preferred they went even further than to make her an analog to another existing killer. Like take the house all the way down to the foundation and build a whole new killer power (down to ditching the drones, even).
But as the Drones are staying, a couple thoughts:
Drone Hacking: make the minigame properly challenging - like something at least on the level of Merciless Storm x Madness - and have failure not just reveal you, but have the drone pursue (like Knight's guards) you for a set time while continuing to reveal you. Maybe spice that up by making SM undetectable only to you (like Plaything) while in pursuit.
Keep the aura read on for success, but make it appreciably harder and give failure some actual teeth - like you failed, she can see you, is almost certainly coming for you, and you won't hear her coming. Might introduce a mild panic, lol.
Invisible scan lines: I like the sentiment behind this, but it will make life disproportionately more difficult for new players.
But as underwhelming as it is, there is a chance I might actually play as her in this new configuration. On occasion.
-
@Thesevenspirits said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3900331#Comment_3900331
Never said anything about entitlement. Why are you afraid of receiving messages? Shouldn't you should be playing against bots instead since you want to avoid human interactions?
I don't think people are "afraid", it's just that most of the time there is no value added by these interactions. At best it's usually a waste of time, at worst it's toxic and aggravating.
And again, it's a personal decision. I have 6K hours, and when I screw up (and like everyone else I do), I don't need anyone to explain my mistakes to me. I am aware.
If someone is newer and they want feedback, that's fine too. But it's undeniable that a large percentage of postgame communications aren't the least bit constructive, and just waste your time and annoy you.
And there are in game interactions that are very human, even without chat. Granted it takes time to be able to read that with the limited tools we have, but there is a massive difference between playing with bots and people, even sans direct communication.
-
@xGodSendDeath said:
Did you ever play against a SWF with a strong looper using the original Object of Obsession? It sounds like you didn't
I think the point was that you don't want to balance the game around what a coordinated four man SWF might do because they are the outliers.
And when original OoO was a thing, the entire game was a lot more survivor sided than it is now. For better or worse, what things were like five years ago doesn't have a ton of relevance currently.
-
@Chiky said:
this only proves rhat the game needs MASSIVE buffs to 90% of the perks
Either that or to have like half of them deleted. That will never happen, of course, but the reasoning would be the same - there are a whole lot of utterly useless junk perks.
-
@Thesevenspirits said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3900188#Comment_3900188
If you played well you shouldn't be scared to receive messages. It's called accountability
Lmao are you suggesting people who don't want to receive messages are just scared of deserved valid criticism? Hell, half of all salty messages seem to be people who played poorly rage dumping on the teammates or the killer. A lot of post game chatter is just salty people pissing blame on each other, and it's hard to blame people for simply wanting no part of it.
And regardless, no one is entitled to be able to tell someone off because they messed up in a video game, ffs. And if anyone is bothered by not being able to do so, that is most definitely a them problem.
As for the OP, console players limiting messaging to friends only is pretty common, and not without cause. It's a calculated decision for each player; you'll miss out on some constructive dialogue, but you'll also be spared from a lot of utter nonsense.
-
@cesspoolechochamber said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3899985#Comment_3899985
No the word unplayable is exactly what it means. Sitting on the ground slugged out waiting for the game to end or waiting around be unhooked just to run a few seconds to go right back down and back on the hook. Or sit on a hook and watch the match until your dead. That's what it's meant when unplayable. For a lot of matches you don't even have to touch the keyboard or controller because there is nothing you can do.
No, unplayable means you literally can't play it due to some sort of mechanically game breaking thing. Crawling around on the ground is still playing the game. Sitting on hook during a tunnel/camp it still playing the game. I've got over 3K hours playing solo queue surv, and if you can name a miserable experience in that role, I've experienced it. But aside from times when the game literally broke, I was still playing the game as it was designed to function.
It can be absolutely miserable and might make you not want to play (justifiably), but the game is functioning as intended. More than that, these are things that aren't all that common statistically, so holding them up as why the entire role is generally "unplayable" is not a position to be taken seriously.
And generally, people hyperbolizing things in this way is not helpful to the argument they are making. If you're trying to make a case for buffing solo queue (as it should be) and you say things like "solo queue is unplayable", "I get hard tunneled and/or slugged every game", etc. you're not helping the cause.
Why? Because none of those things are true. People play solo all the time, it's totally playable. Intermittently miserable, but playable. NO ONE gets tunneled or slugged every game. Or even half the time, regardless of their MMR. Claiming that just invalidates everything else you are saying.
It's like killer mains saying they face cracked four man SWFs almost every game. It's just ridiculous on its face.
Sure, one can infer that it's exaggeration, but when people make bombastic statements that clearly aren't true, the immediate response of people isn't "oh hey, they make a good point, let's get that fixed", it's "the person is clearly lying and isn't rational". It's bad faith argumentation. In fact it's actively counterproductive to the cause of getting solo improved. Sounding like a biased person in the middle of a full tilt isn't helpful, and people aren't going to take you seriously. Not the ones you need to listen, anyway.
This makes me think of a Choy video I watched yesterday profiling a killer main streamer who said things that are so totally divorced from reality that all you can do is marvel at it. Now it stands to reason that a lot of that was disingenuous rage baiting, but even knowing that, you wouldn't take anything this guy says seriously.
People saying solo surv is unplayable, they get tunneled every match, etc., etc. has the exact same effect.
Solo queue has issues that absolutely need to be addressed (and to be fair, some are and have been). I want to see solo buffed. But if a person is feeling super activated, they should step away for minute, calm themselves, and compose an actual case with thought out and articulated points (maybe some actual data) rather than vomiting hyperbole all over the place.
-
@bathwatergrill said:
Holy hellbeans, you got 3,1k comments on the forums. You just here to validate yourself by being a smartypants? I'm deleting my account here.
Lol if you think that's a lot just wait until you run into the people with 20K+
And I'm not trying to validate myself, I just get annoyed by hyperbole
-
@bathwatergrill said:
It's nothing but hard camping and tunneling. Solo queue is 110% unplayable. You have 0 exhaust/loop/aura/antitunnel perks. Killer is rewarded for tunneling and camping, when it's already meta in normal gamemode.
"It's nothing but hard camping and tunneling. Solo queue is 110% unplayable."
Seriously. People keep using that word and it's absurd. Not fun =/= unplayable. Barely ever winning =/= unplayable. Imbalanced =/= unplayable.
-
@mecca said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3899871#Comment_3899871
I don't believe the vast are survivor players, I really don't think there is a such thing as survivor main because there is no point in it. The queue times and incentives speak which side is most popular and fun. There is always an excuse to nerf survivors.
Tell me, if we are so worried about survivors waiting, why wasn't killers nerfed for 2v8. Killers waited like 30 minutes even with a 400 percent bonus for survivors and there was no nerfs to killer. Everything will deny common sense to keep the game killer favored and miserable for survivor.
The game would be so much more popular if it was fun and fair for both sides.
The vast majority of players being survivors isn't really a matter of opinion, the game wouldn't run if that weren't the case. I mean every match is a 4v1. And I don't see the incentive on surv 24/7 or anything. At least half the time I see no incentive at all, and when I do see it, it's like 25%. So logic and math dictate that ~80% of all players at any given time are playing survivor.
I'm not saying solo queue isn't tough right now, it is.
But saying the majority of players aren't playing surv or that there is no such thing as a survivor main (lol) is just delulu talk. The biggest slice of the DBD player pie chart at any given time are solo queue survivors. If it weren't so I'd be waiting forever to get into a killer match, and I certainly am not. I have no patience for waiting.
Now it's not as much that way as it once was, as the balance has tilted toward killer (no objective person would deny that), but the game used to be wildly surv sided. And people have been saying "just wait killer mains, you'll be waiting an hour for a match when no one is playing surv!" since 6.1.0, and it hasn't happened.
Okay, maybe it takes 30-60 seconds to get into a killer match instead of 10 seconds.
And as for your statements about 2v8 - people didn't want to play surv as much in 2v8 because all the novelty of the mode is in playing killer in tandem/with a friend, not because surv was weak.
2v8 is insanely survivor sided. I would know, I played pretty much only survivor (played five or six matches as killer total over the three 2v8 implementations) and escaped constantly. Like 75% of the time, like twice my 1v4 escape rate. Nerf 2v8 killer? lmao.
Now solo queue survivor is most often a rough experience. But people screaming "solo is unplayable! It's so bad that no one wants to play anymore! It's literally like being dipped in acid!" and flailing about isn't helping when they could be making rational arguments and actual realistic suggestions instead.
-
I like the characters that have, well character. I won't name them to avoid offending their mains, but there are a number of survs that are awfully basic and clearly popular because they are a conventionally attractive vehicle for cosmetics.
And don't get me wrong, that does matter (and choosing a surv because they are hot is valid) and I'd by lying if I said some of my main survs weren't chosen in part because I like their look, but I like to have a little uniqueness as well. And sometimes it's the look that is part of the uniqueness, but I didn't choose any of them because they were the easiest to look at.
I choose ones I find interesting. My "1a" surv is Haddie. I like her because of her lore, and that she looks like she's been through it. She has some depth and feels like one of she survs most appropriate to the setting.
My other "mains" are Yui, Yun-Jin, and Adam.
And one licensed one, Ash Williams, because I am a massive Evil Dead fan. Being able to play as Ash is what initially got me into DBD (and then I spent almost all of my first 1000 hours as a killer main, lol).
-
People abuse the reporting system because it's simply easier for a person to assign blame than accept responsibility, and it's often a knee jerk response.
It's human nature; "that person did something unfair to win" is a whole lot more palatable than "I got outplayed", "I really screwed up there" or the elephant in the room for all of us - "maybe I'm just not as good as I thought I was".
And once a person falls into the habit of blaming, it can get out of hand. I've seen streamers reporting people for absolutely absurd things like every other match.
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3899729#Comment_3899729
Everytime I go to reload as Huntress and accidentally get a survivor instead, I think about that.
Yeah, me too. A somewhat experienced player should absolutely know that there are certain killers who will frequently open lockers, and you often can't predict when. If you're facing a Huntress, Trickster, or Dredge, you have to very mindful when getting in lockers. That seems like it should be obvious.
And on more than one occasion I've opened a locker to proc Darkness Revealed and been literally startled when there was a surv in there. And them I'm like "well, I'm getting reported, lol".
But streamers screaming about stream sniping/hacking because they were found in a locker is something I have seen a lot.
And I think this is yet another manifestation of issues caused by people not playing enough of each role. A lot of these people are surv mains who simply aren't fully aware of what killer might be seeing/hearing. In a lot of these cases, there were multiple easily explicable reasons the killer could know they were in that locker, but they simply aren't aware of them. Some of them were breathtakingly obvious.
And of course the same dynamic applies to killer mains who never play surv.
So yeah, I think a good chunk of these frivolous reports are down to people simply not understanding the other side.
-
I personally love lighthouses and the maritime aesthetic, and would like to see it. That said, I'm not the lighthouse itself could be incorporated, unless it was just the base/ground floor.
Or maybe a collapsed lighthouse where the top/beacon is near the ground with the light still functioning. That would be cool.
And it has been proposed by others, but I'd love a killer in an antique diving rig. There was one in Scooby-Doo and it creeped me right tf out when I was a little kid:
I'd like to see an updated mature version, of course.
-
@NewPlayer100102 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3899536#Comment_3899536
They called Xenomorph OP on release, one of the media personalities compared human reaction time possibilities with the tail attack and gained a measure of support. It resulted in some changes, this is the historical precedent for the launch and tune cycle.
I understand your point and am basically in concurrence, I just suspect its not a design issue, its a media leadership influence issue.
And I'm really only bothering to point it out in the hopes that people will consider that people who play this game for a living are unlikely to push for fair change, as any change is potentially a threat to their source of income.
I mean people are always saying stuff. But as a surv did you ever feel oppressed by Xeno? I never have. Sure, the tail attack is/was too quick to really react to, but actually using it was tricky for a lot of players. And the rest of the kit is just kinda…meh.
Certainly not strong in the way Dracula is.
But I do think it's mostly a design issue, as these killers are in development long before anyone in the media puts eyes on them. And then they leave it to PTB for people to discover what are often fundamental flaws when the product is essentially complete.
And yeah, then we get creators falling over each other to pass judgement on them after only a few hours, which often results in some searing hot (and often quite poor) takes that influence general perception.
Lots of the most notable issues we've seen only after weeks or months into them being live. In cases like the SM, these design issues are so fundamental that they essentially have to nerfed to the shadow realm, or just left as is, where no amount of responsible feedback would have saved them. There are more than a few of these cases that where there was a fatal screw up early in the design process, either in favor of the killer's strength or to their detriment (Nurse, Legion, SM come most quickly to mind).
But the main point I was trying to make is that I disagree with the "BHVR drops OP killers and leaves them that way to make money" narrative. While they sometimes drop an OP killer, there have been plenty of killers dropped in a sorry state, we just don't remember them as well.
-
He'd need a perk where he just flops on the ground and feigns death whenever the killer so much as moves in his direction
-
@jedimaster505 said:
it's their newer killer and BHVR is 95% controlled by the profit motive. so their newer killers tend to be very OP.
That's…not really true.
Yes, they sometimes have issues, but most killers do not come OP. Not even the licensed ones. For every Dracula there's an Onryo or Xenomorph that come janky or just straight up weak, and they stay that way. The could have made a lot more money on the latter two if they had made them stronger, if that was their sole intent.
I think it's more just design incompetence. They make killers they don't know how to nerf properly, or with an exploitable fundamental design flaw that makes them broken (like SM). Nurse is the prime example of this.
Or they just move on to the next chapter and leave whatever broken mess they've made on the back burner.
-
It'll be like any other major release; people will flood in, you'll see a lot of the killer (too much, most likely), the novelty will wear off (and some will be disappointed) and within a few months we'll be right back where we started. The initial numbers spike might be bigger than most (probably right up there with the first RE chapter), but the lifecycle is always the same.
I doubt we see anything transformative. I feel like the best thing FNAF is doing for DBD is that the prospective flood of new players has ostensibly spurred BHVR to address game health as a whole so all the noobs don't immediately flee when they realize what this game actually is, lol.
As for the IP itself, I kinda hate it (no, I really hate it) and wish it were something else, but I don't want it to flop because I want what's best for the game. But it is a divisive property.
Personally I'm more excited for Kaneki and whatever follows FNAF than FNAF.
-
@Shroompy said:
Currently using Corsair Void Elite, theyre treating me quite well so far.
I've also had a good experience with this headset. Had one at work and one at home. Solid and reliable for the price. My only annoyance is the the mic arm will eventually reuse to stay up, which can be annoying if you're using a standalone mic.
It's hard to go wrong with Sennheiser, but there is definitely a cost associated there. But if someone is really wanting to hear the crows fart from 30 meters, then the cost might be worth it.
I've also used SteelSeries Arctis sets that were pretty good.
But I also have a cheap wired Razer Kaira I bought for couch DBD-ing on my PS5, and I feel like they sound better than more expensive sets.
Disclaimer: I only have one good ear and set the sound to mono output whenever I can so the surround features are lost on me
-
What I consider a "win" is really subjective.
Like as a killer, generally speaking it's a 3K (for an average match).
But if I'm playing say, Myers on Red Forest vs. a SWF, a 2K feels a whole lot like a win, lol. On the other end of the spectrum, if I'm playing as Spirit on Haddonfield versus a grab bag of solo survs, anything less than a 4K (or 3K and a hatch/mercy) feels like a failure.
And everything in between. In my personal calculus, if the team I am facing is clearly a strong SWF (and I don't think these are common), I factor in that I am playing at a disadvantage. I also consider the map and the killer I am playing when self-assessing.
Or if the team I am facing is clearly a bag of potato sprouts and I just toy with them and let a couple go, I consider that a win because I had total control of the match (though a waste of everyone's time due to bad SBMM).
There are just too many variables in this game to have an iron clad win condition, imo.
Survivor is also subjective (disclaimer: I play strictly solo queue). If I play really well, make some plays, get 3-4 iri emblems (or score the highest) and die, that still feels like a win. Especially if 2-3 of my teammates escape.
If I could have escaped but go back in to help someone and die in the process but they escape, I also feel like that's a win.
If I don't contribute much (either because I played like cheeks or I just didn't have the opportunity) but escape, that doesn't feel much like a win. Feels pretty meh, really, like the chips just happened to fall my way.
If I escape and my teammates die but I feel like I did everything I could (within reason) to help them, I feel like that's a win.
But more than anything as a surv, it's down to the fun, as cliché as that is.
-
@I_Cant_Loop said:
Having killer “skill” be based on hooks rather than kills would be a healthy change.
On the survivor side, it’s absolutely insane that “skill” is still based on escapes only and nothing else. There needs to be some way of rewarding players for playing well even when they have useless teammates and don’t escape because of it.
For sure. And the scoring system tracks (to a degree) how you actually play, so you know a more nuanced solution is possible. And it's not unusual for the best player on a team to die while teammates escape.
But as a certain hockey loving former dev once openly admitted, the system "ignores how you got there" in terms of the result. And there is little indication that has changed at all. Which is kind of okay for killers, but woefully inadequate for survivors.
But to be fair here, the accuracy of the ranking system is secondary to how the SBMM system actually makes matches, and how that affects queue times. Anyone who was around back during the SBMM testing will remember, there were times where the queue times were obscenely long. Ostensibly this what when they tightened up the parameters.
Any actual improvement to the matchmaking will come at the cost of queue times, and BHVR has to weigh how that will affect the player base (a lot of people won't be willing to wait). I am not confident we will ever see balanced matchmaking.
But of course that doesn't mean they shouldn't at least try to have the system measure actual skill.