UncannyLuck
UncannyLuck
About
- Username
- UncannyLuck
- Joined
- Visits
- 420
- Last Active
Comments
-
Then the clown anti heal perk will be weird though, since survivors will be able to tell they're in your terror radius by healing
-
@CrowFoxy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/974663#Comment_974663
Testing new ruin isn't required, this change is awful and any Experienced player would know that.
People on here say this about any change they don't like though.
-
@Divinitye9 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/972230#Comment_972230
Then destroying ruin immediately "unfixes" that issue. Fairly hard to have a match where you will pip when gens are being blown through.
Except Ruin doesn't last till mid game (at least according to the forums), and the emblem change was to fix the fact that you'd get bronze gate keeper even if you stalled out the last 3 gens for like 20 minutes.
-
@Divinitye9 said:
Because killers have been getting nerf after nerf after nerf after nerf.
What's completely pissing people off is the bias that the devs have shown on the survivor side. Everything was about their experience, NOT the killers. Except the emblem thing, but nobody honestly gives a damn about the emblem system.
Err, I've seen lots of people complain about how it takes a 4k to black pip at red ranks. Fixing the gate keeper emblem is a step towards addressing that complaint, no?
-
I'd say exhaustion nerf was probably similar, outrage-wise.
-
@The_Second_Coming said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/966332#Comment_966332
That is not being tunneled. What you described 99% of the time, only happens if a survivor gets unhooked right in front of the killer. They go for you and slug you ASAP. It's not tunneling so much as cucking the benevolence points of the nerd who got cocky and unhooked you in the killers face. The only one at fault for that is your jackwagon of a teammate. If you're going to sit there and say "I got unhooked in the killers face, but it's not fair that I got downed", then you have some serious entitlement issues.
How does he know where you are if he just hooked someone else? BBQ (and other aura reading perks) don't give you accurate information of who is where. They just know "there's people over here", but not who.
Either you were being foolish trying to go for a body block/flashlight save and the killer saw you, or you were working on a gen nearby and the killer found you near it. Neither of those are "tunneling". The killer chased and hooked someone else already. You hanging out near them is your own fault. You knew the risks of doing it, and you shouldn't feel safe doing it just because you have "60 seconds of invincibility".
That's a whole lot of words to justify tunneling, and the end result is the same: you're on the ground unable to play the game until someone comes and gets you.
And, yeah, it's not fun/fair that I get punished when my teammates make poor plays like unhooking me in front of the killer without BT. I can literally do nothing about it, aside from not getting caught in the first place (which is tantamount to just not playing the game, since no matter how good you are at some point you are going to get caught).
I don't run DS, so the rest of your rant has very little to do with me. I've already said that I think that 'if someone else is hooked and you are not in the dying state, DS deactivates' is also a fine condition.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/966332#Comment_966332
If someone heals you in that time, then you got to avoid being hooked and you got to keep your DS for a potential future use, so it still works out for you overall.
Right, which is why I think that 'if you are healed to the healthy state, DS deactivates' is totally fine.
-
@The_Second_Coming said:
It should absolutely deactivate if someone else is hooked. If someone else has been hooked, it's impossible that you are being tunneled in that moment. Period.
Err how's that work out if the killer immediately goes for you and downs you, then goes after someone else? You were still tunnelled and are unable to play the game until someone comes and heals you (barring running No Mither or Unbreakable) which isn't too different from being unable to play the game due to being hooked.
I think that, if we're going to add conditional deactivations, then healed to healthy and/or if someone else is hooked while you're not in a dying state avoids the problem I described above.
-
@AngelicLaw said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/943703#Comment_943703
Ah yes because its definitely not the 4 man toolboxes and gen rushing swf's
Its me the currently rank 2 legacy 1 trapper with more then 3000 hours that has to run Ruin and Corrupt Intervention to keep from getting gen rushed
Well, there are people with fewer hours than you that haven't been playing as long as you that manage without both corrupt and ruin.
Also, if you've been playing that long you'd remember gens use to be even faster, not counting things like original BNP.
-
Tbh having a hook indicator would be nice so I know who is on death hook. It's not hard to count, but I wouldn't ever make mistakes with an indicator
-
@EverflowingRiver said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/936059#Comment_936059
I never said they gave the stats in bad faith. And yes, a bad sample is a bad sample. In a case like this and similar ones though, the bigger the sample the better.
That's fair. I don't think we're majorly in disagreement then. Someone else assumed (or wrote as though they assumed) the stats weren't in good faith so I just wanted to clarify
-
@EverflowingRiver said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/935431#Comment_935431
My point wasn't about whether this study is good or bad. My whole point is more data taken over time is better than data taken in a short time period. That's statistics 101. The medical example was just a method to explain this point.
Again, the over time component is not the important part of this. Bad samples taken over a long period of time are still bad samples.
What you should do is make sure you take a representative sample, and a months worth is probably good enough to compare to the previous 3 months, for purposes of this conversation. It's *probably* a bit premature to be declaring it a buff without other contextual data (did other killer kill rates go up too) but like I said in the other message I assume good faith.
-
@gantes said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/935598#Comment_935598
TBH I feel like anything between 60 and 70% can be healthy depending on how hard the killer is. I think the reason why it's consistently above 50% is because all survivors escaping is pretty rare, at least in my experience. It's easy for a killer to secure a single kill in the end game, so in my observations at least 4 kills is a far more common scenario than 4 escapes. So what would generally be a 50% average ends up being like 62,5% maybe? I feel like a number around that would be fine too.
I think that 62% would probably be too high - I'd be fine with anything around 50-60% because you're never going to have perfect balance.
Something we should both keep in mind is that 25% is basically the floor for killers and 75% is something of a ceiling due to the hatch.
But again, I think they need to adjust the emblem system first for sure.
-
@gantes said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/935543#Comment_935543
You have said a lot of stuff but failed miserably at addressing my point.
You're looking at data without context. That's the point.
The Nurse is the type of killer who should NEVER have the same kill rate as easy-to-play killers, not on her current design. Not even at red ranks, no, because the skill threshold for getting at red ranks in this game is extremely low. If the Nurse has the same kill rate as easy yet powerful killers, it means that her skill cap isn't gating her performance properly. Because new Nurse players will perform poorly due to her difficulty, so if her kill rate is high it means the good Nurse players are roflstomping with her no matter what. That's how win rates work on every single PVP game. She's objectively the hardest killer in the game to start getting decent results with, and her ceiling is also arguably the highest.
Her kill rate at red ranks in November, according to the devs, was 65%, which is perfectly acceptable for a killer of her difficulty which was just brought in line after her changes. She should never, ever, under absolutely any circumstances have the same kill rate as someone like Freddy. Her skill cap should never allow that. That's just balancing 101 for any game.
The only way to fairly compare Nurse's kill rate to other killers is by taking data from hardcore Nurse mains, which can't be done sadly. And no, I don't mean anectodal evidence from Nurse mains who come complain in the forums because they can no longer 4K by existing. I mean actual, hard data.
What I was saying originally is that taking data without context would also make it seem like this game is killer sided. But the majority of the community agrees this isn't the case. This game isn't killer sided, Nurse did not fall into low tiers and data should not be interpreted without context. It's as simple as that.
EDIT: for reference, take the Clown's data to see what real weakness in comparison to other killers looks like. He's extremely easy to pick up for anyone who can play regular M1 killers, yet he has considerably lowest kill rate than even other basic killers that are considered weak like Trapper, Legion or Doctor.
Yeah I think clown could use a little love based on the kill rates, and then everyone probably needs to be adjusted down if they're aiming for 2k average. Obviously fix the emblem system too so it doesn't feel like you've gotta 3k+ to rank up at red ranks
-
@EverflowingRiver said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/934876#Comment_934876
Length of study is absolutely important to the validity of most studies. Thank goodness the medical industry didn't take your opinion of statistics into account when studying the effects on smoking.
A bad study that takes a long time is still a bad study. It does not become more valid because you do it wrong for a year.
I'm also not going to hold Behavior to medical study standards, since the FDA barely holds medical companies to those 😛
-
@GodDamn_Angela said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/934876#Comment_934876
So you are just twisting things to make a point?
They didn't take a month before and compared it to a month after. They took 1 month of data and compared it to 3 months of data, that includes additional information to understand the data better, and said it shows a net buff.
You keep going into threads saying "most people don't know how to read data" but have proven that not only are you unwilling to talk about the stats directly, but have some sort of superiority complex where you act like you are more intelligent than everyone else, without providing any substantial argument, and that's the end of it.
You sound like someone who looks at percentages, says they prove whatever they say they prove, and ignore the numbers that make up the data.
Here's a semi-quick example to explain what I mean:
A pet adoption center posts the data about the kinds of cats that have had up for adoption over the last 3 months, and the number of each type that was adopted. This includes "In the last three months 38 Calico cats have been adopted. That's about 60% of the Calico cats we've had available for adoption."
Then after some changes they release new data specifically about Calico cats spanning a month saying "100% of Calico cats were adopted this month! They are getting really popular! Amazing!" And they don't mention that they only had 10 Calico cats available this month.
It means literally nothing to just look at the percentage other than that of what was available 60% were adopted over some previous 3 months while 100% were adopted over this other month. It doesn't mean, as they state, they are becoming more popular. And leaving out numbers makes it useless in comparing it to previous data because each "percentage point" may not be equal.
But because the percentage is a higher number then they can state it because people like you don't care about the actual numbers.
If you can actually explain how leaving out numbers, and not providing where you got these numbers, provides usable and acceptable data and how percentages alone are enough to conclude a definitive conclusion then that would be nice.
I guess taking people at their word is good enough for you though.Edit: I meant to add that you mention "outliers". As if outliers in the 3 months is the only thing that could cause these not to be comparable. Wouldn't it be more likely that there are outliers skewing the data of the provided 1 month data? We have nothing to go on so we can't say either way, but to bring up outliers as only pertaining to the 3 months is, frankly, ridiculous.
Or, you know, whatever.
That's a super long response that doesn't really address anything I said. I assume good faith posts by Behavior, yes, because I don't particularly have any way to independently verify their results.
I post people don't understand stats because they don't. It's usually in response to people saying things like 70% is 2k on average, showing they fail to understand averages. Or complaining about 3 months vs 1 month with averages. I did mention that the one month might also have outliers, but I would like to see some evidence of that. For example, better killers might've picked up legion this month which would raise his kill rate possibly even if he got worse.
-
The stats do not (or did not, for the 3 month ones) include DCs, and it has been said that they don't look any different whether they have DCs or not.
-
@Vetrathene said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/934855#Comment_934855
Yes. If you look into scientific studies you need a valid comparison. Which means doing them for the same amount of time. Also the longer you do a study the more valid and realistic the data will be. One month of time is not nearly enough to figure things out.
That's uhh not how that works at all. Length of study doesn't correlate with validity of study. He could just take the data from the month before the changes and the month after and he'd probably see something similar (unless you believe that there are significant outliers in the 3 months or for this month that are skewing the data).
One month of data is plenty of time to draw conclusions. It's not like legion changed radically.
-
@ASpazNamedSteve said:
These stats are always interesting, but everyone draws too many conclusions from them.
People on here don't know how to read stats. See: people complaining about 3 months vs 1 month for averages.
-
You said not to count it, but I don't think that it's fair to not count getting to actually successfully use your gimmick builds as satisfying. If I make a stupid gimmicky build, and it works like once it's usually a fun game.
-
Thanks for the stats! Glad to see my initial reaction to the changes was wrong. I thought I'd miss being able to use DD during frenzy more but it turns out not to be a big deal.
-
@Peanits said:
Not blocking the ones that are being worked on gives you information as the killer. You'll know which ones are being worked on, so you'll know exactly where to go after hooking that survivor even if they hide in lockers to avoid BBQ.
Plus, it punishes people who get off the Gen to avoid letting you get that info since they can't get back on it for a hot minute
-
The fact that people insist that an average 70% kill rate is a 2k proves my point that that don't know how averages work. The fact that people bring up keys and moris when the data set is tens of thousands of games does as well.
-
@Seanzu said:
The irony of people drawing conclusions that gens are too fast from these videos that get posted every other week but disregarding anyone who brings up stats of 1000s of matches the devs tracked.
Most people don't know how to read or interpret stats, which makes them useless on here. Coupled with ridiculous stubbornness that shows up on here, doubly so.
-
@Monlyth said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/924567#Comment_924567
For Decisive Strike, I have to disagree. There are numerous examples of Killers who actively avoid tunneling and simply chase whichever survivor is the easiest target at any given time, but get hit by DS anyway.
Survivors will often use DS as a safety net in order to play very carelessly; jumping into lockers right in front of the killer, working on generators in front of the killer, or unhooking in front of the killer.
Also, why should the killer be forced to keep track of up to 4 60-second timers in their head, in addition to everything else they need to pay attention to?
If you're at the point where you're downing and hooking survivors fast enough to have to keep track of 4 60 second timers in your head, you probably don't need to be keeping track of much else since they sure as hell aren't getting anything done.
-
@UkilledLegion said:
borrowed time need little rework but ds reworked already :D
BT was already reworked
-
@dooces said:
killers have a 75% win rate, way easier to farm bp, and "win". you want shorter wait times for killers? dont make the game super easy for them so everyone plays them.
Err where did you read they have a 75% win rate?
-
Why are you buffing Ruin and Nurse's calling?
-
@The_Second_Coming said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/111306/the-kindred-buff-was-an-incredible-success
Bro. Don't talk trash about my autodidact. That is the perk to end all perks. RIDE THE WAVE!
it is mathematically worse than not running anything in that perk slot for most games.
-
Just run No Mither so he can't get blood from hitting you and his power won't knock you down from full health :)
-
Super complicated but looks neat. I like the flavor of it
-
They would have at the time I posted that comment, for the reasons I posted in a different comment. I still think that 'can't do anything but mending' shouldn't be a thing, but skill checks for mending are fine imo.
@Deadeye said:
@UncannyLuck not exactly, you still move at 2.7 m/s I think while in stun, not with 0.0
@xllANDRESllx the build you ran before was double stun reduce (to 1.75 sec?) and then frenzy hit the survivor, catch up while in frenzy, run past the survivor and body block pallets or windows, then stop Frenzy. If you could make it and block, it was an insta down, and that was pretty easy
That was true with the old stun too though, was my point. 110 => 115 is not such an increase that it requires an whole extra second of stun if the point is to give someone time to get away.
-
@Deadeye said:
You still would make him run both fatigue addons in addition to what you will use. The thing is that survivors should get a min distance after the hit as you can approach them with Frenzy easily and cancel it while in body contact. With 110% ms the 3 seconds were ok, as you catch up more slowly. 4 seconds is needed because of the 115% ms
110 => 115 is a 4% increase, so if 3 seconds was fine with 110 then 115 should be like 3.15
-
Missing them would remove a portion of the timer and reset progress. The latter bit is what would make it lethal. It's basically madness 3 but will eventually down you. Actually that's exactly what it is
-
DS is fine and doesn't need to be fixed.
Adrenaline on the other hand...
-
@Lentoro said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/897494#Comment_897494
Maybe mending shouldn't be considered a healing action, but I feel like the other Deep Wound changes are needed
Maybe the skill check one, but it's too easy to apply DW and it's up too often for it to be so lethal. If it's going to be a lethal power, then they'd need to nerf its uptime.
Turning the game into 'mending the game' wouldn't be any fun for survivors, which is why the first set of changes shouldn't be around. Legion already has amazing unshakable tracking in FF post stab so they don't need NC buffs for them.
-
The Deep Wound changes would be too much on top of the other changes.
-
Usually only punishes people who tunnel, or tunnel then don't wait it out.
As for 'the perk may as well be immune to killer for 60s', that's only really true during end game collapse in certain scenarios or with the right combo of perks. And yes if someone builds their entire character around escaping once (DS + Unbreakable + Deliverance) then they probably should be able to escape once.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/889084#Comment_889084
It’s so funny to me that people are only complaining about Forever Freddy NOW, despite it being entirely possible on Old Freddy with old Swing Chains, old Jump Rope, old Dying Light, old Remember Me, and Overcharge to make it close to impossible for gens to be repaired.
And if the survivors were indeed lucky enough to get all 5 gens repaired after 20 to 30 minutes, trying to get the exit gates open was even MORE of a nightmare.
Survivors have it WAY easier against current Freddy.
Err people did complain about him. Like, BE mentioned that in their rework video during the anniversary stream
-
@Spooky13 said:
The best part about this is that they are claiming "If you didn't like the Legion changes from the PTB, you should've voiced your opinion."
Because absolutely NO ONE did that. Sure, ok.
Legion needs a complete rework at this point. Legion being tied to Deep Wounds makes them fundamentally badly designed. Every nerf Legion gets almost always goes hand in hand to a buff to BT/DW. DW is practically pointless now, instead of changing Nemesis and BoP with Legion, you know, like they should have, they just completely made DW pointless. It's a band aid fix, meanwhile Legion sits in the corner, rotting corpses that they are.
Legion is one thing that devs never listen to their community about, they just go around, constantly avoiding any major rework they can, despite the massive cries from the community asking for a Legion rework to make them strong and fun to play with as killer, and challenging yet counterable for survivors.
But don't worry guys, Legion is getting Christmas sweaters, because everybody enjoys playing a massively gutted killer.
Where did they say that?
-
@twistedmonkey said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/871664#Comment_871664
That's what I stated in my first post 😉.
The stats are accurate for what they represent.
The devs have said not to draw conclusions from them regarding balance as they basically don't show the whole picture.
That means anyone who does draw conclusions on either side are not thinking about anything and everything and are just using them to try and fit what they want to believe but not what is actually the case 😁.
Idk, I think that if they're aiming for 50/50 and we're not even seeing 50% survival rate on the 'best' maps I think there is probably a problem.
I dunno what it is, or what the solution is, but they're not hitting their goal.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/871352#Comment_871352
I'm not coming up with any reasons for why the stats are wrong, no. I just gave some reason as to why the stats aren't fully representative of the game's balance, pointing out what factors have an affect on these stats. I see no reason to ignore those.
Of course, Moris and keys have the least influence on these stats, but I don't think they should be ignored. Matchmaking and ranking obviously has the most influence on the stats.
Also, if you say dc's aren't counted, does that mean the entire match isn't counted? Since one survivor dcing or suiciding on hook often screws over the other three survivors and gets them killed, even though they would have had a chance to escape if that one survivor didn't rage quit.
I believe that the entire match was discarded if there was a DC, according to Peanits. I don't know if they excluded suicide on hook.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/871284#Comment_871284
There's so much that goes into this. DC's, survivors suiciding on hooks, Moris, keys, afk killers, and in particular match making and ranking. It only takes one lesser skilled survivor to screw over the entire team.
DCs aren't counted in these stats, per Peanits. Also per Peanits on last time these stats were done, DCs don't really change what they look like.
For the other stuff, that's what's nice about average over large data sets. Unless keys and moris are being run every game, they end up being noise that gets drowned out by the sheer volume of games played.
But uhh I guess continue trying to come up with reasons why the stats are wrong rather than just... considering you might be mistaken?
-
@Plu said:
Theses stats would have more meaning of they were way more specific, like specifying the platform, SWF or not, perk builds/add-on/offerings used.
Just the map stats alone are pretty worthless because it's all ranks and all platforms.
No they wouldn't. You'd just move the goal post again once very little changed.
They posted red rank nurse PC only kill rate and she's at 65.8%. If you look at the red rank graph, she's right around 65%. And that's on a killer that everyone acknowledges is harder to play on console than PC.
-
So are we all going to ignore that the Nurse's kill rate on the PC only graph is nearly identical to the mixed console/PC red rank graph?
I do also agree about not releasing stats. They're neat to look at but people are just going to keep their opinions even if the stats don't support it, because most people posting on here are statistically illiterate.
If you're aiming for an average of 50/50, and literally every killer in the game is significantly above that, then something *is* wrong. Could be a whole bunch of things (maybe it's too easy to rank up as survivor, maybe moris are used frequently).
-
I believe Oni comes out on the 3rd so you've got like a week left
-
@Uxoricide said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/869084#Comment_869084
So arguing with stats that don't fit your personal experience is not feedback then?
I'm saying there's no use in having stats if that's all that happens, nor do I blame behavior for not releasing stats since that's all that happens.
-
@Uxoricide said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/869030#Comment_869030
Let me try to rephrase, people sharing their personal experience is feedback, whether they are right or wrong is another question.
That is entirely fair, and has nothing to do with what I wrote.
I am not saying people can't or shouldn't share their personal experiences or give feedback (at least, here). I am saying that there's not much point in having stats if you're just going to ignore them or argue with them if they don't fit what you've experienced.
-
@Uxoricide said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/868967#Comment_868967
Maybe the definition of Feedback will help you understand why people are sharing their own personal experiences:
Feedback
noun [ U ]
information or statements of opinion about something, such as a new product, that can tell you if it is successful or liked:
Have you had any feedback from customers about the new soap?
On top of that developers have said over and over again that they appreciate hearing feedback, whether good or bad so not really sure what your goal is with your comment as each experience is personal.
I think it would help if you actually read what I wrote. I'll try to summarize it again for you anyway though:
I don't blame behavior for not releasing stats because people ignore them when they don't fit their expectations, rather than considering that their perspective may have been wrong or adjusting it based on the new evidence.
None of what I said had anything to do with feedback.
-
Honestly this whole thread is why, despite enjoying the stats released by behavior, I don't blame them for not doing it. People will just complain that their stats don't fit their preconceived notions, which are based on personal experience.