UndeddJester
UndeddJester
About
- Username
- UndeddJester
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
Y'know, now I think about it... I definitely do get a very Jane Romero vibe from league of legends even in her base skin when looking at Forecast Janna...
I mean talk about mirror images...
And then there is her Holiday Horror outfit, clearly lifted from Miss Fortune too...
I mean talk about blatent...
C'mon BHVR come up with some ideas of your own... Jeez.
-
@Rudjohns said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885696#Comment_3885696
I mean, if we are not supposed to share our thoughts and preview text, what are we supposed to do?
Yeah, but is there any need for the obnoxious tone?
It would be far more constructive and helpful, and be far more likely to be listened to if you were to point out potential oversights and issues, without the snide remarks and baiting of Us vs. Them argumentation.
Your points are not wrong, but you decided to instead write your points in a way likely to provoke an argument, much like we are in now.
-
@Rudjohns said:
"To disincentivize and properly penalize this behavior, we’ll be implementing measures that will help us identify when a player is attempting to “Go Next.” Once identified, they’ll receive a Disconnection Penalty Point and lose an entire Grade. We’ll be keeping a close eye on this system to ensure its accuracy, but we’re confident that that this will help alleviate the issue. "
Great, I will bring Slippery Meat in every game, let's see if this "mechanic" will ban me
Extreme Hiding & Body Blocking PreventionTo combat this, we’re changing the way AFK Crows operate, so they can more accurately identify when a player is deliberately avoiding engagement with their gameplay objective. Once a player receives Crows, their location will be immediately revealed to the Killer. We’ll also be incorporating a feature that allows players to lose collision after receiving a third AFK Crow, which should prevent instances of Body-Block related griefing. "
Great, now slugging for the 4k is even stronger. Thanks guys.
Not sure what you're trying to acheive with this passive aggressive nonsense my guy.... You don't know the details of any these features yet... do you want things to change or not?
An yes absolutely test Slippery Meat, cause this will be important, though I'm in the camp Slippery Meat needs a rework.
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885647#Comment_3885647
They didn't find it. I hooked her by an exit gate and when I saw two of them sneaking around, I opened the gate, signaled for them to save and walked away. I couldn't even see the aura of it, probably because of the more vibrant colors.
Bless you Count, that rough a game eh?
Don't sweat it/let it get you down, we all have games where we get fed to the wolves every now and again. Pig has many layers of gameplay, and there is always something to learn, even from games like this.
Brush yourself off, take a break if you need to, and go next with a fresh head 😁🤘
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
I was finally beaten and quite badly as Pig recently. I got one hook only after all gens were completed using NOED.
The map was Toba Landing and I was humiliated. I had dominated all my Pig games since playing her and then this team just cooked me. Ggs to them though. I let them unhook and save their friend.
Is this a notorious bad map for her? There just seemed to be too much clutter to use her dash appropriately.
There are some frustrating tiles that can waste a lot of time for Pig on that map, but it's not too bad.
What probably cooked you is if they were on comms, your biggest problem will have been the fact that all the clutter makes it hard for you to see, and your main strengths in it (small profile and relatively small map to sneak around in) will have been completely taken off you and caused you a lot of problems.
Your head traps also won't have been fantastic because small map is a double edged sword, where although your map traversal is better, your headtraps are much less lethal... and your NOED would also have been easy to find as well. I assume your NOED was cleansed pretty quick?
-
@VibranToucan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885584#Comment_3885584
- Not unhooking is a mode mor einherit to 2v8. Lets say the following happens in 1v4: Survivor A is on hook, Survivor B is in chase and Survivors C and D are on different generators. Survivor D sees on the hud that Survivor C stops working on the gens, without starting another activity or entering chase. Survivor D can therefore conclude that Survivor C is likely going for the unhook and they don't need to stop working on their gen to do that. 2v8 is too chaotic to use the hud like that. Also, due to MMR being less strict you are paired with Survivors not close to your skill level this happens more often.
- Again, the same issue with your argument. Yes, Survivors can adapt to Legion, but due to the issues mentioned above this is easier in 1v4 than 2v8. In addition to that, in 1v4 Legion doesn't have a chase power. They can keep everyone injured, but unless the Survivors group up too much they need to be a basic M1 killer to get the down. Due to Legions partner having a chase power this issue doesn't exist in 1v4.
- Bugs in 2v8 are way more frequent tho. Due to smaller map selection the RPD out of bounds glitch was more common and I have never seen a Survivor get stuck on the killers shoulder in the normal mode. The lagspikes are also not comparable.
- That would be the case if people actually played their role. Medics often sit on gens and stuff. And, more importabtly, to go back the unhook example. You can't use the HUD to see if someone goes in the unhook in 2v8, but at least usually you can see across the map and see if someone else is running to the unhook or to heal that injured Survivor or to open that Gate and you can make a more informed decision. The constant sight blockers of RPD prevent that.
- It is more chaotic, but unlike 1vs4, cage locations are not revealed to the killer, therefore the usual issues of camping and cut off are not present, so the issues of SoloQ balance themselves out. You should on average have at least 5 survivors available to unhook, if none of them are on gens, and none of them go for the unhook, then I dunno what to tell you, survivors deserve to lose. How would you even address this? This isn't an auto battler where you switch your brain off and the game plays itself for you, Survivors have no excuse for letting a fellow survivors go stage 2.
- Yes, Legion does run over players playing bad, and yes you are more likely to get bad players in 2vs8... but playing bad is still playing bad, and the defence "most players suck, so this killer has to be held down to do absolutely nothing" is a poor argument. Now I am in the camp Legion would be fine with his regular ability, I don't think he needs the 8 charge buff... however in the same breathe, I'm not convinced he actually gets weaker by going back to 4 charges. The goal for 2vs8 is to eventually have all killers in it is it not? Unless your plan is to say "2vs8 can only ever have this list of killers, sorry SoloQ is too stupid for your killer to ever be added", people will have to learn to play vs. him at some point.
- Of course there are more bugs in 2vs8, bugs are a result of a constantly changing codebase, and an expected part of live service development. You can't expect a temporary mode that has so many radical changes to it to have less bugs than the mode that's been refined over and over across the past 8 years.
- Again, you can't force players to play well. There is only so much hand holding you can provide before you're basically not playing the game any more. Survivors have plenty of auras from their classes available to help them to help them on indoor maps, from gen auras, teammate auras, window/pallet auras, and auras through walls on the killers themselves.
Solo is not as stupid as people think, and the same issues with bad players can be felt on killer side too. I've seen plenty of Bambi's that get stomped by Survivors. Hell I've had a Wesker paired with my Trapper, and legit 50% of this man's downs came from my traps... and with fear monger I was giving him 10% regularly throughout the game.
The SoloQ/MMR argument applies just as much, if not more to killer.
-
@DestroyerBG said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885584#Comment_3885584
I wanna ask if the mode is so popular why is nobody playing survivor? if you say well because its fun to be two killers then I guess we have to correct your statement on it being very popular to "The gamemode is super popular on the killer side of things" because if nobody wants to play survivor how can you call the mode fully popular both sides have to want to play on all sides for it to be popular and honestly all the other posts of people having no fun in the 2v8 mode seems kinda against your argument. Probably it is fun but I personally can't see it because I am not insane to wait 20 minutes for a match with 6 survivors and 2 bots. Tbh not sure how any of you got the patience for that good for you but nobody should be saying the mode is so good and popular when the other side of the playerbase refuses to participate whatsoever to the point devs have to keep bumping their bloodpoint incentives to insanity XD
@A_T_E pretty much nailed it already. The simple fact is, a lot more people want to play killer in this mode… however to do so we need 4 survivors for every one killer, and since a greater ratio of people want to play killer, killer queues are longer…. we still have way more survivors than killers playing 2vs8. Your argument here would have just as much sense as saying "Well there are 4 times as many survivors in 1vs4 as there are killers, therefore killer is clearly an unpopular role that nobody wants to play". Sounds pretty silly all of sudden doesn't it?
I join games for survivors in usually 10 seconds flat, and there are at least 6 other people that want to play with me, and apparently 1vs4 constantly struggles for players when 2vs8 is live, and 1vs4 tends to be full of much sweatier games for both sides. This says to me that the bulk of the casual playerbase massively prefer 2vs8…. Soooo that seems like a pretty strong argument in favour of the mode. Just because you hate the mode is not representative of the rest of the playerbase.
I mean no offence my guy, but we've had a number of discussions now… and you seem to hate 1vs4 just as much… I just get the general feeling you don't enjoy the concept/game of DBD at all. I'm not accusing you of being a quitter, but following our previous discussions, I get the impression you tend to give up pretty easily given how you describe how "impossible" Survivor is, despite the fact that myself and many other players have no issues with Survivor at all….
-
I'll address your arguments from your other post here, because this one has the more traction it seems.
- Cages not relocating when a surv is near and lack of survivor unhooking - None of the problems you have described here are attributable to the design of the mode, and the same issues are in effect in 1vs4. Players playing badly by leading the killer to cages while in chase, or being silly and making the mistake of not to hiding out of range when a killer is camping a found cage is not a problem of 2v8, it is an accepted part of any game where the team that plays worse should lose.
- Legion in 2v8 - Legion only does well in 1v4 when survivors don't understand how to play against him. Having played with and against a number of Legions now, I have come to the conclusion that Legion is no more oppressive than any other killer in 2v8, but he does require Survivors to adapt how they play. The problem is if a few survivors do not adapt how they play and keep giving the Legion the scenarios he wants, then Legion becomes very strong and will mess over the players that ARE playing correctly. However if survivors play the Legion game sensibly and use their abilities properly, then Legion is perfectly managable. Again this is the same issue in 2v8 as 1v4.
- Bots - Bots are bots, there is good and bad with bots. There have been times where a bot has actually been the MVP of the round because they actually do things unlike the rest of the cowardly goombas in my team, the "no one comes to unhook" problem you describes is often addressed by the bot. There have been times they are trash, but I've had more instances where a bot directly helped me than I have bots directly hindered me. In my experience bots have tended to roughly even out their shortcomings with their strengths, and especially now there is only 1 bot per lobby. I often don't even notice a difference to a full lobby. The fact they often take the least popular role usually means your team is pretty balanced, so have often made up for the "weakness" of the team.
- Bugs - Bugs are bugs, there are bugs in 1v4, there are bugs in 2v8. This is a poor reason to write of any mode because it isn't a criticism of the mode itself. Invalid argument to the discussion.
- RPD and Indoor Maps for 2v8 - Very easy to find anyone to heal you. Injured medics have their aura revealed and can always see injured players, Guides have their auras revealed when repairing gens, often you can see players scatter as the Scout when seeing the killer aura and looking at the HUD. It's far easier to find someone is 2v8 than it is in 1v4. Herbs have been clutch for me plenty of times, particularly the yellow herb has granted me at least 4 escapes that I otherwise wouldn't have had. Green herbs tend to get gobbled up fast, so I don't often get to use them, but that tends to mean they are working.
I'm afraid the mode is extremely popular, the most popular mode the game has ever had… you're in a minority I'm afraid, and your arguments are pretty weak at the foundation, and tend to apply just as much to 1vs4, and in same cases, more to 1vs4.
-
@Daniel_Silva04 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885307#Comment_3885307
Her ambush is useless without the two yellow addons.
Skill issue.
-
@Jtflorencio said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885307#Comment_3885307
Bro I have the Pig on its way to P100 (92), I don't see the problem with the Pig having the same speed as Ghost Face in doing the "TBAG" let's grant that he will still be a Tier C or C+ Killer, love this Killer a little, the Ambush the same I don't know how your MMR is but the Survis that I get drop the pallet before it reaches a "certain loop" to force me to turn or break... (this is very serious even a low category survi can learn to do that) Myers can jump faster from the base, it's time for Ghost Face and The Pig to be able to do the same... (and break pallets too) after all they have no map control and suffer a lot against SFW (Survi with Friends) Remember that Pig and Ghost are memes just like the old Freddy
Oh! On a re-read of my original post, I wasn't saying you didn't know how to use the ambush man! That was general statement regarding its place within the entire framework of playing Pig, wasn't directed at you... full disclosure I was more paraphrasing what Druss and JMD said, so no offence meant my Guy 😅
Good to know you're a Pig main, changes the timbernof ny response a bit! To be a little more accurate, crouch speed would definitely be nice, I have a real hard time taking JMF off my loadout for the myriad of benefits it brings, it just makes Amanda so much better at ambushing, m1 gameplay/mind games, sneaking round the map in general... I would certainly not scoff at that... though to be fair to Ghost Face... his undetectable does have a cooldown, whereas ours is on demand, so I don't begrudge his crouch being a little bit faster. 😏
The problem with buffing Pig is there is a natural trade off between ambush and head traps, and her identity lies more in using that slowdown to her advantage rather than her raw ability in chase. The current ambush does it's job well, it has plenty of skill expression and unique mind games. There isn't a lot difference between Pig ambush compared to Chucky, and he has (or at least is supposed to have) a much better version of Pig's ambush. The difference is meant to be made up by Pig's RBTs... a lot of players see it as pure slowdown, which it simply is not... it's a whole macro game of itself and adds another dimension to Pig's gameplay... A dimension that a lot of players ignore/dismiss, only to end up writing Pig off entirely, I hasten to add -🐽-
If Ambush gets buffed too much, then inevitably she becomes more like Chucky, and her head traps have to be nerfed in response. This is what they tried to do in the last PTB where she got her ambush buffs, and Pig players across the Internet rallied en masse to fight tooth and nail to stop the nerfs to RBTs coming in. Thankfully (and credit to BHVR), they mostly listened.
So with that in mind, the direction I would lean for buffing Pig is to improve her crouch/stand up times, maybe roll JMF partially basekit, cause that buffs ALL aspects of Pig, without solely trying to push her ambush as her main tool/identity.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3885308#Comment_3885308
I can only assume people don't understand how their Survivor classes work to be able exploit their power, and/or are so reliant on their meta perks from 1vs4 they are incapable of switching their playstyleto natch their class.I think we have to be dealing with a perception, or an MMR, or a region based issue.
Because even if someone who thinks its killer sided at the moment is awful, in 2v8 its not as statistically significant. 1 bad survivor does not nearly have as much impact as 1 bad survivor in 1v4.
Personally, my experiences have been a lot more lopsided than before. I'll play against killers who barely get any hooks, and sometimes the killers will cut right through the survivors.
That's fair, and I have played a few games as killer where I bulldoze, and had other games where I'm doing all I can, but it's nowhere near enough.
For every good player In ee, I also see a load of bad ones...
- Guide is often not used to it's full potential, finding and breaking central gens early is important because you have the 3% great bonus. If you get hooked, fantastic you unlock the special ability that is super strong. Most guides sit on outer gens instead while on 0 hooks.
- Scouts often have players who forgo gens to ensure their perks are impactful, following killers around and revealing auras, which is fine, but ideally you should be doing gens with wide fields of view so can give value passively while pursuing objectives, and obviously looking for good pallets to reset.
- Escapists tend to do the same as scouts, forgo gens to keep boostingg people in chase, which isn't wrong... but its a one and done, get back to gens man. Escapists especially should be helping their Guides trying to break difficult gens, and giving them the fast escape when they need it.
- Medics thankfully are kinda foolproof. They usually do fine, though I've seen some being kinda cowardly instead of prioritising unhooks to get people back in the game faster.
- Killer side I often see people take a perk they want... rather than a perk that actually works for their partner... e.g. the Shadow then paired with Wraith/Trapper.
Ultimately I think there is so much fluctuation in both survivor and killer skill every game that it's kinda impossible really to conclude whether it's survivor or killer sided... at least it is with only the brief times we have it to assess.
I recall the original intent of 2vs8 was Chaos... it is certainly chaotic
-
I win so many of my survivor games in 2vs8... I don't know how anyone holds the view killers need nerfs...even when I die, I can usually see 6 survivors getting out at least... I'm not even that good.
I can only assume people don't understand how their Survivor classes work to be able exploit their power, and/or are so reliant on their meta perks from 1vs4 they are incapable of switching their playstyleto natch their class.
Not trying to insult anyone... but I can only see a Killer sided conclusion as people simply not using the strength of their classes.
-
As a member of the SAWciety of Swine (Eep... I'm definitely getting stick for that...), I think I agree with the takes from Druss and JMD.
The Pigs ambush is perfectly fine. You can fake, you can moondash, it has a good amount of skill expression, you just need to learn to use it. An idea they recently got me exploring is using the ambush to profile survivors. Use it just to see how they react and adjust your playstyle accordingly. As such I don't think the ambush needs buffs at all, it's perfectly fine.
We might need more buffs for her crouch speed though, maybe a buff to give her more combat straps, because as well as knowing when to ambush, it's also important to know when to cancel. When you crouch as Pig, your profile becomes very small. If you hide your red-light well (it doesn't vanish instantly), you can fake a survivor into thinking you're ambushing and instead stand back up for an m1. This mind game is very important on Pig, so being able to crouch/stand up faster helps all her interactions... not just ambush.
That said... 80% is a little extreme... that's a buff from 1s → 0.55s to crouch/uncrouch, which is super fast... if I eere to eyeball it, something 15% (0.87s) with combat straps making this 0.79s would be enough to make her a little smoother.
A faster pallet break is interesting, I've often liked the idea of Amanda having additional tools to aid her breaking pallets faster with a unique animation... I imagined a crowbar, a bit like how Charlotte breaks pallets with her hook weapon thing. Vaulting faster is Myers thing though, so wouldn't really wanna steal that from him.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
He would toss her around like a throw pillow.
Jesus man... there is going hard in the paint... but damn 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Even the lost Empire of the Inca's got humbled by that level of savage xD
-
@Skeleton23 said:
I'm Mainly a Killer Main but I do play survivor sometimes if I'm bored
Killer side: I main The Trapper, Ghost Face Mainly and I just started Liking The Hag. I like killers who take Skill but also not much thought:
Survivor Side: Fang Min is my personal favorite Survivor because I like to make sure the objective is being done even if I'm by myself doing it. Again I don't play alot of Survivor because honestly it's to easy in my opinion:
Hag has grown on me recently as well. I am a sucker for a setup/payoff killer (Trapper is definitely my second) 😁
Pig is my killer main. I literally bought DBD cause I was on a major SAW trip after revisiting the series a near decade later... I basically learned the game watching Pig guides from Scorpionz and Otz, and even having played all other killers and enjoying many of them, something about Pig keeps bringing me back.
She hits a nice combination of requiring good DBD m1 fundamentals, has many different build strategies/routes to explore with perks, has a good variety of add-ons for further build variety, has a unique macro game to play around that a lot of players do not respect or acknowledge (at their own peril).
Kate is my Survivor main. I used to be a Jeff main, as a tall long haired metal head myself, though the magnificent beards of this man is beyond my capacity sadly... Then I spotted and fell in love with the Award Night Opulence head on Kate... that black lipstick triggered a neuron in my chimp brain. 😶😶😶😶
Combined with some careful other choices of garb, and we have Metal Kate... though now I've mained her a while and gotten a number of different cosmetics on her, I do switch it up now and again...
Younger me might have switched to Sable when she was released, but Sable is a little too much teenage angst for my tastes... prefer a more mature metal lady nowadays 😏
-
I'm still inconclusive on him.
A lot of players don't play the Legion game correctly, which is true... but Legion with this extended ability tends to make breaking gens in the middle of the map difficult, and once you get down to a low number of gens in a small cluster it has become hard, especially against someone like Wraith or Spirit, who really thrives on injured Survivors, to crack the last few...
However in the same breathe… Guide class exists, and I have beaten quite a few Legions.
Also the Medics heal super fast... so Legion doesn't seem THAT oppressive to me, you can kinda undo his injuries on 3 people in like 15s flat...
Soooooo, I really dunno... 2vs8 even with 2 bots is still just as fun for me.... so still playing games and trying to work out what I really think right now.
-
Thus far my 2vs8 experience has been... interesting...
- I kinda keep winning in 2vs8… whether playing killer or survivor (a lot more survivor).
- Legion tends to prove a challenge, but I also see a lot of players not playing Legion game... so not sure how to rank him really.
- Bots have actually saved my butt and/or won games multiple times. They've also done stupid stuff, but hey, they're bots.
- Herbs have come in uber clutch on a few occasions.
- Survivor classes and 2vs8 in general is just as fun as it was last time.
- Wesker is buggy... I got hit after he vaulted a pallet with Uroboros while I was spraying on the other side and got instant downed... I dunno if that's a bug or has always been a thing, or if he gets a dash after he vaults a pallet now... I have no clue xD
- Still far less leaver dorks in 2vs8 than 1vs4... no quite 0 but pretty close...
My evidence is pretty inconclusive tbh. I've been having a lot of fun both sides... Maybe the higher level games are more frustrating... but low/mid level seems to be just as fun as it always was.
-
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3884466#Comment_3884466
You are incorrect. I read it whole. My whole point is, that I don't accept your premise of "get it all or I lost". And I argued that if you allow "get it all or I lost" on killler's side, then you should do the same as well on survivor's side (which is 4 out). Given this, most matches result in both side loose. But even in this case killers win way more then survivors, because 60% kill rate instead of 50%.
As for your 2nd statement. No it's not win. It's a loose. 3 people died. Survivors most definitely lost. Given your "I only win when I get it all" view on things, it means that survivors were worlds away from a true win. As survivor my objective is getting everyone out and I failed it miserably.
But if you start to think about it, the world is never absolute. There's a thing called "partial win". Your example showed exactly that. Killer won 75%, but survivors managed to get 25%. Overall killer most definitely won and being survivor feels bad, but it's still better then getting all 4 killed. The same way as getting out via gate is true win, but if I can't get that I will still take hatch over running at killer getting sacrificed. Hatch escape is still better then outright dying.
Fair enough.
Though I think we have a fundamental disagreement on what the game is and what it should be, and thus will just have to agree to disagree.
I believe the difference of our perspectives is in regards to the games theme and objectives as defined. You perceive the 4 Survivors as a team, and the game as far as your terms are concerned, is number of survivors escaped vs. number of survivors killed determines the outcome. If that were true... yes you would be right that 50% would be balanced purely on a team vs. team scale. This means that if 3 survivors escaped, but you had to die to do it, that to your mind is you winning, which is of course the way competative DBD is played. However DBD is not a team.vs. team game... every survivor who dies actually loses; they fail their objective. Every survivor who escapes is the killer failing their objective, and this is a subtle but important difference.
A lot of people say DBD isn't a horror game any more, but I disagree. Even if it's gotten cartoonish in a number of ways, it still explores the same fundamental ideas and principles that a real horror scenario would put you in... and the reason I reject your way of looking at the game is it completely kills that theme.
To save as many of your teammates as possible is your personally defined objective... but in reality as per the rules of the game, it is not an actual objective of the game, your objective is quite simply to get out alive by any means necessary. It is just as valid to play this game with a selfish playstyle. Most people don't... but someone who does, is not wrong.
This means that first and foremost YOUR survival comes before your team. This contradicts my previous example with the 2 man right? Well no... because if I know that I'm gonna lose, the best I can get out of the game now is to help another player win. That player who escapes is winning the game. They are not losing the game because 3 other survivors died, they still win... What this means for me dying is yes, I might have lost to the killer, but the killer lost a kill in doing so, I sacrificed myself and lost so another player could succeed... thatbis different to survivors winning and losing as a team.
Now in theory this should mean I'm always leaving when given the chance right? Since my goal is to survive? Well No… because despite knowing this, I am an altruistic player. I will always TRY and save other survivors, however... I do so knowing I am compromising MY ability to win. That to me is emulating the horror experience it intends, where if this were real the equivalent question would be "could I live with myself knowing someone else sacrificed themselves for me, and I had a chance, however slim, of saving them?".
This simple scenario is a great representation of a horror experience... if survivors are a team, 3 of us can and should leave for a guaranteed win while 1 dies. By your logic, that's a Survivor win... but we all know that isn't true... because we also know that player loses. The real world scenario the game is trying to emulate is that player actually dies if we leave them, so what are we gonna do? We compromise our own chance to win to save someone else...
You might call it risking the game to win more, but to me that is a very detached and inaccurate way of looking at the game. You aren't winning more because thats not your objective as defined by the game, you are deciding to risk your chance of victory to help someone else win, similar to how the games in something like Squid Game work. It's your humanity that is being questioned, not your actual win condition.
On a personal preference note, the decision to go back and save a player, only has meaning if the threat of failure is real, and you are actively giving up your personal chances of victory to do it, and a survivors individual chance of survival in a trial has to be lower for that decision to carry any weight, excitement and meaning... As I've said before, the 50% killrate means that the gate is opened AT LEAST 60% of the time... making this decision to go back not just less meaningful, but also the status quo.
I myself find Survivor role much more thrilling because a 4 man escape is rarer. I tend to find the games where a 4 man escape occurs to be kind of boring more often than not. The games that are really exciting are where there is a desperate scramble between 2 or 3 survivors left to get out... but most 3 man escapes are typically quite easy escapes, and 4 man's are very often snooze fests... that means on a 50% killrate, 30-40% of our survivor games are actually quite uneventful and boring... I personally would like less of these games, not more.
We'll likely continue to disagree I'm sure, but the point I'm laborious getting across is I would personally find the game much more boring at a 50% kill rate, where gate scrambles occur 60% of the time and I still maintain, you can't call the killer failing to complete 50% of their objective a draw game for killer...
Now if you made the killer objective a certain number of hooks... then yeah, in that scenario a tie makes more sense... but with things as they are neither side has a concept of a tie, the objectives are binary.
- Did you kill all survivors?
- Did you escape?
That is it. There is no concept of a draw here, nor winning more as a survivor unless you personally define it.
-
@Nun_So_Vile said:
Describe your boop etiquette.
Do you let survs boop leave, no boops, or something inbetween?
Let's Discuss.
Everyone gets one... after that the right to boop must be earned to my mind.
I will accept the first boop... but I expect a genuine effort to win the trial after that, not meme all game. I will happily accept boops at the exit gate, and a death hook survivor who surrenders and boops will be pardoned...
However, teabaggers, sandbaggers, flashlight clickers, rats and Boil Over users shall not be spared... 💥🐽💥🔪
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3884330#Comment_3884330
Your argument fails at the very start. Gunman winning only if he kills all knive people is super arbitrary. The other extreme of that example would be if gunman escapes with his life without killing anyone (should game allow it).
Now given dbd, you as a killer want to kill as many survivors as possible. On the other side as survivor you most definitely want to escape. However vast majority of players would consider it winning more if it's not just "i escaped", but also "i and everyone in my team escaped". These are the 2 extremes where (after some simplification) "you can't win more" (and yes for simplicity i am ignoring hook states).
So basically as killer i want (my objective) 4k, as survivor i want 0k. Math tells me that means 2k (50% kill rate) instead of 2.4k being the exact split in the middle. That is fair compromise.
If you don't like this way of looking at it, then take devs explenation of killer playing 4 gamed in 1 trial at the same time - if he kills 2, it means he won 2x and lost 2x. That's 2 wins only in 50% kill rate case. Anything above 50% means killer is on average winning more (partial) games then loosing.
And this still conveniently counts hatch escape as an escape - which it absolutely isn't. Hatch is pity chance giving part of the game which only serves as an incentive for survivor to not quit the game when it's hopeless. Most survivors prefer all generators fixed gate escape over hatch escape, because free random hatch does not feel like a true win. Fully valid alternative to whole hatch mechanics would be vote to surender the game (which would probably mildly annoy killer as he's not able to enjoy free win)
However devs clearly don't agree with fair 50% balancing, because in this fair setting, there's less killers then required amount - and the reason for that is stress/annoyance/etc with killer role. But instead of fixing that, people are trying to twist the logic why it's actually fair that survivors should loose most games and killers are entitled to outright loose (meaning not getting even the exact split between perfect win vs perfect loose) veeeery few games because "that's fair".
NO IT ISN'T. Not by a long shot. And i refuse to play this game because of it - survivor is in game for free killers win just to bribe killer players to play the game even thru all the problems that make killers less desirable.
Survivors undeserved loss is directly balanced against killer's frustration. For me that means both roles now suck hard and i am not playing either one (not since chucky). And that is not going to change until the game gets fair while at the same time less frustrating for killer. So long as it's like this, I rather play actual fair (symetrical) multiplayer games instead (where 56% win rate of 1 side equals to very fast hotfix and lots of talk in community compared to TARGETTED FREAKING 60%).
Your argument fails at the very start. Gunman winning only if he kills all knive people is super arbitrary.
I feel like you didn't read past that first point, because the point I'm making is you cannot define a tie in my example asym, nor DBD.
The instruction for killer side is to kill all survivors. That is the killer objective, not "most" survivors, ALL survivors. If you do not do that, you failed in your objective, and by escape we agree that gen powered gate escapes are the only true escapes. There are different degrees of failure in this killer objective, but anything short of a 4k/3k with 1e through hatch is a failure by the killer to prevent survivor escapes. The problem is, your 50% killrate has the killer fail their objective at least 60% of the time, while Survivors as a team complete their objective of powering the gates and getting out through gate also at least 60% of the time... You probably disagree with that statement, but let's think about it.
You describe the survivor goal of as many survivors making it out as possible... OK, but do you not also consider it a victory if you have 2 survivors left, and 1 manages to distract the killer long enough for the other to open gate and leave? Or is that not a victory for the survivor team? I would certainly consider getting my teammate out alive a victory, because to my mind, I as the survivor cost the killer a kill. That's a victory by virtue of the fact it ditectly denied the Killer their objective.
That's the crux of my point, the killers goal is to kill all survivors. Killing 4 survivors before any escape as an objective is no different in its terms compared to my little asym example game where you have to kill 4 enemy players before they kill you. A 2k is not a draw, it is a factual statement that a 2k is the killer failing their objective.
This does beg the question, if the killers objective is to kill 4 survivors, how often should they succeed in that objective? By your logic that would be 20% of the time, but it would also mean 20% of the time we should see a 0k. Would you say that every 5 games the killer 0king should be the status quo? Cause I would definitely expect a 0k to be rarer than a 4k if the killer is a tangible threat as the power role.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3884316#Comment_3884316
this is so backwards as saying we need HUUUUUGE surv buffs, because survivor's objective is to escape. Would you consider it win if someone you met died with you? Absolutely not. Even getting hit is traumatizing. So by the same backwards logic the game should be balanced around survivors escaping without getting hit… That's their objective after all
I mean not sure I understand your argument tbh, but I suppose an alternative way of looking at it is to simplify the idea of an asym.
So I have an asym where 1 player has a gun, and 4 players have knives. The Gun player has to kill all 4 Knives players to win. Every knife player wins if they are alive when the player with a gun dies. This is a simple as the asym concept can be.
What is neat about this example is it follows a similar gameplay curve as DBD, where the more Knives players that die, the less likely the Knives players are to win, to the point that a 2vs1 is likely a losing game for Knives, and 1vs1 is petty much guaranteed death for the Knife player.... but for the sake of ease we'll assume each outcome is equally likely.
Now what does a "tie" mean in this context? Our Knives side might call it a tie if 2 knives die and 2 knives live... therefore Gun players should expect to have a 50% killrate. However from the gun players perspective, in 4/5 games they are getting killed. They are losing 80% of their games. Even with a 60% killrate, the Gun player is still dying in 75% of their games.
Lets now assume when we get to 1vs1, the Knife player can forfeit and Gun gets to win, and the last Knife player is considered to draw (like DBD hatch). Even then, Gun is making it to the one vs. one 45% of the time (effectively a 3k in DBD), winning less that 50% of their games.
This is semantically no different to Killer in DBD, with a 50% killrate you are expected to be failing to kill 4 survivors in 80% of your games, and failing to kill 3 players in 60% of your games. You don't die in DBD, but you still failed your objective, and your argument is effectively "be happy with a draw"... even though it's not a draw... you failed as killer if you got a 2k.
If I'm wrong, kindly tell me where my argument fails.
-
After having this discussion 100 times, I think one misconception that a lot of survivors have is the killer draws on a 2k... the killer hasn't drawn in this scenario.
The killers objective is to kill 4 survivors... thats is it. You achieve this most commonly by preventing gates from being powered at all. No one would deny preventing the gates being powered is a killer win.
The only reason a 3k is considered a "win" is because the 4th survivor can escape via hatch or out of gate once hatch closes, so 3k being a "win" accounts for the Survivors last ditch hope mechanics... not because the Killer was "close enough to a 4k so that's a win". If hatch didn't exist and survivors MUST power the gate via gens to escape, then 3k would also not be a win for killer, since you failed to hold the gate and prevent survivors escaping.
I think this is where a lot of this "2k is a tie" mentality comes from.... it doesn't consider the fact that the terms of the trial is simply a race to power generators and open/escape through the gate vs. killing all survivors before that happens. Failing to hold gates means you allowed legitimate escapes from the trial, thus you failed to maintain enough pressure for the killer objective.
Due to this I think the 60% killrate is fine, even though I play more survivor than killer... however since this discussiom keeps coming up, I feel like the sweet spot for most players is a 55% killrate, and my logic is:
- The gate not being opened is unequivocally a killer win.
- The gate being opened means some number of survivors got a "legitimate escape", i.e. the killer failed their objective of killing all survivors. (This is why killers don't see a 2 man escape as a draw, the killer failed their objective of preventing any escapes through gate).
- On a 50% killrate, 60% of your results are 0k, 1k, or 2k, meaning the gate must have been opened after completing 5 gens 60% of the time AT MINIMUM, thus the killer fails to hold gate 60% of the time. (The best case scenario assumes that vast majority of 1 man escapes are hatch/closed hatch into gate escapes, which is probably true)
- On a 60% killrate, only 50% of your results are 0-2k, meaning only 50% of the time the gate must have opened after completing 5 gens and the killwr fauled to hold the gate. This means the killer is succeeded at their objective of preventing any "legitimate escapes" 50% of the time. (Why I think it's fine).
As such on a 55% killrate, survivors complete opening the gate 55% of the time, but killers kill 2 or more survivors 55% of the time, therefore both are completing their respective objectives equally outside of scrambles at gate.
Given majority of the player base are casual survivor or SoloQ players, a 55% kill rate is less demanding outside of high level and SWF coordination.
However that is an admission that killer at high level will suck... so... Personally I still vote for 60% killrate.
-
Well done keeping clean... but we all know what this is really for…
I've been to the DBD discord. I know exactly what's up.
-
As a regular Rocket Launcher detractor.... I approve this message.
In seriousness, this is a great idea. You can have a believable rocket launcher without breaking the logic of the game, nor having to make your rocket launcher a bubble gun.
Might be good to tie it exclusively to the Finisher Mori... just so photobombing doesn't look silly... Though now I think about it... I'd probably be happier to give it a long set up animation and the rocket launcher to simply gibb any other survivor caught within the blast radius...
That would be a funny and unique Mori Interaction 🤣
-
It's kinda poo as a perk really... unless you're hard building for an end build with perks like No Way Out or Remember me, it's kinda a self defeating perk, since you're essentially planning to fail holding gens, but think you can still get pressure before survivors open gates.
However the swing of power it grants is so wide depending on how the rest of the trial went… if your already miles in the lead, it basically guarantees a 4k, if your miles behind it more often that not merely prolongs the inevitable. It can clutch you the game for a 4k if the game is close, but it can also do absolutely nothing, or give you anything in between... it's good at creating chaos... that's about it.
The only time it's really gonna give you value outside of specifically building for it is if you have the game on a knife edge, and that last m1 down is the surprise when camping out a hook and preventing the last ditch effort of altruistic survivors taking hits to get the unhook and sprint to gate at end game.... hopefully you have a bunch of people on death hook or to make something of it... otherwise it's kinda ass.
-
My suggestion to combat slugging has for a while now been some variant of, when in the dying state:
- Hold the rush button for 5s to enter Desperation.
- Bleedout increased by 50% (1.5 c/s or 240s→ 160s to bleed out)
- Grunts of Pain are 50% louder
- Crawl Speed increased by 75%
- Desperation ends after releasing the rush button and remaining still for 5s.
I believe the biggest problem when a killer is slugging is the killer can keep easy tabs on the survivors they've slugged cause they are so slow. You can't get apart or move anywhere really while slugged. This means the slugged survivor can't get anywhere safer to be saved, and if you/a survivor get caught trying to resolve the slug, you double the killers pressure and can't split up to then try and break the slug chain.
This Desperation suggestion included a slight increase to bleedout speed, for which I have for 3 reasons:
First it's thematically satisfying. If you're injured yet desperately crawling away, you're disregarding your injuries to go faster.
Second it gives a meaningful choice with appropriate trade offs of whether you want to use it or not, since you do bleed out faster and can be found easier. This gives slugged players some actual agency of trying to get away from hot spots and key objectives to somewhere where their teammates can potential save them.
Third in a hopeless situation it gives a small means of mitigating slugging for the 4k and full team slugging, without heavy handedly going NOPE! BAD KILLER! HOW DARE YOU TRY TO WIN! Because like it of not, a successful 4 man slug is a victory for the killer, and trying to remove that completely doesn't just hit aggregious startegies, but also affects opportunistic slugging when Survivors are being aggressive too.
So yes I agree a lazily implemented "super fast bleedout" or "give up" mechanism is dreadful, an increased bleedout time built into a more reasonable mechanic has a place.
Basekit Unbreakable is too much of game changing effect to manage... every suggestion I've ever read always has some outlier, some situation where it breaks the game and can create scenarios where the killers hands are tied and they can't pick up.
Instead of acknowledging that fault, players tend to just wave it off as not important, or try and shoe horn in some really ugly additional rules/conditions to combat it.
The Crawl Speed route is a much more innocuous change that isn't gonna suddenly completely rewire and break the game.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3882797#Comment_3882797
It's their general playstyle. Just had a game where every survivor was dead or on death hook, and neither bot had been hooked yet. This means survivors are being eliminated more quickly, without hooks being spread the catch up mechanic isn't working. They seem to be good at avoiding ever getting in chase with killers, which makes it kind of pointless.
I still maintain if theyre gonna fall back on bots, bots should be super buffed with teammate support perks added to their kit that killers can't ignore. My list would be:
- We'll Make It
- We're Gonna Live Forever
- Shoulder the Burden (no other downsides and 2 uses)
- Babysitter
- Bot gets the effect of Quick Gambit for all survivors, and is stackable.
At that, the bots do their job of effectively supporting the Survivor side and actually have enough buffs that they are a tangible threat to killer success.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3882871#Comment_3882871
The 8 hits thing is a nerf. Instead of getting a down on your 5th hit, you don't get it til the 8th. This increases the likelihood someone will stun him before he gets that far.
But getting the down isn't the difficult to deal with part of his power, it's the permanent slowdown he inflicts by constantly forcing people to mend and often having the bodies to mitigate the split apart strategy you should be employing vs. Legion.
Ofc once your injured, other killers like Wesker, Spirit, Blight, Nurse and even Wraith become much greater threats, so his passive of keeping as many of the team injured as possible, the natural slowdown it brings, and the very limited options to prevent him doing it, makes him a fantastic support, and was what made him very strong in the fan made 2vs8 mod years back...
As I say, you shouldn't mend until Legion drops power, and the longer he stays in it, the longer you gave to wait... Legions power in this mode isn't downs, it's his constant harass, slowdown and forcing survivors to remain injured.
I'm not sure how strong he is yet cause it's early days, but Legion was always good in 2vs8 because his ally gets to benefit from all of Legion's strengths, but none of Legions limitations.
-
I did wonder if Legion really needed his 8 hits change... it felt like his basic power would be good enough, since it naturally does well with more Survivors.
Against Legion you want to not mend until he's out of power... but having 8 hits makes this last even longer, and as a bonus gives him the power to track down and tunnel survivors fresh off the hook with ease...
Basically him passively existing prevents anyone from mending and holds everyone in stalemate while his teammate just cleans up the injured Survivors...
-
I agree, however: -
- Skull Merchant was the poster child of the 3 gen/gen kick meta, which was a bit of a pain point on all killers, but Skully especially thrived on it.
- Her release was rushed and the false Predator hype, her lore, her appearance and her power didn't ingratiate her to players.
- The Chess Merchant game vs. Team Eternal made her a griefer magnet.
- After her rework, her power was heavy on loop cut off, while literally taking barely any effort on SMs part compared to Survivors (She never even had to switch drone directions at all, but Survivor had to track SMs position, current haste stacks, Bloodlust, drone position and current rotation, loop size and timings, current stacks of a claw trap,locations of other known drones, etc.)
- She was easy fodder for Streamers and Content Creators to dunk on for Content.
- Her rework massively improved her potential, but she still had problems, but instead of addressing those problems, the community looked at the previous points and decides they wanted her head, and refused to discuss anything about her.
I understand why Skully was done dirty like she was... but I see a killer that was interesting in a lot of ways, where although a lot of things missed the mark, there was a lot of potential.
If she hadn't been rushed out and had a little more time in development, I think she could have been a pretty good killer... the first strong setup/trap killer since Hag, which is my favourite killer archetype.
It saddens me how vitriolic the community was/is around her. Even though she's been cut off at the achilles tendon, and is basically an m1 killer with a bit of stealth and nothing more, so many people still wanna see her dead and buried... and refuse to offer anything constructive on how to make her better.
I can't help but think if she's that hated, might as well throw Trapper and Hag in the bin too, cause she was basically just a better version of these 2 killers.
-
Hmmmm... would mostly not come into play, even if 99ing gens survivors are likely wasting more time than its worth if it does come into play... so it's a niche change....
Might be a nice thing to still permit headtraps to do something after gates are powered... the big questions are:
- Does being chased pause this timer?
- Does being hooked or slugged pause this timer?
- Is the survivor allowed to escape with a headtrap still on their heads?
If the answer is no... not a bad change idea at all... but getting caught at the end while a trap is still in play is a death sentence... 🤔
Might work as a "just leave" mechanic if a survivor can still leave while the trap is not active... but are always on the timer through a hook and what not... it's interesting to think about 🤔
-
Actual footage of console players in toxic end game chat....
-
@Spare_Them_Mori_Me said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3882241#Comment_3882241
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3882256#Comment_3882256
He's in Canada and getting a Chinese team, I think? I imagine the ping is horrendous lol. I wonder if they all disconnected on purpose or due to ping.
But why does every player have Chinese/Japanese (couple of those characters have Japanese Katakana characters in the Kanji, but not sure), but regardless why are all people with these characters if this game is in Canada?
Is not impossible obviously for a Canadian player to have these characters... but why do they have them? Not saying lying... but it does raise an eyebrow... and I know I have never been paired with Asian servers...
My immediate suspicion is VPN...
-
@MechWarrior3 said:
The P2 killer going up against those prestige levels good lord.
Hold up friend... we're making a lot of assumptions here...
- What are the rest of this killers prestiges?
- How many games of this killer character has this player played?
- How many hours do each of the players have in DBD?
Prestige levels are a misleading metric for player skill...
It also looks like we have a players DC to a bot... we don't even know the outcome of this game... but on face value, it's not looking good for survivors... is this DC player the subject of the post?
Why are there a bunch of Japanese Kanji characters for a entirely Japanese lobby in Canada?
Lots of unanswered and suspicious points here....
-
The one thing that I think would be cool is a character p100 charm you could equip on your character if you choose to... like an Iridescent character model or something.
Since we have removed the character levels from lobby (one of the really solid changes of the last year IMO), the players who do want to p100 a character and display it proudly in the lobby have a way to do so, that is also small and relatively innocuous.
Entirely optional, and pretty much harmless to the community as a whole.
A banner for the p100 character would also be nice. Seems a cool yet small and reasonable reward for dedicating to a character.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3881696#Comment_3881696
We're tired of improving. At 3000-5000 hours in, we expect to start seeing the fruits of our labor, but instead we get continually told to get better. Well, when is the survivors' time to get better? I haven't seen it. They've had the same broken tiles and perks for years, and it's such a taboo to criticize those things, that killers have bought into it and turned to blaming stuff like Windows for their defeats. It's the loops, not Windows, that's to blame for straight-up not being able to get good survivors.
We want to win, because that's how skill is shown and how reward is given in every other game in the world. I hate this "invent your own win condition" idea. Now, we do win, but not enough at the times when it truly matters. Anybody can beat a subpar survivor team. It's why killers supposedly go on all these long streaks, numbering in the triple or sometimes quadruple digits (poppycock). But the moment 1 decent team appears, it's over. I'm experienced at running no-gen defence builds, and the time crunch is absolutely ridiculous. It's like there's a certain amount of time you need to kill the survivors, and the game only gives you half that much time. And if you do run gen defence, then you sacrifice info or lethality, leading to an equal lack of momentum. So all you're doing, really, is counting on survivors to make blunder after blunder, or else I guess you just lose, and then get told "You can't win them all." We'd love to legitimately get outplayed and call it GGs, but that almost never happens.
Saying that tunneling and slugging is the easy path, and that it's a crutch and gives you stuff you didn't earn, is just wrong. Like, what do you mean? It takes a certain amount of game awareness just to realize those strategies are the best. Then comes execution. You have to still maintain quick time to down to even make the strategies work, especially slugging. Doing these things isn't at the cost of practicing on chase; they're done at the same time.
I like the idea that you can simply let go and not really care as much, just like I don't get as mad anymore at losing these scripted matches. But you can become so detached from the tension of the game that you don't even want to play anymore. That's what we don't want to do: throw in the towel. That's 1 of 2 things I think a lot of the playerbase wants to have happen to killer players. The second would be to just keep playing killer no matter what, even though the game literally doesn't support the ability for the role to win. It's been said countless times recently, about hooking, downing, injuring, and even chasing continually becoming less worthwhile. You just look at the history of balance changes, and there's your proof. Whereas survivors cried injustice about losing infinites, instaheals, keys that let you skip the gens, DS that could only deactivate through the timer, and DH for distance, killers lost... stuff that made the gens slower or chases faster… when they played well. 🤷♀️ It's not their fault that the survivor's objective is way faster than theirs, and the gap keeps getting wider.
I read all of this, and you make a lot of good points, and to be fair I do feel like I agree with a lot of your perspective. I apologise for the length of this response, but there are a lot of points you discuss and a lot of nuance I feel is needed to be added. 😁
Survivor Skill and Tunneling/Slugging
Well, when is it survivors time to get better?
//..
Saying that tunnelling and slugging is the easy path, and gives you stuff you didn't earn is just wrong.
I whole heartedly agree, and am one of the first to point the finger at survivors who make things harder for their team. I've maintained for quite a while that tunneling and slugging are largely something that largely only happens if the survivors present the killer with the opportunity to do it.
There are exceptions to this, but for 95% of cases, this holds true, and I do firmly believe if you give the killer the chance to do it, you can't attribute blame to the killer. This is a 7 min video I made a while back to discuss this nuance of tunnelling with a friend of mine. I don't expect you to watch this video, but it illustrates the difference between hard tunneling and opportunistic tunneling.
https://youtu.be/iS44qKOdbWY?si=MS_Dhxo33uvAMyTEThe short version is I played pretty poorly in this game, a lot of hold W and pre-throwing, but while I did get "tunnelled" by definition, Wicked shows the Xeno made no special effort to single me out and shunt me out of the game. Both instances were me getting caught after a teammate stuffed me.
- 2:50 - Yoichi had the killers attention, but rather than take the killer away from loop and away from me, he doubles back right into me, letting the Xeno find me for a second chase and second hook.
- 4:20 - Ripley more egregiously brings the killer straight to me even though I'm in the far off corner of the map trying to stay away from the action on Death Hook.
In both of these instances I know neither meant to sell me out, but both cases were mistakes that resulted in me being tunneled out of the game. These aspects of the game absolutely need to remain as part of the game... killers should not be punished for survivors making mistakes.
My point in relation to tunneling and slugging is they should be used in appropriate situations. However... there are players who are going hard on them from minute one, without even trying to create pressure. In relation to the OP, you're not "playing nice" and yes, these strategies will run over weaker survivor teams... however I don't believe hard Tunneling and Slugging is more effective at winning the game than opportunistic Tunneling and Slugging, in fact I believe you put the game on more of a coin flip based on perks in play and skill of your targets. The argument I am making is if you play this way against weak survivors, you become a one trick who doesn't learn how to apply pressure without these strategies, and so if you cone up against survivors who can punish you for it, you have no other answer.
WoO and the Strength of Loops
that killers have bought into it and turned to blaming stuff like Windows for their defeats. It's the loops, not Windows, that's to blame for straight-up not being able to get good survivors.
//..
It's why killers supposedly go on all these long streaks, numbering in the triple or sometimes quadruple digits (poppycock). But the moment 1 decent team appears, it's over. I'm experienced at running no-gen defence builds, and the time crunch is absolutely ridiculous.
I think you're spot on that all WoO does is reveal the problems of DBD loops than cause the problem. My stance on WoO has always been the same issue as described above with regards to tunneling and slugging, players become overly reliant on it and don't learn any other nuances. I've taken on board previous discussions with yourself and others regarding WoO, and revised my stance to conclude that WoO is actually good for killers... it ensures a certain amount of baseline consistency for survivor map use to learn your killer. However I still.maintain for survivor it is a highly detrimental perk for your growth and development.
The thing about this though is while yes, there are certain maps and loops that are extremely strong for survivors, the same is true also of killers, but there is a caveat in both cases, because killers come in many shapes and forms. What is strong and weak depends very much on the killer in question, e.g. Huntress, Singularity and Blight all have very different problems with different tiles, and to try and make maps perfect so they are balanced for all killer powers is quite simply untenable.
The fact is not all killers are created equal, so trying to define a "balanced map" is kinda a pipe dream. The best you can hope for is maps are varied enough that some killers powers flourish, while others struggle, with the hope of this averages out across the whole roster of killers/maps. Sadly some powers, like Nurse and Blight, are so versatile that they don't really have a bad map for skilled enough players... and with regards to maps, you have this problem that there is a need to define what is the "correct" playstyle of DBD that maps have to cater to?
In regards to "playing nice", your ability to catch survivors at loops and tiles obviously has a correlation to your need to slug and tunnel, camp, 3gen, play mean, etc. I think any objectively reasonable person would say if you're on a heavily survivor sided map that your killer is bad on, it's a bit more reasonable to go a little hardball. However this ties back to my original point... if you always go hardball every game, there is no "second gear" you can go up to.
And this ties in to my final discussion point...
Desire to Win and Self Driven Goals
We're tired of improving. At 3000-5000 hours in, we expect to start seeing the fruits of our labor, but instead we get continually told to get better.
//..
We want to win, because that's how skill is shown and how reward is given in every other game in the world. I hate this "invent your own win condition" idea. Now, we do win, but not enough at the times when it truly matters.
//..
I like the idea that you can simply let go and not really care as much, just like I don't get as mad anymore at losing these scripted matches. But you can become so detached from the tension of the game that you don't even want to play anymore. That's what we don't want to do: throw in the towel.
I can see why you hold this position, and at the end of the day, your motivation to play is entirely your own to decide. You can't be wrong in how you enjoy the game, and how you measure skill is your own metric... but I would argue you've fallen into the trap of kills=skill.
What sticks out to me here is you saying "you want to win". There is nothing wrong with wanting to win, but to my mind this mentality causes a negative feedback loop. If you keep playing to win, you'll obviously beat players playing subpar, and you will go up against better survivors who get progressively better and sweatier as well... this is the natural outcome. In this environment you can't afford to simply play anything you want to play or enjoy, play anything fun, or interesting... you have to take the best killers, the best perks and using the strategies most likely to break survivors, and run it hard at all times...
By doing that, you will of course win more games... but is that really a demonstration of your skill? Taking the most powerful tools you possibly can every game? Or is it more skillful to challenge yourself and take something sub-optimal? Restricting yourself is a perfectly normal thing in many games to keep the game entertaining, playing a game with restrictions to improve your mastery of it. E.g. Pokemon Nuzlockes, Darkest Dungeon no torches runs, Deagle only in Counter Strike, playing Dan in Street Fighter; we even see it in DBD with Hardcore Killer/Survivor challenges, or the Killer all perks streaks. The terms and scale of these challenges are entirely yours to define, and in all of these cases, players lose much more often... and that's the point... but in all of these examples I don't think anyone would argue victory takes much more skill and knowledge to achieve.
The issue with playing hard to win with full meta all the time brings the same issues as WoO, and the previous points I've discussed... you can easily become overly reliant on these styles and become a bit of a one trick. Human beings are inherently lazy, when the chips are down in the heat of the moment, we all take the path of least resistance, so to my mind, its important to combat that as much as possible by limiting yourself and stretching your ability regularly, even if you lose more.
For example I main Pig, already a far cry from a meta killer, but if I were to play uber serious, Deadlock and/or Corrupt Intervention would be permanent fixtures in my builds. These free me up from having to worry about having to find survivors quickly to get my first down before multiple gens pop, nor having to worry about multiple gens popping simultaneously and having to have good survivor prediction/map awareness to get traps out at key gens timings... these effects are very strong for me, but if I use them all the time and never have to play that part of the character, I naturally become lazier at this part of my game.
Now maybe you've learnt all you want to learn, maybe you're at the limit of what you feel you can improve upon... but in a game with as many variables as DBD, I don't think that can ever possibly be true... but hypothetically, even if you have perfected DBD somehow... isn't limiting yourself the next logical step for the game?
End Note
That's the way I see it. I find it much more fun trying to make a sub-par build effective and stretching myself to try and make less powerful builds work, than I do playing uber sweaty every match and either dunk or get dunked.
Sometimes I find builds that look dumb on paper that are actually pretty good, and by always shifting my playstles, I'm always keeping my fundamental skills sharp.
-
You could grab the iri versions off the wiki:
Then use something like Paint.net to grey scale then crop quite easily
-
@DestroyerBG said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3881734#Comment_3881734
Well we got no clue what has happened to the guy since he is doing it but uh still just annoying them by you know refusing them their quitting is not really helping. It will probably make things worse on literally everyone both the current game and the next game they decide to quit. I dunno it just does not fix it at all. But eh good luck with the effort
As I said, there are 4 possible outcomes, 2 benefit me, 2 leave me in exactly the same situation as before, with the added silver lining of at least reporting the guy who tried to ruin the game for me and everyone else.
There is actually a 3rd scenario that benefits me, they DC and give me a bot instead, so that's 5 reasons to unhook... there is literally no reason for me not to unhook them if they are trying to quit, there are only benefits. 6 reasons if I take the stance that I'm keeping this player in this game, and stopping them from running others.
You may argue that it might upset them, and you're right, we have no clue what happened to the guy to make them want to quit, but every single one of us makes an implied agreement when we queue up with each other to play this game. The game doesn't work without 5 players, so if anyone deserves for their "situation to be made worse", it's the one who has decided to pack their toys up and go home to ruin the game for everyone else.
Don't be an SoH apologist man. There may be a reason for it, but there is never an excuse, and it should not be tolerated.
-
@DestroyerBG said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3881703#Comment_3881703
Yup honestly that usually works if the survivor giving up does not use their brain. I still don't see why you guys want to stop people from giving up so bad but eh I guess that is just your choice. If they don't wanna play why even bother with them seems useless to try to make them play.
Because it spoils the game?
As Survivor it instantly makes the game almost a certain loss. The quitter basically quit for everyone else on your team as well in that instant, and if you're still trying to win, it is so annoying to have another player just throw the game down the drain.
As Killer it instantly makes the game an almost guaranteed win, which believe it or not, some players dont want. Some.people play for a challenge and/or have empathy for the remaining survivors.
When I play killer and someone leaves, I am now put in an annoying position of having no point to playing normally... and either have play uber hard and ruthless to finish it quick, or I have to turn into a farmer and let survivors complete gens and leave.
Now don't get me wrong, I like to goof off and mess around time to time... but it's annoying when that scenario is forced upon you, especially when completely unprovoked.
-
I feel like all maps should have day/twilight/night or bright/dim/dark variants. They added that to the player survey a while back, and I would be happy to see that added. Would make a cool offering. REd forest with loooooooong shadows as the sun pokes through the trees would be cool…
Also please add some burning bodies and medieval sconses to The Decimated Borgo… it's dark theme is great, but I can't see jack in that map…😶
-
The best way of getting around this, is bee line to the brat on hook and yoink them back into the game. This has 4 outcomes: -
- They start playing again, you're still screwed with likely a lost hook stage on them, but it's better than nothing.
- They AFK. AFKing is a reportable offence, so you can report them for that.
- They start throwing pallets, missing skillchecks and body blocking teammates. Helping the killer is a reportable offence, so you can report them for that.
- The killer slugs them and maybe gives you and your team a chance/free escape.
Never ever let anyone suicide on hook if you are close enough to stop them. Your chances of survival are always better as a result of points 1 and 4… if not, then at least you put a legitimate report against them.
-
Meh, my advice would be play to improve your skills and your fundamentals, don't play to win. Try to win sure, but don't play with winning as your primary goal.
Playing meta perks and strats constantly makes you reliant and lazy. Take weak killers, experiment with all kinds of add-ons and perks, make silly builds and don't fallback to excessive slugging and tunneling constantly. You can win with these things, they are tools in your toolbox, but if you allow yourself to always take the easy path to victory, you won't have an extra gear to turn up to when you need it.
If you play for self growth rather than wins: -
- The outcome of the match doesn't matter
- Hatch doesn't matter
- Teabags don't matter
- Bull squads don't matter
- Arrogant end game chat warriors who think they're something special for escaping vs. A Pig with Iron Maiden don't matter
- Salty biscuits who whine against a Trapper running Distressing/Unnerving Presense don't matter
Its amazing how much more fun the game becomes when you get impressed by survivors playing well and teaching you something, instead of getting mad you lost.
-
Meh, it seems to me the choices were:
- Have bots when in extreme imbalanced queues.
- Do nothing and let us govern ourselves/just deal with it.
- Enforce a limited number of times per player they can queue for a particular side when queue imbalance reaches a certain threshold and force so many games on the opposing side to clear the slate.
- Add a queue priority system that operates on a similar "how many games of Killer/Survivor have been played consecutively" logic based on queue times.
The latter systems would be the most effective and fair methods of limiting queue times and particular players excessively hogging killer queue... but the complaints of being "forced to play survivor" will be more intense that any other complaints...
Doing nothing will also yield a lot for complaints as well, you can already hear the "BHVR doesn't care about player experience" posts from just the hypothetical.
Looks to me like people will pitch a fit no matter what BHVR does in this scenario. Bots is probably the most reasonable and non invasive solution, though if it were me, I'd buff the bots significantly with additonal perks geared towards supporting the real survivor players.
Let's face it, gaming communities tend to be littered with drama llamas, "what have you done for me lately?" and "me me me" types... and DBD is no different, so this problem looks like a poisoned chalice to me.
-
Just because I can't think of any other discussion I might get to plug this...
I'd like to put the Tarman Zombie forward... I mean look at this guy... he's great...
I dunno about you, but I'm running.
-
This is true, at least bots don't DC or SoH.
They also don't unhook you while the killer is chasing them, or looping near the hook in general.
-
@Emeal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3881231#Comment_3881231
Im indifferent to perk tiers.
I disagree that this game has a grind that is in need of addressing. All the times I have discussed this here, the argument seems to be that this game does not cater to completionist players better, most players are not completionists and the kicker is that new players do not need all the perks in the game, nor do the need specific perks to have a fighting chance. What they need is to do is play the game to learn it, Simple as.
If the goal is to help new players get going with builds
This sentence I thought was interesting, yes the goal is to get new players going, but they have within days of playing a wide variety of perks so they should be going with builds. However we have a colossal social problem that everyone will say such and such perks are useless, here have my perk tier list etc, we put into new player's head that they MUST HAVE these perks, they dont.
Its also a vicious cycle, because if you use the strongest perks in this game your MMR will go up and you will face harder and harder players, which could burnout a player if they don't have skills learned first. I think the Community is doing the Community a disservice here, not that anyone deserves blame here.
I do want to say would very much support additions to the Shrine, as wells as price differences on perks that are geared towards new players.
To be honest, I actually pretty much agree with your assessment here.
I believe you're spot on with how the community thinks about perks. My personal opinion is "meta" perks… and tbh all perks to a degree, have a tendency to build bad habits and an over-reliance on them in players if they use them repeatedly. I still condemn WoO constantly because I fervently maintain it does more to hinder a new players growth than help them.
Many players for example run exhaustion perks, but because their exhaustion perks can often get them to a point of safety, they tend to play much more recklessly than they should, and often it leads them to make a mistake that if that perk isn't available, causes them to lose, or leave a teammate in a desperate situation. To my mind you should change up your build often to ensure you are building good fundamentals of DBD across the board… it's also much more fun to keep trying new builds than trying to sweat lord every single game.
I'm also of the opinion the grind isn't that bad IF you understand the system and take a minute to think about what you should be doing.
I do feel like it would be beneficial for new survivors to have help with a better jump off point. Some changes I would promote for new player experience: -
- Better/Advanced tutorial, with a greater emphasis on finer game mechanics, such as sound ranges, basic guide to fast vaulting and looping, etc.
- Some mechanism of exploring/understanding killer powers and counterplay… maybe even a spectate a random game in progress mode for certain killers to watch what other players are doing on either side.
- Greater rewards of bloodpoints and iri shards for the first few (maybe 20) Player account levels as a jump off point.
- If not that maybe a Welcome pack sent out via the message system with a predetermined amount of points to spend.
- Better options in the shrine of secrets, maybe 5 perks per side.
-
@Emeal said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3880856#Comment_3880856
To give you some numbers, I bought all the content (even the original DBD characters), but even doing that took me 1100 hours to get every perk to tier 3 on every character (both killer and survivor).
Not every person is going to buy every character, only whale type players do. Other than that, you don't need every perk on every character to enjoy this game or have a fun time. You are effectively scaring people away from this by saying that you need to do all these things when you don't, Why does the Grind conversation always have to be about 100% a game when the vast majority don't?
Friends of mine joined this game last 2v8 and they literally already have a surplus of bloodpoints, they looked at the Survivors, one liked Sable and then they bought Sable and now they wanna play them. What I told them is get every other character to P1 and keep playing the one they want.
BHVR likely has numbers that show even when they made the overall grind easier, the vast majority play like one character as Survivor OR a few as Killer. I doubt the vast majority is cashing in every new chapter, like I do. Besides if you are a whale player, you are gonna get all perks to T3 by the time you hit P3 anyway so im like, this matters so little.
Well my point is, that it's not the tiers of perk that are the problem, it's the unlocking of perks in the bloodweb that makes up the grind, and that is true even if your are targetting specific perks.
You either have to unlock perks via unlocking the character and P1-ing the character, which is shards or buying them... or you have to buy the perk in the shrine of secrets, which is extremely limited and also requires shards as well.
Removing tiers doesn't address the grind at all, because levelling perks is barely any grind at all... the issue is unlocking perks you want in the first place.
If you want to remove perk tiers, OK I guess, I'm kinda indifferent to it... it reduces the long term grind once you have all characters...
However if the goal is to help new players get going with builds, this change does almost nothing to help them. A change that would help new players is drastically expanding the perks available via the Shrine of Secrets somehow and giving them a significant boost in iri shards for their first steps into the game.
Either that, or give new players 5 of a new currency that grants free purchases of perks from the shrine of secrets, that are kept permanently until you use them. That would help people actually get going with builds.
-
I think bots would be fine, if bots got additional basekit perks with the goal to help/support the real players:
- We'll Make It
- We're Gonna Live Forever
- Shoulder the Burden (minus the exposed)
- Prove Thyself
- Empathic Connection
At least if the bots are gonna sacrifice themselves for me, or make up for their lack of map awareness with good abilities, it'd still be managable.
I figure you could give them Escapist and effectively just make a "Bot build" for 2vs8 that is purely focused on helping the bots be effective support for survivors
-
His macro play is strong.
Mangled effects are quite good on him cause he makes timing heals awkward at certain points.
His strength depeletes if you have 4 strong survivors, but any weak links in the team allow him to build pressure quite easily.
Pallets give him the tools he needs to zone and get hits even against good loopers, but he's not oppressive in this regard.
He sits at a respectable spot in the roster now. Fun to play, not oppressive, not weak, and an opponent you at least have to be wary of tricky perks and playstyles. All in all a success to my mind.
