Valuetown
Valuetown
About
- Username
- Valuetown
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Shinkiro said:
Crazy someone actually downvoted you lol. Yes more Alien franchise cosmetics and content BHVR please!
I mean, there are people that play this game who would prefer if the tourists didn't beg for their favorite franchises to be added as skins/licensed chapters on the forums daily, just to play for 1 hour a week regardless if it gets added or not.
I'd rather the devs prioritize fixing the matchmaking system if they choose to keep adding crossovers because it's very exhausting playing with 10 hour Leons/Jills/Laras/Eddies who do absolutely nothing all game, ruining the experience for the other survivors because this game is balanced around 4 survivors pulling their weight, not 3.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073961#Comment_4073961
Please see previous comments.
Don't understand, could you repeat?
Definition of irony.
That...was the point yeah.
Extremely bad faith. 😆
Definition of irony.
Welcome to the conversation, nobody has argued otherwise.
Except for all the times you did.
Considering you ignored my entire proof about the data, that being being 85% of it is gathered post nerf and the kill rate is still 67.1%, I take it you have no genuine rebuttal and have conceded your point on the topic.
Wrong. (I gave up after you admitted started making up bits)
Anything about your completely invalid use of anecdotal evidence, or are you still clinging to that too?
Guess not.
Must be a very uneventful Monday for you lol likewise!
Except for all the times you did.
When?
Again I must reiterate: "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073955#Comment_4073955
Please see previous "I'm not going to repeat myself" posts for the same message.
You might even, repeat yourself? Funny how easy it was for you to claim “you're wrong” with no reasoning, but and then pivot to repeating this like it adds anything.
She went live September 24th… that's two weeks between release and nerf. Thanks for playing!
Umm, I never said anything to the contrary? I was using hyperbole and actually trying to act like you :3 (he’s onto me fellas)
The vast majority of people that genuinely use nightlight are
“Let's generously assume she went down to 2%” “umm noooo actually that data is skewed”
Didn't you know standard derivation cancels out the nightlight skew? Duh. Rules for thee, not for me.
Even if we were to assume Krasue's pick rate was 20% FOR THE ENTIRE DURATION OF 2 WEEKS, this is still 30 data points shy of being 50/50 for pre-nerf and post-nerf data.
The skew isn't 50/50? Clearly the data is 100% accurate! This is actually the worst logic yet lol
And let's not pretend that pick rates for new killers, especially original chapter killers who don't have the license hype, don't fall of within 2 days of the killer releasing anyway.
oh so she did have a higher pickrate, just now it's unmeasurably small?
“Umm actually your stats don't exist and when they do they're too small to notice” how many of these kinds of stats are we going to talk about?
Considering she can turn back into human form, use the auto-locking regurgitate, and then transform back to head form in less than 10 seconds, yes this is her strongest nerf but it is still very weak.
Lmao if Deathslinger misses he can also reload and shoot at you again in less than 10 secs, is that also literally imperceptible to the data?
Anything about your completely invalid use of anecdotal evidence, or are you still clinging to that too?
You might even, repeat yourself? Funny how easy it was for you to claim “you're wrong” with no reasoning, but and then pivot to repeating this like it adds anything.
Please see previous comments.
Umm, I never said anything to the contrary? I was using hyperbole and actually trying to act like you :3 (he’s onto me fellas)
5 week span, the hotfix that nerfed her hit live on October 7th. You are already double off the mark
Receipts, they're the darndest aren't they?
“Let's generously assume she went down to 2%” “umm noooo actually that data is skewed”
Didn't you know standard derivation cancels out the nightlight skew? Duh. Rules for thee, not for me.
Translation: "I can't explain Standard Derivation at all because I was just using buzzwords."
Definition of irony.
The skew isn't 50/50? Clearly the data is 100% accurate! This is actually the worst logic yet lol
Tell me you willfully misinterpreted the actual exaggerated data portion of my message without telling me.
oh so she did have a higher pickrate, just now it's unmeasurably small?
Welcome to the conversation, nobody has argued otherwise.
“Umm actually your stats don't exist and when they do they're too small to notice” how many of these kinds of stats are we going to talk about?
Extremely bad faith.
😆
Lmao if Deathslinger misses he can also reload and shoot at you again in less than 10 secs, is that also literally imperceptible to the data?
Holy strawman Batman!
Considering you ignored my entire proof about the data, that being being 85% of it is gathered post nerf and the kill rate is still 67.1%, I take it you have no genuine rebuttal and have conceded your point on the topic.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073939#Comment_4073939
I am not going to repeat things I've already explained. If you would like the explanations, read my previous posts again.
This is like the 5th time you said “I’m not gonna repeat myself.” Funniest thing is that this is the first time you shouldn't have felt the need to since you actually tried interpreting the data instead of just claiming it says what you want.
Let's say there were 1000 matches total played of killer in that 2 week span.
5 week span, the hotfix that nerfed her hit live on October 7th. You are already double off the mark, as well as assuming her at a 5% pickrate even though launch killers are usually higher.
Let's now assume that her pick rate took a nose dive and dropped to 2.3%
Nightlight puts it at 1.44%
This is what I mean by the averages help cancel out the pre-nerf data outliers to arrive at the aggregate kill rate
How perfectly clean and easy for you after assuming all the key variables involved. Thought you were just using the stats given to you?
Yet you are assuming that Krasue is not played anywhere near "popular" because she got very, very minor nerfs because… "vibes?”
No. In modern DBD every killer falls off fast because there are now over 40 of them and they all lose considerable interest after not being the hot thing anymore or meta. Bad faith yet again.
very, very minor nerfs
Leeched removal on hook was very very minor? Extremely bad faith.
"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." -Oscar Wilde
“Nah actually I never said that and when I did it's because I was pretending to be you."
What was all that about being genuine for the sake of your argument?
This is like the 5th time you said “I’m not gonna repeat myself.” Funniest thing is that this is the first time you shouldn't have felt the need to since you actually tried interpreting the data instead of just claiming it says what you want.
Please see previous "I'm not going to repeat myself" posts for the same message.
5 week span, the hotfix that nerfed her hit live on October 7th. You are already double off the mark, as well as assuming her at a 5% pickrate even though launch killers are usually higher.
She went live September 24th… that's two weeks between release and nerf. Thanks for playing! Better luck next time!
Nightlight puts it at 1.44%
The vast majority of people that genuinely use nightlight are nurse, blight, ghoul, and spirit players; and that's not even mentioning the fact that less than 1% of the entire playerbase uploads data to it. If you want to talk about skewed data, look no further than your own example lol.
Also
assuming her at a 5% pickrate even though launch killers are usually higher.
Casually ignoring:
Even if we were to assume Krasue's pick rate was 20% FOR THE ENTIRE DURATION OF 2 WEEKS, this is still 30 data points shy of being 50/50 for pre-nerf and post-nerf data.
And let's not pretend that pick rates for new killers, especially original chapter killers who don't have the license hype, don't fall of within 2 days of the killer releasing anyway.
Leeched removal on hook was very very minor? Extremely bad faith.
Considering she can turn back into human form, use the auto-locking regurgitate, and then transform back to head form in less than 10 seconds, yes this is her strongest nerf but it is still very weak. "Bad Faith" lol.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073917#Comment_4073917
Wrong.
Wrong again.
All of your posts are "nuh uh,"
Rules for me but not for thee? Starting to feel like you're projecting.
The only information we have on her high MMR pickrate is first-hand accounts, since she is not in the top 5 that was posted in the stat reveals.
And common knowledge that a killer is more popular in their launch period, especially when they are overbuffed.
The difference between top 5 popular and average popularity is literally 1.72%.
And if her current pickrate is 2.3% (your average), this would almost double the potential metrics during her launch window given she was more popular then, but let me guess it still somehow evens out because of the magic of the unexplained Standard Derivation?
one person's "I've seen 2 Krasue in the past 3 months" (most likely because they play killer 95% of the time) is taken as gospel but my "I see Krasue 1 in every 5 games" is thrown out because you disagree with it?
No, they're both useless because anecdotal evidence has no place in informed debate, the fact you haven't put that together yet really says a lot dude. The point is that if you want to substantiate a claim, you have to say more than “I saw it” because then you could have an entire horde of people showing up to say “Well I didn't." Huh, that sounds kinda familiar...
See how disingenuousness will get your argument nowhere?
The statements you take issue with are all literally built off the faultiness of your original claims. You are arguing with your own logic being used against you.
Definitions are not evidence. If you used even 16% of the time you've wasted with this point alone, you'd already have enough of an idea to recognize the erroneous math you keep applying. Alas.
Quips aren't evidence, but they are fun! "Seven minutes is what I wish I’d spared to play with you." Ah damn, yours is better. Perchance.
I just figured I'd try my hand at cherry picking words from your post completely out of the context in which they were written.
See how disingenuousness will get your argument nowhere?
Rules for me, but not for thee.
Rules for me but not for thee? Starting to feel like you're projecting.
I am not going to repeat things I've already explained. If you would like the explanations, read my previous posts again.
And if her current pickrate is 2.3% (your average), this would almost double the potential metrics during her launch window given she was more popular then, but let me guess it still somehow evens out because of the magic of the unexplained Standard Derivation?
Let's say there were 1000 matches total played of killer in that 2 week span. Let's also assume Krasue's pick rate was 5% during this time frame. She would be the 4th most popular character. The reason I chose 5% is because not everyone has access to the killer and not everybody wants to play the killer. That means Krasue had 50 games played aka 50 data points for kill rate. Let's now assume that her pick rate took a nose dive and dropped to 2.3% which is the ideal average. Assuming 1000 matches every 2 weeks for the next 5 months means that there were 10,000 matches played to follow our example. Using basic algebra, we can conclude that for this example, 230 additional data points were collected for kill rate. This means that over the course of these 10 weeks, there was a 460% increase in data for post nerf Krasue data over pre nerf data. Even if we were to assume Krasue's pick rate was 20% FOR THE ENTIRE DURATION OF 2 WEEKS, this is still 30 data points shy of being 50/50 for pre-nerf and post-nerf data.
This is what I mean by the averages help cancel out the pre-nerf data outliers to arrive at the aggregate kill rate. The fact that her kill rate is STILL 67.1% when practically 85% of the data points collected are post nerf means that her kill rate is still well above the intended target of 60%. For reference, ghoul is sitting at 65.3% and he is one of the most controversial killers in this game with his kill rate.
No, they're both useless because anecdotal evidence has no place in informed debate, the fact you haven't put that together yet really says a lot dude. The point is that if you want to substantiate a claim, you have to say more than “I saw it” because then you could have an entire horde of people showing up to say “Well I didn't." Huh, that sounds kinda familiar...
Yet you are assuming that Krasue is not played anywhere near "popular" because she got very, very minor nerfs because… "vibes?"
Quips aren't evidence, but they are fun! "Seven minutes is what I wish I’d spared to play with you." Ah damn, yours is better.
Perchance."Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." -Oscar Wilde
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073888#Comment_4073888
I was also using the hyperbolic approach since that seems to be the only language that you accept.
It's the language I've been telling you is wholly made up and in your own head this whole time, pretending like you've been forced into responding that way when you chose to make those false claims is one way to avoid taking accountability for false claims
My stance has literally not changed lol
You just admitted to changing it for the sake of hyperbole.
Obviously 2 weeks of data
*4 weeks and it's the time when her pickrate would be highest, something else you quite literally have not touched on beyond "I see her 1/5 games"
but the amount in which it will change is extremely minuscule compared to this "massive" drop of 15-20% that your language is suggesting.
Over 17% of your data is corrupted, a number that's supposed be around 60% becoming 67.1% isn't mind shattering. Your bad faith only continues.
Again, I'm not going to define and explain terms to you when you ostensibly have an internet connection and access to Google.
"I'm not going to explain myself because I said two words and that's enough." How about you substantiate the claim you make with evidence?
And finally,
Oh! So you are admitting to playing devil's advocate this entire time and that you actually agree with me?
I say, "I was being sarcastic with the Sunday comments, don't feel the need to engage if you don't want to" and this was your takeaway?
What are you talking about?
It's the language I've been telling you is wholly made up and in your own head this whole time, pretending like you've been forced into responding that way when you chose to make those false claims is one way to avoid taking accountability for false claims
Wrong.
You just admitted to changing it for the sake of hyperbole.
Wrong again.
*4 weeks and it's the time when her pickrate would be highest, something else you quite literally have not touched on beyond "I see her 1/5 games"
The only information we have on her high MMR pickrate is first-hand accounts, since she is not in the top 5 that was posted in the stat reveals. Keep in mind that springtrap (the 5th most popular killer) is sitting at 4.1% pick rate. For a perfect popularity balance, each killer would have a 2.381% pick rate, as there are 42 killers in the game. The difference between top 5 popular and average popularity is literally 1.72%. So you're telling me that one person's "I've seen 2 Krasue in the past 3 months" (most likely because they play killer 95% of the time) is taken as gospel but my "I see Krasue 1 in every 5 games" is thrown out because you disagree with it? See how disingenuousness will get your argument nowhere? If Krasue's pick rate is anywhere between 2.381% and 4.1%, she has an above average pickrate, enough to get requisite data that would aggregate out the initial 2 weeks where her nerfs were not applied.
"I'm not going to explain myself because I said two words and that's enough." How about you substantiate the claim you make with evidence?
Definitions are not evidence. If you used even 16% of the time you've wasted with this point alone, you'd already have enough of an idea to recognize the erroneous math you keep applying. Alas.
I say, "I was being sarcastic with the Sunday comments, don't feel the need to engage if you don't want to" and this was your takeaway?
What are you talking about?
I just figured I'd try my hand at cherry picking words from your post completely out of the context in which they were written. You seem to be having a fun time doing so! 😀
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073835#Comment_4073835
Why? What is the point? Best case, you get everyone saying “GG” to each other. So we need to keep the ability for people to say GG so that the other 99% of extremely toxic post game chats can remain?
No, best case is people are kindly correcting misplays from survivors or explaining specific game situations that occurred for future improvement. Just the other day I explained to another survivor that m1-ing a survivor as ghostface clears his current stalk meter, so if you're afraid that you're 99'd try forcing an m1 before his power is off cooldown. I can't do this with console players, who arguably need the most help in improving for that very reason: because nobody is telling them when and why they messed up.
Like others have said, if you don't want to interact with the chat, then close the chat. But removing communication altogether is an awful idea.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073857#Comment_4073857
the average will already greatly correct the statistics to essentially counteract the 2 weeks she wasn't nerfed.
According to you? No difference, not one. That's how data works?
When 5/6 of the data is outside that range? Yes that is how data works.
You are currently contradicting yourself again, as before you claimed explicitly that there was no visible change at all and the exact killrate was accurate. Quite literally changed your stance to be closer to mine by accepting the skew exists :D
It is not my job to explain what standard deviations or variance are to you, but these are the concepts that are causing your erroneous reasoning when talking about the current kill rate.
Translation: "I can't explain Standard Derivation at all because I was just using buzzwords."
Yeah, let's not do this saccharine kindness routine. I'm just here to discuss the topic at hand
Look man, we're on the second page of this argument. I thought it was pretty clear from context in this internet scrap that l was being sarcastic. If you didn't or don't want to participate, please don't feel compelled to respond about how good or bad your Sunday is. That said...
more than I want to waste my time addressing on a Sunday afternoon.
How's your Monday?
the average will already greatly correct the statistics to essentially counteract the 2 weeks she wasn't nerfed.
When 5/6 of the data is outside that range? Yes that is how data works.
I was also using the hyperbolic approach since that seems to be the only language that you accept. Obviously 2 weeks of data is going to adjust results, but the amount in which it will change is extremely minuscule compared to this "massive" drop of 15-20% that your language is suggesting.
Quite literally changed your stance to be closer to mine by accepting the skew exists :D
My stance has literally not changed lol
Translation: "I can't explain Standard Derivation at all because I was just using buzzwords."
Again, I'm not going to define and explain terms to you when you ostensibly have an internet connection and access to Google.
I thought it was pretty clear from context in this internet scrap that l was being sarcastic
Oh! So you are admitting to playing devil's advocate this entire time and that you actually agree with me? Okay phew, that makes a lot more sense, thanks for clearing that up! I had a hunch, but I'm glad that's what's going on here. 🙋
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073678#Comment_4073678
What inconsistent claims have I made?
Bruh.
Also, I never said they had 0 effect,
the 67.1% kill rate is her current rate after nerf.
Here's you saying two different things.
you outwardly claiming you didn't say something you explicitly did?
Still absolutely nothing about how you claimed one moment you never said Krasue's killrate then was the same as current, despite having clearly done so earlier and having it pointed out to you.
Here's the part of both posts where it was pointed out to you and you still ignored it up until now.
All of your posts are "nuh uh," and when I correctly call you out for erroneously applying math, you double down.
"Erroneously applying math" is funny when you still haven't elaborated at all on how Standard Derivation cancels an entire sixth of your data set being skewed, much less accounted for it within your claim.
You insult my numbers, but you quite literally haven't done any math beyond name concepts. You haven't even provided a basis beyond "the devs gave stats to me" whilst ignoring that the devs said "this includes her statistics from September" which colors the results.
You've got completely circular logic.
I'm having a great Sunday, I just hope more people would take data analysis more seriously.
On this account our experience is shared my friend :3
Also, I never said they had 0 effect,the 67.1% kill rate is her current rate after nerf.Here's you saying two different things.
These are not contradictory statements. 67.1% kill rate is her aggregate kill rate with the entire dataset from September 2025 through February 2026. This has likely decreased since her release because of her small nerfs and number adjustments, but it has ended at 67.1%, which is through February 2026. This idea that they are contradictory statements was the first clue in understanding that your knowledge on data and statistics is incomplete.
"Erroneously applying math" is funny when you still haven't elaborated at all on how Standard Derivation cancels an entire sixth of your data set being skewed, much less accounted for it within your claim.
You insult my numbers, but you quite literally haven't done any math beyond name concepts. You haven't even provided a basis beyond "the devs gave stats to me" whilst ignoring that the devs said "this includes her statistics from September" which colors the results.
You've got completely circular logic.
It is not my job to explain what standard deviations or variance are to you, but these are the concepts that are causing your erroneous reasoning when talking about the current kill rate.
our experience is shared my friend :3
Yeah, let's not do this saccharine kindness routine. I'm just here to discuss the topic at hand.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073672#Comment_4073672
Nah, you made inconsistent claims with refusal to elaborate and currently hide beyond math concepts you don't intend to flesh out because you can't explain your way around an entire sixth of your data being skewed.
You spent half your posts claiming I was wrong with no reasoning, and now that you've talked yourself into a corner by claiming her performance is affected by changes after saying it was the exact opposite case earlier, and you still even now won't mention it after being pressed openly on it.
Enjoy your Sunday afternoon man, I'm getting a kick out of mine.
What inconsistent claims have I made? I am using the data the devs have given me. There is nothing to flesh out because the data is right there for us to use.
All of your posts are "nuh uh," and when I correctly call you out for erroneously applying math, you double down.
I'm having a great Sunday, I just hope more people would take data analysis more seriously.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073664#Comment_4073664
Changing the collision number from 0.35 to 0.32 is literally an imperceptible nerf.
It isn't, it affected Krasue's ability to slide lunge around loops a sizable amount, especially around small objects. Collision numbers are already small given the default is less than 4 tenths. You again seem to misunderstand math and its relationship to DBD.
Changing her projectile cooldown from 1 second to 1.3 seconds means nothing when it has auto-lock and is only .3 seconds longer.
Except when that recovery distance matters, usually around windows when a Krasue can't bounce off the environment.
Increasing her regurgitate cancel from 0.1 second to 1.3 seconds means absolutely nothing when nobody was doing that anyway.
Except instances where the survivor disappears from sight and there's nothing to bounce off of, made more common an occurrence by the prior change.
Changing her form swap time from 1 second to 1.2 seconds means absolutely nothing when she literally flies around the map in head form, losing practically 0 distance in the transition.
What does her having a dash ability have anything to do with this?? The nerf was useful to body block Krasue and make her lose more distance when being forced to swap, which the cool down on regurgitate nerf adds up with. Have you ever done an endgame save against Krasue???
The only two changes that genuinely mattered was the extra .1 seconds on windup because that actually makes or breaks a vault over a pallet or window, and most importantly removing the corruption on hook.
And yet despite receiving these two sizable nerfs, you say her killrate hasn't changed meaningfully.
It's strange. Despite seeing Krasue 1/5 matches, you don't really seem to understand how these changes actually affected facing and playing as Krasue.
I would; however, recommend trying to understand what standard deviation and variance are before claiming that 16% is "objective reality," as you are erroneously claiming.
Go up to anybody conducting a field test in study and tell them 16% of their dataset was skewed, see how comfortable they are publishing it. Invoking Standard Derivation without mentioning at all how it disputes this point is again not giving any logic at for your reasoning, yet hoping you can just say "you're wrong!" and accept it as reality.
Still absolutely nothing about how you claimed one moment you never said Krasue's killrate then was the same as current, despite having clearly done so earlier and having it pointed out to you.
Your whole reply is riddled with objective incorrect analysis, more than I want to waste my time addressing on a Sunday afternoon. Again, you are intentionally misinterpreting my messages.
Again, please have an understanding of standard deviations and variance before trying to talk statistics, thank you for your cooperation.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073661#Comment_4073661
Lmao adjusting numbers is a nerf and 6 of them isn't small, idk why you think "changing her kit" means I was claiming she was reworked.
You got any response to the 16% being objective reality or you outwardly claiming you didn't say something you explicitly did?
Changing the collision number from 0.35 to 0.32 is literally an imperceptible nerf. Changing her projectile cooldown from 1 second to 1.3 seconds means nothing when it has auto-lock and is only .3 seconds longer. Increasing her regurgitate cancel from 0.1 second to 1.3 seconds means absolutely nothing when nobody was doing that anyway. Changing her form swap time from 1 second to 1.2 seconds means absolutely nothing when she literally flies around the map in head form, losing practically 0 distance in the transition. The only two changes that genuinely mattered was the extra .1 seconds on windup because that actually makes or breaks a vault over a pallet or window, and most importantly removing the corruption on hook.
You got any response to the 16% being objective reality or you outwardly claiming you didn't say something you explicitly did?
Yes, I agree that 1 divided by 6 times 100 is 16.6%, very good! Glad we're on the same page there! I would; however, recommend trying to understand what standard deviation and variance are before claiming that 16% is "objective reality," as you are erroneously claiming.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073655#Comment_4073655
Your Math is incorrect, sorry.
1/6th is 16.66% which is objective truth. You cannot dance your way around this because you don't want to accept variance in your data.
Also, I never said they had 0 effect
the 67.1% kill rate is her current rate after nerf.
You did.
you claiming that nobody has played Krasue since the nerf to make 67.1% so horrendously out of date is just simply wrong,
Krasue went from presumably being one of the highest pickrate killers during her launch window (every killer is) to 11th according to unofficial sources, plus all the anecdotal accounts you call lies in favor your own anecdotal account. You not wanting to accept she isn't as popular as she was is pure cope.
Apparently tweaking dash numbers and removing infection on hook is "changing literally her entire kit."
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/YIAIA4A7KSUS/1000002399.jpg
No, changing her entire kit is changing her entire kit, but good job pretending 6 changes were 2. The bad faith continues.
Any more insults? Cause that's all you got aside from "your math is wrong" with no logic or rebuttal.
Adjusting numbers is not changing her kit. Changing her kit means reworking her power. Good to know that you were not a participant when they sent out the survey defining all of those terms…
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073587#Comment_4073587
You don't know how math works and think if you say the data is still accurate it changes how math works.
Krasue had a different (bigger) killrate before she got four big nerfs, that is objectively how data works even under your "they average out" logic which means guess what? Krasue currently has a killrate under 67.1% with your own evidence.
"But 1/6th doesn't skew" it skews by 16.66%, that's how objectively math works, you can't dispute this. We are measuring the difference between a number supposed to be 60% that is 67.1%, which you better believe makes 16% mathematically significant.
But let me guess, her pickrate being probably triple what it currently is and her killrate being inflated by the buffs were wholy inconsequential right? According to you, they genuinely had 0 visible effect on her performance?
So what nerf would you even want?? Apparently you can change literally her entire kit and nothing happens? How does that even work?
Answer: That's not how DbD works. You are misreading data.
Your math is incorrect, sorry. Also, I never said they had 0 effect, but you claiming that nobody has played Krasue since the nerf to make 67.1% so horrendously out of date is just simply wrong, and we have the stats to prove it.
Apparently you can change literally her entire kit and nothing happens?
Apparently tweaking dash numbers and removing infection on hook is "changing literally her entire kit." Please try to have a modicum of intellectual honesty with this discussion, otherwise I'm not going to waste my time replying to you any longer.
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073585#Comment_4073585
Skewed example. Breaking the rules of a game isn't anything like breaking the literal law. Someone running a red doesn't directly affect me and driving dangerously to "teach them a lesson" is insane and dangerous.
Somebody breaking the rules in a game I'm playing to ruin it for me and all others involved, when i have a theoretical way to counter it and I just shrug, roll over and let them get away with throwing the game so they can get hatch? Doesn't seem the same.
You do not have the authority to police this game as if you were some form of in game moderator. You breaking rules to "counter the troll" means you are now guilty of breaking rules. It's really that simple. Your ego is the only reason you find it "acceptable" to try and rulebreak your way into "countertrolling." If you don't want to risk a ban, then don't break the rules.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073531#Comment_4073531
So more than 5/6 of the data if you stop ignoring her pickrate dropping? You started at 100% accuracy, you just admitted at least 17% is off, more when you actually consider the other factors involved. That's how data works.
You are making numbers up based on how you feel on the data. I am using the data the devs provided me. You are doing what's called "interrogating the data" to twist it to fit your narrative.
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4072990#Comment_4072990
So a survivor is allowed to deliberately throw the game, sandbag and ruin the game for all involved with no penalty then?
I'm not asking if it's against the game rules because i know it categorically is. I'm just asking for people's personal take on it. If someone is going to ruin your game by breaking the rules themselves, and you have a way to combat it in the moment would you do so? Like if you could sandbag someone who was hacking and ruining the game for all 4 other players and stop them from cheating, I think most people would.
So because someone breaks the law and runs a red light, does it then give you the authority to do the same? Two wrongs don't make a right. Put your ego away and realize that this person's behavior has nothing to do with you, nor will your attempt at vigilante moderation change anything about the person you are trying to spite.
The only thing you can do is leave a report and move on.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073523#Comment_4073523
A literal sixth of the statistic and the time when her pickrate would be largest. According to you? No difference, not one. That's how data works?
When 5/6 of the data is outside that range? Yes that is how data works.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073508#Comment_4073508
And ignoring the entire month that skews it. Anything for your bias though, right?
You can say it skews it, but the average will already greatly correct the statistics to essentially counteract the 2 weeks she wasn't nerfed. That's how data works.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073489#Comment_4073489
This is such an intensely bad faith argument. You can't explain why the Killrates aren't affected by Krasue being busted for the time large portions of people were actually playing her, so you've just resorted to insisting the data is 100% accurate in spite of that.
Go back to the post on the forums where Krasue's last statistics were posted, you'll find discussions even then saying her pickrate fell off.
Honestly, not even gonna bother, it's clear you just wanted to be told you were right. Have fun waiting for the nerf ig
I am simply arguing based on the statistics the devs provide me. 🤷♀️
-
@Abbzy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073478#Comment_4073478
By your logic nurse should have been buffed long time ago and pig nerfed harder into dirt, data arent everything as someone here mentioned these data they give us are very small its on top spots but they arent the same as these they gave us
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/ZLCC8QH7CRKU/image.png
and even with full picture I ask you now, wheres that nurse buff????
All MMRs
Data from 2022
This isn't the "gotcha" you think it is.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073478#Comment_4073478
"So actually the data represents her killrate after the nerf." No it doesn't, you're making that up. (Objectively true)
"I see Krasue 1/5 games and she's op." I see her rarely and she's not. (Subjective opinion) See how far anecdotal evidence gets you?
The data is literally from September to February which is way after her nerf. Blatantly lying about the data is not helping your point.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073452#Comment_4073452
Popularity of Krasue matters because it skewed the killrate during her launch that you use as reasoning for her being currently overturned. It's important because it affects your data dude.
It's a bit irresponsible to simply ignore the data in front of you because it doesn’t fit your narrative...
Using metrics you know to be inaccurate is what I consider to be irresponsible. And I have yet to see a counterargument for how Krasue being overpowered during the duration when most people played her isn't a factor in her having a 67% killrate during the time those metrics were tracked.
The only attempt I saw at one was "3 months is bigger than 2 weeks" and yeah man, that's how time works. That doesn't mean those two weeks didn't seep into your data.
I ignored your Nurse comment and the whole balance =/= popularity thing because tbh that's fully you arguing with yourself about wider issues and acting like I said things I haven't.
I am telling you that Krasue doesn't currently have a 67% killrate because the first two weeks of her launch window had her see much more usage, where she was also extremely overturned. This skewed her killrate and makes you using it as evidence for why she needs a nerf illogical, because she already got that nerf.
@Abbzy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073359#Comment_4073359
It is same as merchant high kill rate from survivors giving up and killing themselfs on hook because i doubt devs have such clear data on everything.
This thing happened year ago after freddys rework there were stats from devs and freddys were high and there were few posts making exuce for nerf because he has super high kill rate and pick rate but they kinda forget to look at date from which these stats were taken and just reacted and didnt put that little detective work to find out that its ovious that most of killers played him by that time because he got reworked finally in to something thats playable and not op or weak as trapper.
So unless the devs provide statistics for Krasue from 2026 alone, the 67.1% kill rate is her current rate after nerf. Your incorrect assumptions that everyone just dropped the killer is not only disproven by pick rates, but by many players' personal experience as well. There is no sense trying to downplay the data provided to us when this is the only data we have to go off of. If the data is incorrect, don't publish the data. It's really that simple.
-
@MechWarrior3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073439#Comment_4073439
Yes. During that timeframe of 3 weeks, everyone and their mother was playing Krause because she was way overtuned. She was destroying everyone for the most part.
After that - I see her as much as I see the Twins which is once a month if that. Nobody plays or wants to play Krasue.
I see Krasue every 5th game. Nobody is buying this "Krasue is unpopular" lie.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073439#Comment_4073439
Yes. A killer is most popular in their launch window, especially when released in such an overturned state as launch Krasue was.
In a game now with over 40 killers, there's much less incentive to go "I like this one" and stick with the character, especially if they don't hail from a licence someone is attached to and get nerfs not long after release, on top of already having a power most people found generic on release.
Krasue falling off after launch skews the killrates and makes them an already more unreliable metric than they would be regardless.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073440#Comment_4073440
With prior context in mind, do you have actual evidence of Krasue's popularity, because not only does Nightlight back her unpopularity, but so does the entire community sentiment you currently dismiss out of hand and label as moot.
If we're expected to accept your anecdotal account of Krasue being popular because you see her frequently as the truth, what right do you have to deny other people's firsthand experience?
Bonus Question, Why is it that Twins is the most unpopular killer in the game but still top 03 on killrates? Do I just need to see like three Twins within 4 hours before I get to claim to they're secretly super popular? Cause that's basically the same evidence you have, except Twins killrates are ironically less fudged than Krasue's are because of not having to deal with buffs/nerfs and launch window player count.
If the kill rates did not reflect the current killer's power, then what would be the point of posting them? It's a bit irresponsible to simply ignore the data in front of you because it doesn’t fit your narrative...
Like I said, I play against a Krasue about every 5th game. I'm not sure how frequent she's played at your MMR level, but she is not "unpopular" by any stretch of the imagination. I never said that she was "popular" just that she's not "unpopular." It's not one or the other, which is where you are mistaken in your judgement.
Twins is genuinely a very strong killer, people just don't care to learn the killer because bhvr jingled the shiny keys of ghoul and blight in front of killer mains. Also the killer is uglier than sin, and this community is obsessed with good looking cosmetics, which twins is the absolute antithesis of.
Like I said before, I'm not sure why you'd hold on to this idea that the popularity of a killer matters when it comes to balance. Since you intentionally ignored my comment about nurse, I'm going to assume that you do understand that popularity does not matter, but you are using it as a way to stifle discussion on a killer nerf. I know the only thing killer players hate more than survivors is survivors discussing killer nerfs, but sometimes a nerf is genuinely warranted based on kill rates, stats, etc, even for killers that aren't the top 5 most picked, aka "popular" according to you.
-
@ArkInk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4073395#Comment_4073395
Krasue is a heavily unpopular killer and this is backed up by basically every statistic we have concerning her.
You having anecdotal evidence of seeing her 1/5 games somehow to the level of Blight and Ghoul will not convince anyone of anything, and if anything people will be less likely to take you seriously since what you describe doesn't line up to what they experience.
Where is this statistic that she's unpopular? Is that your opinion on community sentiment, or is anyone not in the top 5 most picked automatically "unpopular?"
It's a moot point anyway. Something being unpopular should not prevent it from getting nerfs. Nurse is very unpopular but is the strongest killer in the game. Do you think nurse shouldn't be nerfed?
-
So you genuinely think that the pick rates from 2 weeks prior to nerfs wouldn't be counteracted by almost 3 months of data post nerf? lol
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
I don't see her much but when I do I get absolutely hammered in that game. She needs some kind of counterplay in chase, eating the mushroom is way to slow and gets reset almost instantly. Maybe buff the mushroom or slow down her infection a bit, make it harder to hit the ranged attack or make it so that it has to hit more than once to fully infect the surv.
I agree, there's multiple ways to do it. Either have it work like plague infection, have it so she doesn't apply the infection with her head form, running over a mushroom removes half of the current infection, etc.
-
@Green_Sliche said:
How about leaving the killer alone?
Seriously, this crusade of gutting killers who already aren't that popular has to end before everyone gets the Skull Merchant or Knight tier.
This fearmongering is exactly what I mentioned in my post. "They aren't popular!!" Says who? I see Krause every 5th game, usually right after 2 blights, a ghoul, and any random killer.
I'm not saying nerf her to being useless. I'm asking for any amount of counterplay in chase if she's going to have an auto locking projectile.
-
@SoGo said:
Freddy and Sadako always have above average KR, do you imply that we should nerf them too?
Kill Rates are not the best way to decide who to nerf.
How about kill rates at high MMR, you know, like I mentioned in my post?
-
@100PercentBPMain said:
weren't those stats from back before her nerfs?
Her nerfs were September 30th. These stats go from September 1st through February 28th of 2026 where she still remains at the top.
-
@Royval said:
his add ons aren’t a problem
April fools was 2 weeks ago.
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
Recently I've noticed more survivor players ratting on each other to the killer, obviously working with the killer is against the rules. But so is refusing to engage with normal game play.
As killer I'll always punish people who try to offer me other survivors or sandbag them during chase. But you will sometimes see those situations where you have a survivor who won't heal, won't do gens, won't unhook and just creeps around with a key avoiding killer waiting for hatch. Often with your usual suspect perks: self care, urban evasion, quick and quiet etc, often with a hatch offering too. Saw one particularly nasty example where an Ace got hold of the hand of vecna and was locker teleporting whenever anyone came near him.
This behaviour basically throws the match for survivors, so if the other survivors clock on and are able to set the killer on them? I'd be interested to know people's takes on this particular situation.
Working with the killer under any circumstances as a survivor, no matter the intention, is against the rules per the in game report system "working with the killer." Unless those categories and wording are changed, it is not okay period. Likewise, killers can be reported as well by "refusing to participate in normal gameplay."
Tl;dr - for both sides, it is clearly against the rules and a bannable offense no matter the intention.
-
@Shroompy said:
Legacy skins are only wanted because of the novelty(?) and exclusivity associated to them. The moment you take that away, they are nothing more than glowing cheeto dust that barely anyone is going to use.
We've seen this happen with other exclusive skins. People kept asking over and over for the Howling Grounds and Summer BBQ cosmetics to be available again and the moment they were released to everyone the skins lost what made them special. Crowns had a similar situation, and I cant even tell you the last time I saw somebody run around with one of those things
I run the year 4 crown every game lol not sure what you mean about "nobody cares about these items anymore," sounds like a personal problem if people lose interest in an item just because they can't feel special anymore.
-
@Wezqu said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4072182#Comment_4072182
I would not see a problem with that as quite often one gen is done anyway before you hook. Still a perk that is always active gives the most useful information to one side that can be is not healthy even if how much you try to defend it.
I agree. I also agree that we should remove auras from hooks and generators for killers because those are always present and provide too much of a tactical benefit for the role.
-
@Wezqu said:
Make it only work when you are injured. Would give value but would not give it all the time.
I say we stop adding bogus conditions for survivor perks to work. Could you imagine the outcry if Pain Res had the requirement that at least 1 gen was finished before it could work?
-
@zonkednb said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4071494#Comment_4071494
One of those situations where I wrote a bunch, then wrote the below and realised this whole exercise isn't worth either of our times.
Your decision to hop into the thread to pin an issue about the state of the game on a generalised group reads as very poor faith. You can call it sanctimonious to prefer not to generalise people or see no merit in unconstructive barbs, but I don't see it that way and never will. It just fosters arguments that I must admit, I'm contributing to, so can't exactly call myself perfect; I'm as baitable as anyone else.If my original obvious satirical comment regarding the state of the game prompted you to type up multiple paragraphs just to delete them in apathy and resort to some platitude, then I must say this unironically: it really isn't that deep.
-
@zonkednb said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4071485#Comment_4071485
I'm pretty sure it was half-baked? Unless the meaning has changed recently lmao. Bringing up offerings as a solution to a lack of map variety is not particularly thought through all the way, hence half-baked. It doesn't help that you used it as an opportunity to single out a group you've decided are an other to you, instead of recognising that a variety of people took issue with offerings for a variety of reasons. It calls your motive into question.
My experience with Nostromo is the same as yours, though. It's every third game or so, both sides. It's by no means an awful map but I'm getting a bit fed up of it.You are making a LOT of assumptions with this post.
Also bringing up map offerings when they used to control what map they brought you to is completely relevant to map variety. If you do not want to risk going to a map you don't like, then select one you do. I cannot simplify it more for you.
This sanctimonious attitude of "well survivors complained as much as killers did" is literally just false. Most killers are more map dependent depending on their strengths and weaknesses, whereas survivors only disliked certain maps for either stealth builds indoors or oppressive small maps with minimal tiles. There would be more of an outcry from killers by this fact alone. The amount of killers that dc'd on the loading screen after a map offering was burned happened 10 times more than when a killer burned one, despite there being 4 times more survivors available to dc.
-
@zonkednb said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4071469#Comment_4071469
The solution is removal of map boosting.
Bringing some half-baked killer vs survivor stuff up was in bad faith. We both know that."Half-baked" lol I would advise learning what buzzwords mean before attempting to use them for yourself.
Unless the devs release information on which maps are boosted, this could be complete luck. I don't disagree that they boost maps, but out of the past 3 days, I've played on dead dawg twice. I've gotten Nostromo probably 20 times though.
-
@zonkednb said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4071439#Comment_4071439
What was the goal with this one, bud?
I'm pointing out that there was a solution to this problem, but enough killers complained and the solution was ruined. Pretty simple.
-
@PleaseRewind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4071439#Comment_4071439
Always one that has to go there. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt as you may have forgotten but there were plenty of players who play just survivor or both roles complained about map offerings too.
The only times survivors complained about map offerings were for indoor maps for stealth killers. That's just the truth of it.
-
@MechWarrior3 said:
I get sent there like 10 times a day…Im over it. 😭
You could run a map offering!... oh wait, killers complained, so now they're bloodweb fluff and useless 😒
-
@coldflame said:
assumptions we make for our discussion:
-we don't bring specific perks to enable counter sabo. the expectation that the killer brings a specific perk every single game is not reasonable.
-we do not play a killer that has power that reduces the effectiveness of sabo. for obvious reasons, this is immaterial to the balance of sabotaging
-the survivors do not make any errors in play. this is immaterial to the balance of the mechanic.
sabotaging a hook takes 1.625 seconds. picking up a survivor takes 3 seconds. the survivors have a 1.4~ second time advantage when it comes to reaching the hook. the survivors are faster than the killer during this race. there are 3 survivors and one killer. the survivor has decent input on where they end up going down, and can mostly freely pick a deadzone to go down in.
theres only really two possible responses:
-slug. bhvr have explicitly made it clear that they dont want slugging to be a playstyle and attempted to mitigate it with balance and perk changes. there are several perks that hard counter slugging, which will be used by a survivor team using sabo. slugging being the only realistic counter also just makes bringing a single sabo toolbox effectively end the game as soon as the last generator powered as the killer can no longer prevent a downed survivor escaping by hooking them
-exhaust the sabos. the survivor get over a dozen sabotages, and even after those are exhausted they can still sabotage slightly slower. there is no plausible scenario where the survivors can run out of sabotages before gens are done
it's been a very long time since bhvr has actually discussed the mechanic and its intended role in the game. it's in a very unhealthy place where it demands large amounts of communication and use of finite bloodweb resources by the survivor team but offers no interaction or counterplay for the killer when executed correctly, so pretty exclusively serves the role of being used by already advantaged premades.
You have a couple of options:
- Use your eyes and hook at one of the 3 other hooks within a 1 tile distance, this game has an abundance of hooks.
- If you see a sabo survivor running in one direction, turn around and hook in the other direction. There will be hooks over there.
- Drop the survivor early. You will have at least 8 seconds if you drop within 4 seconds of picking them up. Push off the sabo survivors and repick the dropped survivor.
- Sometimes you have to slug. That's just the way it is.
Please note that if you have 2 or 3 survivors going for sabos, you have won the game. Nobody is doing gens and it is infinitely better than any slowdown you could possibly run. It will be annoying, but you will win. The above list is extremely effective for just one sabo survivor.
-
@Little_Kitten said:
I’m simply pointing out a very basic fact. A serious DbD player would NEVER suggest that survivors should be able to know which killer they’re facing.
In fact, even someone who doesn’t know DbD in depth, but has a rough understanding of it, wouldn’t suggest that—if they’re being honest.
Like I said: it reeks of survivor main from miles away. Or someone who doesn’t really understand video games.
But hey, it’s not a big deal—every day, players who don’t understand the game or just want to benefit THEIR side come up with ridiculous or completely out-of-touch ideas. Nothing new.
And that's entirely your opinion, which you are entitled to. That being said, I'm not going to entertain a conversation with someone who is only interested in throwing ad hominems my way. Have a wonderful rest of your day.
-
@Little_Kitten said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4070031#Comment_4070031
And me, I'm a pink unicorn.
As expected, Iridescent 1 on both killer and survivor. Sure—if you’re going to try and sound credible, you might as well go all in. Sorry, not buying it.
Juste because your say something in a forum doesn't mean it's the truth.The conclusion remains the same. Only someone who doesn’t understand the game—or who only plays one side—would suggest something that so CLEARLY benefits their own side.
Thread to be forgotten.
Not sure why you're being incredibly hostile when all I did was tell you that I do in fact play both sides enough to have iri 1 lol
-
@Little_Kitten said:
The author is clearly a player who doesn't take the game seriously—or who has never even played as the Killer.
A player who takes both sides seriously and knows the game well would never suggest something like that.
I am Iri 1 on killer and survivor every month. Just because you disagree with me doesn't mean I don't play killer lol.
-
@Wezqu said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4070014#Comment_4070014
If you read my post on those I am against any more abandoning options as they are not needed. So maybe you should not lump people in to groups as that is not how people play this game only few people play only one side. I have not said anything of removal of any abandoning features. I only want 10 seconds before it becomes available
You are one person. Your individual view on how abandons should work is not how the majority of killers see them. That's just how it is.
-
@Wezqu said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4069970#Comment_4069970
and what is your point that some random killer player said so? Ok and why would I need to agree with his point. You also seem to be in that camp that wants to people to play how they want. So why can't I play how I want? If I want to leave someone on the ground I have total right to it by your own opinion.
I'm just saying that there's an incredible double standard between survivors wanting the game to end versus killers. You have killers making forum posts about being able to abandon when 5 gens are done, but you have people in THIS thread who are wishing for the removal of abandoning when someone has been slugged for 3 minutes or downed at least 6 times and not hooked.
-
@Wezqu said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4069949#Comment_4069949
Yeah selfishness is something you should really garner in a game where you play part of the team. Go play some single player game where you don't ruin fun of the other players. There you can play how selfishly you want. Your own actions cause reactions you should know that by now.
That's funny because I've had many a killer player tell me that this game is a 1v1v1v1v1 and not a 1v4. I guess it's only a team game when the killer says so, but it's an every man for themselves when it's convenient for them huh?
-
@Wezqu said:
Usually if they try to kill themselves on first hook I slug them. Its there to let them think of their actions and how it effects the other three survivors. Usually in those matches I will not kill the other three but I make sure he is not going to get out fast.
If its happening when the match is practically over then I just hook them and let them go as then they did play the match and tried.
This is exactly what I mean right here. People think they're holier than thou by trying to punish survivors or "teaching them lessons." As long as the killer approves of your fun it's okay!