White_Jesus
White_Jesus
About
- Username
- White_Jesus
- Joined
- Visits
- 69
- Last Active
Comments
-
Submitted a ticket instead. Seems to be a bug.
-
It's only revealed to you. The wiki is a little more specific than the game (https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Dark_Sense) but general speaking if it doesn't specify it's typically just to you.
-
I mean hey, my two cents is just that if someone can waste 5 minutes of your time (and I do truly mean waste... because there's no tactical benefit to just watching the last survivor bleed out)... That's not super ideal for the game in terms of fun, toxicity, or the number of tickets BHVR's poor support staff must get.
Obviously, slugging for the 4k is a real mechanic, but any game that requires one person to literally go make dinner while they wait for another person to either get killed or escape likely isn't great game design. The same balance issue was discussed with hatch hostage games, the only difference here is that the killer either gets 5 minutes of everyone's time or the survivor gets a dc penalty.
But hey, it's not like this isn't on bhvr's radar... if they ever choose to fix this issue they'll do it. whatever.
-
Thanks for the super detailed reply! :)
-
Okay this sounds like a total win then from BHVR implementation perspective. If loading in the match dodges rather than forcing a bot, and if someone DC's they aren't completely gone because there's a bot instead! Also no more survivors disappearing from your shoulder as killer.
Also TY for the second question answer. Sounds like the bot implementation hasn't really changed high mmr behavior as most people used to kill on hook to avoid dc as well, so no change there lol. Was just curious if maybe people DC'd more to leave a bot instead of a corpse lol.
-
Obviously the second question is super subjective, so if people don't want to answer that one it's totally fine
-
Ah I see, the title was replaced with "########"... Should say "Add the option to let yourself die on the ground when downed"
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I have experienced matches where the killer 4 slugged then just stood around Tbagging us, knowing that we would get penalized for leaving, so we had to just sit there and wait out the bleed out timer, which really sucks.
But I'm not sure if it's such a common occurance to need a patch. But if it is in fact more common than I thought,,
Maybe the bleed out timer could move faster if someone gets crows? If its reached that point, the killer hasn't lost you, just left you to bleed out, and your team is clearly not coming for you 🤷 so the faster bleed out wouldn't trigger if your attempting to crawl to a hatch or gate
I agree that if this feature was created, it would need to have certain requirements to activate. Whether that requirement is that the survivor has crows or that every other survivor is in the dying state/already dead, I think the devs would need to determine those specifics.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740709#Comment_2740709
Well, no, it's not "Purposefully wasting" time nor is it about being "toxic". There are certain times when doing a tome challenge or going for a adept achievement that I've slugged one of the last two survivors and gone for the last one standing to avoid them getting hatch and ruining my chance. It's not like I let the slugged one bleed out and I go back and hook the other one, but still.
I totally agree! If you are slugging to go find the last survivor, that is perfectly acceptable. However, the scenarios that I am talking about are when either you are the last survivor and the killer refuses to hook you or when every survivor is slugged and the killer refuses to hook you. In these scenarios it would be wasting time.
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740733#Comment_2740733
In case you weren't aware, hook suicide mechanic exists exclusively because BHVR tested removing it, and people would sandbag instead. BHVR (reasonably) viewed someone essentially quitting out less bad than someone staying and actively ruining it even harder for the others.
As Marcavecunc pointed out, there are ways to implement this feature that would reduce griefing. For example, only allowing players to use the bleed out button when they are the last survivor. So, while a feature like this could be detrimental, if it had the right implementation, then BHVR could maximize the positive impacts while minimizing the negative ones.
Also, if anything your anecdote helps to prove my point. BHVR tried to change features in a way that would reduce griefing, but it only negatively impacted normal players while the griefers found new ways to accomplish their goals. I think BHVR should do their best to minimize the possible negative ways that a feature like this could be used, but ultimately they shouldn't avoid implementing features simply because they COULD be used in a negative way.
-
@Marcavecunc said:
There should be a bleed out prompt only if you're the very last survivor left slugged (or if every survivor left is either slugged or hooked on struggle phase) and only if you've been slugged for X seconds, maybe a full minute, to prevent survivors from just clicking it as an easy way out and denying the killer from a legit kill.
But yeah, in the case of a killer being a major dick, I agree it would be a good thing to have rather than sit there waiting for my character to die. But then again, often it's my fault cause I crawled away. Same when I can't find a survivor I slugged because another survivor was nearby and I gave chase.. they rarely sit there waiting for me, and with the way sounds are bugged, you don't always hear them moaning on the floor despite them being right there, so it's easy to just miss them and look at the wrong area
I really like the idea of allowing the survivor to use the button only if they are the last survivor or if every other survivor is slugged/hookedo n struggle phase. I'm sure that if this feature was implemented there would be certain requirements to avoid abuse, which would help this be an overall positive feature.
Also, I think the feature could be useful even for the scenario you describe when a survivor crawled away from the killer. If the survivor doesn't think they can escape, they can bleed out to save both themselves and their killer time. So, it wouldn't just be to reduce toxicity, but could also create more smooth gameplay in that way.
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/303959/there-should-be-a-bleed-out-button-feature
Bleeding to death is not hostage, because the game will end in a specific amount of time. Also, the reason this doesn't exist is so people don't have another way to suicide just because they don't like how the match is going.
I would argue that if a player wanted to suicide, then there isn't much to stop them from doing so. I don't think that we should balance features around the players that negatively impact the community, but rather the players that genuinely want to play the game. Ultimately, whether this feature is added or not, players will continue to suicide in matches regardless. So, the only difference is that the players that have already decided to suicide would be able to do so a few seconds more quickly.
Also, if BHVR did determine which features should be added or removed based on the ability to use them in a negative way, then very few features would remain. We wouldn't be given the opportunity to escape on hooks, there wouldn't be skill checks in phase 2 on hooks, we wouldn't be allowed to drop every pallet on the map, we wouldn't have player collision that allows you to block teamates, etc.
-
@Milo said:
Technically speaking (don't hate me for this)
When you're bleeding out the game will eventually end. So, while it takes a while, the killer isn't holding the game hostage. UNLESS in that scenario where the killer is dropping you on purpose. But the you might find the hatch.
Regardless of whether or not the killer is holding the game hostage, they are purposefully wasting time. I'm not suggesting that the killer be punished for this action, instead I'm suggesting that the survivor be given a way out.
My argument isn't that this breaks the rules placed by BHVR, but instead that it creates a toxic environment that is unenjoyable for players. So, therefore it should be changed to allow players to enjoy the game more freely.
-
@Emeal said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1713945#Comment_1713945
Well, hopefully, they will implement the new better matchmaking soon again, when the kinks have been ironed out.
I won't hold my breath, but god I hope they implement a new system because this game has so much potential to be amazing!
-
@Emeal said:
MMR? Phew... i have not heard that name in a long time.
They implemented MMR for a short time.
I thought it was great, but a lot of people complained.
They removed it and I have not heard of it since.
Idd wish if BHVR could like whisper in my ear and say, "Soon™" But that has not happen yet.
Ah so still the same matchmaking we've had the last few years? That's really unfortunate, because this game desperately needed a new system last time I gave it another try.
-
As a PC player I haven't noticed any change in skill. The only changes I've noticed are increased queues for survivors, decreased queues for killers, less toxic players (I assume due to console's lack of chat), and far less SWF when I play killer.
-
My survivor queues are about 15 mins and killer about 10 seconds. Also, there are actually new survivors (not just smurfs) coming over from console, so now is a great time to learn killer!
-
I forgot to mention, that I only play Bill. So, it is entirely possible that it is a glitch that only occurs with Bill's model for some reason.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1442307#Comment_1442307
The innocent people who haven't blocked anybody will still see significant wait times, because if one person in a SWF is blocked the whole group has to be blocked from joining the game.
Queue times will go up on both sides. Thank God it doesn't work this way lmao
sounds to me like you're playing with the wrong friends lol. Either way it wasn't a suggestion just a question.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1442160#Comment_1442160
Ah well, not really.
Killers would basically block every SWF they encounter (because as we know, there is nothing you can do against an SWF) and Survivors would block Killers who were better than them.
Its good that you cannot block people from matchmaking.
I don't mind killers that are better than me or swf. However, I'm not a huge fan of toxic players who t-bag or killers that talk about how easy you made their 4k.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
Nope, just that they cannot add you.
Ah that's unfortunate. Thanks for the quick answer.
-
@Reyer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1425219#Comment_1425219
I understand. Totally and truly. But this game is flawed. I know that people want to play with friends together but this game is not designed to handle outside communication. I don't fight players, I fight developers. It's not players fault the game gives them ability to overcome main obstacle that's part of game mechanics.
It's like having open survival competition that's about finding your way in unknown terrain and reaching some finish line and saying "it's fine and fair that certain runners get free map with all landmarks written on it because they really like having fun with map and gps devices".
I totally agree that SWF gives an unfair advantage to the survivors, but if BHVR were to remove SWF this game would die by the end of the month. There has to be a way to balance SWF without removing the fun of playing with friends. Otherwise, BHVR has no choice but to leave it how it is.
-
@CremelloJoJo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1425256#Comment_1425256
Most of my characters have between 5 and 20, I keep using them every match but not getting any back. Am I being too greedy? 😂 I just love bloodpoints...
Nah it's probably a glitch then. I would throw it in the bug report section https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/categories/bugs
-
This is a really interesting idea! I would love to see any thoughts from a dev/mod.
-
@CremelloJoJo said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1425233#Comment_1425233
Would make sense, maybe I'm just having some bad luck. I got loads last week
How many cakes do you have? They may have set a limit on how many a character can hold in their inventory. If you have an even number like 10, 20, 30, ect., you might consider using one in your next match and seeing if you get any on your next blood web.
-
I'm still getting the cakes, so it may be a bug for some survivors.
-
Dead by daylight is a party game for many players and isn't fun for some people without friends to relax with.
Rather than stopping players from playing SWF there should be a benefit to the killer for going against a SWF team. This wouldn't restrict or disincentivize SWF, but would reward the killer for playing in what is objectively a more difficult match.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1408954#Comment_1408954
By design there are two sides competing against each other. It's competitive. And well known for being stressful. So if someone has ######### high blood pressure then they shouldn't play it
It is only competitive and stressful if you make it so. It isn't bannable to play in a fun way... "you could still do something to help the team and derank in the end if you really want." ~ Peanits (Dev-Community Manager)... You are literally allowed to derank as long as you aren't making the game unfun for the other people in it. That does mean AFKing is bannable, but not playing in a non-competetive way.
So, the OP shouldn't be required to leave the game because he wants to have fun playing it. He can play in a for-fun way if he wants.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1408941#Comment_1408941
The devs mean it's not competitive in the sense that it's not intended for esports.. not that there's no competition in it at all
The devs mean it's not competitive in the sense that it is meant more for fun rather than to focus on the ranking system. So playing in a non-competitive way is completely acceptable. They have even said on numerous occasions that the ranking system basically rewards you for playing the game, not being good.
-
@brokedownpalace said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1407071#Comment_1407071
Everyone's doctor would tell them to avoid unnecessary stress. That's like telling people to drink water or eat vegetables. It's a "health concern" every one on earth shares.
OP shouldn't be playing competitive multiplayer games if stress is such a concern for them.
If his doctor is telling him to avoid stress it's likely due to high blood pressure or another concern. I don't get texts from my doctor reminding me to avoid stress, idk about you...
Also, the OP is asking for suggestions to play the game in a less stressful way. The devs have said about a million times that this isn't a competitive game... so he should be able to play in a way that he has fun (not afk, but playing with fun builds and ignoring ranks).
By the way, I didn't even say that he should afk, just that there's no reason to be toxic #########... but I guess go off lmao
-
@Carpemortum said:
"I've hit my skill cap and instead of accepting that or getting better, I'm going to afk and ruin the game for others because I cant win every game anymore".
FTFY.
lol good job insulting someone complaining about irl health concerns. Hopefully the ego boost you got from writing that made you feel good about yourself.
-
My advise would be to change your standards for winning a game. I find most matches there are 1 or 2 survivors too good for me to chase, so I don't. I literally just leave them be and look for a survivor I might have fun against. Obviously this doesn't always work, and if you find yourself getting stressed by a toxic 4 man it's better to walk away than create health issues.
-
@McLightning said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/127589/matchmaking-fix
No caps. DBD is a casual game, and basically a party game honestly. You can't tell people "I can't play with my friends because they are more experienced". You'll see the game die quick if you try to dictate that.
All they need to do is put the SWF (however many exist in the party) against a killer that matches the average MMR of the SWF group.
The problem is the killer ISN'T the average MMR of the survivors. The killer is typically way below the survivor's ranks, to the point of rediculousness.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/165220/matchmaking#latest
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/N2SUPGPKZ0AN/happy-fun-time.png
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1352418#Comment_1352418
-
Ultimately the only way the devs could make up for the communication advantage is by giving either a disadvantage to all SWF groups or an advantage to the killer when facing SWF. Someone suggested an increase in bloodpoints or a decrease in points required to pip when facing SWF. That way the killer is rewarded for facing a much more challenging team, but the SWF group isn't upset by any disadvantage given to them.
-
@Reptile said:
Anything is better then what junk we have now... I"m not great.. I'm around R15-16 killer at the moment.. but I get put against Rank 1-4s frequently. I just had a game where they were running circles around me.. magically dodging hits... (All this before they escaped and called me a #########.....)
Zero fun was had by me that game... Can't I have a chance to be pitted against people around my skill level??????? Learn gradually? I'd gladly leave a red rank room to a killer how would have fun AND give them a challenge...
It doesn't happen much, but I've been against the odd R20, and I feel sorry for them too....
Majorly unbalanced matches just making people walk away and play something else... it's just not fun to be totally out classed...
Yeah and my hope would be that if the lobby is too high rank for the killer they leave so a higher rank killer can join, and if a survivor is too low ranked they leave so someone else can take that 4th spot.
-
Complaint about matchmaking #703423843... devs still haven't replied.
-
@SketchyPenguin said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1401246#Comment_1401246
It's okay to be against the idea.
However how do you get the idea that people would play worse?
Like BBQ and/or We're gonna Live ..., they're only really useful if you have a high amount of Bloodpoints to get faster through your own goals.
If a survivor goes into the match without any perk, just to purposefully die on first hook, they only get around 2k Bloodpoints and they would have been better off playing with perks.
The problem is that plenty of survivors would attempt this before they were good enough to warrant it. Furthermore, if a player is a veteran then they likely wouldn't care about blood points.
-
@Cheers said:
I'd be against this, mainly when playing survivor. Having people play worst just to get bp would make me annoyed.
Agreed, this gives incentive to play worse at the expense of your teammates.
-
They aren't going to fix it. I made a post complaining and kept putting up pictures for a week. Another person put up pictures for over a month. Neither got replies from the devs. Your 3 options are to tough it out, don't play killer, or play a different game.
-
This just needs to be fixed honestly.
-
To be fair they announced a new ranking system... 6 months ago...
-
This just needs to be fixed honestly.
-
This just needs to be fixed honestly.
-
@DetailedDetriment said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1321911#Comment_1321911
The other survivors in the swf should be compared to the rank 2 to find a killer suitable for everyone in the group to go against.
Yeah that's what MiniPisa and I were discussing above. Hopefully this will be implemented, because right now it's based on the lowest rank not the highest.
-
@DetailedDetriment said:
I feel the ranking of an SWF should start with the highest rank player in the group. If the highest is a rank 2, then the game will start searching for rank 2 killers. In the meantime, it should compare the ranks of the other players to the rank 2. This way, you wouldn't be getting any easy killers for the rank 2, but you wouldn't be getting any difficult killers for the lower ranking players.
I'm a little confused on the wording here. "In the meantime, it should compare the ranks of other players to the rank 2." By this do you mean find equally skilled survivors?
-
@MiniPisa said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1321791#Comment_1321791
All good points, and I won't deny the matchmaking is horrible.. Even I get low rank killers sometimes... at rank 1... solo.... but still, theres literally no way of balancing this out fully. With your system a low rank survivor suffers, and with mine *based on your experience* a mid rank killer suffers. I see your point that the survivor is fully aware they will be going up against a high rank killer, but its still punishing.
Seeing as we both feel strongly about our opinions, what if instead of it being fully inbetween ranks, the killer is slightly more on the high rank side?
-example- instead of a rank 1 and a rank 20 survivor getting a rank 10 killer, they get a rank 6 or something in the purple rank. Its still technically in the middle, but its more fair to the killer. Still not great for the low rank survivor, but lets not kid ourselves.. a rank 10 killer would still destroy a rank 20 - it just looks more even. Obviously if theres more than 1 red rank survivor in the SWF team then ofc the killer will also be red rank, but for the sake of a simple 2 player SWF it could lean a little more inbetween. I just don't like the idea of it always being highest rank when theres a low rank involved.
Yeah I would agree that someone always suffers and somewhere around rank 6 is probably the most fair. Then it could obviously be adjusted lower or higher based on swf win rates. Also, even if the devs can't implement this before the new ranking system, I would say it's worth keeping in mind for their new system.
-
@MiniPisa said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1321751#Comment_1321751
I didn't say the game wasn't challenging enough. I meant at your current rank if games are getting a little too easy or not remotely challenging then you're ready to rank up - and generally this doesn't happen unless you've learned new things about chases through more experienced survivors. Unless you watch streamers (recommend OhTofu btw) you can't improve without better survivors, and survivors can't improve without better killers.
I don't see whats so unfair about being in the middle? a rank 20 shouldn't have to deal with rank 1 lobbies (they would literally never get out of that rank unless their friend babysat them) and you can't just punish people for wanting to play with friends either. As a killer the experience is totally different, getting kills is your goal and if you can kill at least 3 of those survivors then I'd say thats pretty darn balanced. Because here's the thing, a rank 20 killer would not get bullied by rank 1's with my "middle ground" matchmaking. Maybe a rank 10 would, but nowhere near any newb rank would the killer have to meet a rank 1. As Ive mentioned before, a rank 20 survivor would. So how exactly is it fair that a rank 20 killer can be with rank 20's, but a rank 20 survivor has to be with rank 1 killers just because they play with friends?
The first problem is that the current ranking system doesn't even meet in the middle. It is based entirely on the lowest ranked survivor (I get matched routinely with rank 20 killers when playing with my friend). However, even if the matchmaking system would place rank 1's against rank 10's I would still argue it's unfair. The killer took no part in the choice to play a survive with friends game and yet a rank 10 killer is expected to play against a rank 1 survivor.
If you instead based it on the highest ranked survivor, then the only person with a disadvantage is the rank 20 survivor. The rank 20 CHOSE to play with his rank 1 friend, so he should have the burden of a hard match. At the end of the day if the survivor finds the matches too challenging he can choose not to play with his rank 1 friend. The killer CANNOT choose whether or not he's in a swf lobby.
-
@MiniPisa said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1321614#Comment_1321614
I see where you're coming from but as i've stated before not all red rank players are actually good. And honestly, all I can say is don't commit to chases with them unless they're in a dead zone. If everyone else is fine, then go for them. Strike the high rank when you can. And I know thats still not great, but i'm saying it because if you're a rank 10 killer and you have 3 other rank 10's (or even lower) in your match, 1 red rank doesn't sound unfair to me because of the ratio.
If anything, the most positive outlook on it is that if games are too easy or not challenging then you won't improve. Sometimes you gotta go up against a good survivor to learn what loops are infinite, what ones are counter-able and basically use that high rank survivor as practice. Trouble is, a survivor can't really do this. They can learn what killers most likely do in situations, but all they can really do is "mirror" the killer - with most loops you're in charge of where they're going. And for killer, as i've mentioned you could still get a 3k at least. But with a new survivor (if their friends are high rank) once the killer sees them they're dead almost instantly, which isn't exactly the ideal way you wanna be brought into the game, especially if you just wanna play with friends
Ultimately it's just unfair. Plenty of rank 10 killers can't deal with a rank 1 survivor and shouldn't be expected to. Then to add on to that the rank 1 can carry the lobby if ignored through flashlight and pallet saves or even body blocking. Finally, you have to add the fact that they are coordinating things which gives them another advantage against the killer. If a survivor wants to play with their rank 1 friend then the cost should be put on the survivors not the killer.
As for your second comment about a game not being challenging enough, the entire reason there is a ranking system is to avoid crushing new players. It's one thing to be "challenged" and an entire other thing to be placed in a clearly unfair match.
-
@MiniPisa said:
No the killer should be a fair middle ground between all the ranks of the SWF. So if one player is rank 1 and the other is rank 16, the fairest killer rank would be around rank 10 - not impossible to kill a rank 1, and not overly hard for the rank 16. And trust me, being red rank doesn't mean you're a good player.... Its shocking how fast newish players are reaching that level.
The matchmaking is not how its suppose to be right now. I get its frustrating but everyone should know by now that it's not meant to be like this, its just a problem they haven't fixed yet. They plan on bringing in a skill based matchmaking, so I think thats why its taking so long for them to do something about it honestly. I mean, why bother going to the trouble of fixing this ranking stuff if they're gonna implement something different soon anyway right?
Ultimately the killer doesn't decide whether they are in a swf lobby or not, and the survivors get voice chat as well for coordination. So, it would seem the most fair thing would be to base it on the highest survivor's rank. At the end of the day plenty of rank 10 killers can't kill a rank 1 and they shouldn't be expected to. This is especially true when you have mechanics like flashlight and pallet saves that allow the rank 1 to carry the whole lobby and not just themselves. If you want to play with your rank 1 friend the cost shouldn't be to the killer but to you.
Also, if they do intend to implement the new ranking system soon then this should act a suggestion to implement into that system.