Zenislev
Zenislev
About
- Username
- Zenislev
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,162
- Last Active
Comments
-
Survivors will not be content until every single killer has been neutered huh? If any killer's power presents even a minor inconvenience, or forces them to maybe have to make a tricky choice, it has to go.
-
The fact that trapper's own traps can stun him has always been absurd. He's already a weak killer, he doesn't need more weaknesses.
In general, I think that killer's powers shouldn't have downsides. Even stuff like the knight not being able to see survivors while he's placing a line, while they can see him is insane to me. Killers should be a threat. Their powers should be dangerous. Survivors having to work harder to avoid their powers isn't the end of the world, I mean look at identity V, that game goes absolutely insane with killer powers. If you brought any killer from that game over to DBD, even the lowest tier ones, they'd be considered absolutely broken, and yet, that game works fine, despite both it and DBD being functionally very similar games.
There's nothing wrong with killer powers making survivors sweat a little, but the moment a survivor comes out that's even a little rough to deal with, survivors scream from the rooftops and they get nerfed. Look at what happened to pyramid head back when he was able to fake his power. He felt great to play back then, but now? Nope. It was too much, that had to go.
-
Considering the devs just gutted regression perks without giving killers anything to compensate, it seems like they don't actually want killers to have any pressure. To that end, I'd say the best way to pressure survivors is to play something else to make their queues take longer.
That said, if, for whatever reason , you decide that you want to keep playing, there are some things you should keep in mind.
1) Learn to recognize the good loopers, and then ignore them. Some players are just better than you, and those players aren't worth engaging with. If someone's running you in circles, stop chasing them and go find the weaker players
2) Get strong pallets out of the way as early as you can. If you can steer someone into something like the shack, then unga bunga that loop until they drop the pallet on your head. The sooner you can delete it, the easier your chases will be later
3) Tunnel and camp, but be smart about it. Do not camp the first hook you get, at that point you may as well just give up the rest of the game. When you do get a hook, try to hook them near the gens that are being worked on and keep an eye on those gens. If you see a player being overly altruistic, constantly going for hook saves and body blocking you, good, you can ignore them at best, and they'll waste their time trying to protect others instead of doing gens. If they're being smart about unhooks, then the best you can do is try to figure out which gens they're working on and start another chase as soon as you can, but once you see that person that you've hooked back on the field, get them down as soon as you can. Seriously, I can't overstate how important it is that someone dies as soon as possible. Like others here have said, a 3v1 is a lot easier than a 4v1.
4) Try to have a plan. Survivors hate 3 gens for a reason, it's because they can be tough to break. 3 genning is going to become a lot harder without any good regression perks, but just do the best you can to make the 3 gen as unattractive a target as possible in the early game.
-
@Fantasy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3393151#Comment_3393151
Imagine still complaining about dead hard 💀
I'm complaining about a lot more than just dead hard. The killer's time economy is pretty messed up as it is, and now that regression perks got nuked, with no healing nerfs to compensate, it's going to get a lot worse.
-
Well this is a joke. Survivors can still delete any injuries they get, so hit and run isn't going to be a viable tactic, and each hook can potentially get you 2 dead hards to deal with, so you're still going to have to play the game assuming everyone has it, until you see them use another exhaustion perk. Lunges will continue to not be worth using and survivors will continue to be able to erase any mistakes that they make at windows or on loops.
I was hoping to run an anti-heal build after this patch, but now, I don't know. My gen regression is gone, and I guess I'm going to just have to suck it up and continue to be strapped for time, because killers have to get gutted while survivors get the lightest, tiniest slap on the wrist.
I'd be nice if anyone at BHVR actually played killer and understood the problems with it, but eh, this is about as much as we can expect from them I guess.
-
(I accidentally double posted here)
-
@CrowFoxy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1497587#Comment_1497587
Perks + Add ons should be only mild effects, honestly. Something as powerful as being invincible for 60 seconds, getting up on your own, getting free downs because someone did or didn't do a totem, and things like that are WAY too impactful.
I disagree. The current perk system has its problems but it makes the game much more interesting. Build diversity is a good thing. When all bonuses are just slight stat buffs then build diversity doesn't exist in any meaningful way and that makes the metagame boring. That said, if perks and addons did only have mild effects, the game's entire economy would have to be reworked. Perks are only worth the time investment right now because they can meaningfully change your game. If they were reduced to "This one gives you +1% move speed" and "this reduces your missed swing animation by 3%" then you'd have to be able to get all of the perks off a killer or survivor in like, an hour or two at most, otherwise they wouldn't be worth the effort.
-
Because it makes them interesting and worth getting? If perks only offered slight changes to how you play they'd be boring. The fact that they can significantly change how you play the game allows for variety which keeps the game feeling fresh. I mean, consider this; Let's say there were 2 versions of DBD. In one rancor exists as it does now. In the other, rancor lets you move 2% faster if you're chasing your obsession. It's just a slight change that'll give you a bit of an advantage but doesn't fundamentally change how you play the game. Which one would you want to invest time into? The one that rewards your time with a new playstyle or the one that rewards your time with a minute, damn near negligible change?
I didn't play deathgarden so I can't comment there but I think that in most games in general, how drastic a change something gets you should be proportional to how much effort is involved in getting the thing. Perks in DBD are part of the reward system of the game. You have to invest a considerable amount of time to get one so the reward should be worth that investment. Games in which perks offer slight very slight buffs tend to hand those perks out like candy. Take ARPGS like diablo for example.
Going from a sword with 15 attack to a sword with 15 attack + 5% exp on kill isn't something that's going to take you a very long time. You'll find that second sword about 5 minutes after starting the game. On the other hand, legendary weapons, which can drastically change the way your character and their abilities function take a lot more time to find since more often than not they only drop at max level and they tend to have low drop rates. You have to invest more time to get them, so they have to be worth the reward. Its the same principle applied to DBD's perks.