Zucker_Schock
Zucker_Schock
About
- Username
- Zucker_Schock
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,029
- Last Active
Comments
-
@GravelordNito99 said:
These seem decent, although I'd personally argue the survivor hitbox would be best at 35cm.
Yeah possibly 35cm is needed, but whatever happens it should not be under 30cm.
If we follow the same matrix (8) for 35cm it would be: Environment: 19cm Vaults: 27cm Survivor 35cm.
Or if we split it more(9): Environment: 17cm Vaults: 26cm Survivor: 35cm
If we do 35, i would prefer the 2nd option with 9cm in between each action.
-
Maybe they had Coup de Grâce ?
-
The video you have shown is the exception and not the norm, it was the perfect setup for this (being hurt for "This Is Not Happening" and so on). It's very difficult to pull this off and things like "Pain Resonance", "Nemesis" or simply applying pressure, directly counter it and let you loose your entire progress and tokens.
-
I want to throw my values in here as well:
Environment : 16cm
Vaults : 24cm
Survivor : 32cm
My reasoning is, they are evenly spread values in the order or priority. Right now they are all at the same size, causing a gamble as to what gets detected first. With these values the cpu has enough time to compute a detection in the first box with a valid hit. And the server can respond to it.
-
Search bar with filter options would be amazing. Just search "gen" for all perk texts containing "gen" automatically showing you all perks that affect generators. Or "heal" or "speed" or "skillcheck".
-
If you are in chase hitting the survivor is more valuable than reaching full infection. There is no real reason to wait for infection on a survivor to rise, infection doesn't do that much like on Pig or Onryo.
And about the hitboxes, one can not deny that they are so small, that they even cause you to go through survivors from time to time. BHVR already confirmed that they are increasing the survivor hitbox size to a value between ptb and current live.
-
Another issue of his is vault detection, it often does not initiate a vault even at a direct hit on a window.
Pallets seem a little inconsistent as well, at first i thought its lag coupled with the drop timing but thats probably not it, its the same issue that happens at the windows.
A fix should be having all 3 colliders at different sizes, the small: collision, medium: vault, big: survivor.
-
About the collider size, i would suggest to follow the order of importance:
Smallest: collision, middle: vault, biggest: survivor.
This ensures that always the most important thing gets choosen in a given situation.
-
@Zucker_Schock said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3167394#Comment_3167394
I believe since they use the same size for all colliders/hit boxes, it often doesn't hit the vault itself but something else and cancels it or something like that. To fix this the vault detection needs to be bigger than the environment/collision detection.
Collision detection should be the smallest size, followed by vault and than Survivor. Generally i would say follow the order of importance:
Smallest: collision, middle: vault, biggest: survivor.
It actually baffles me, that they haven't done this in the first place. Never put them all at the same size that causes issues.
-
@Biscuits said:
It's weird because, sometimes you don't look straight on a window and it vaults you. Other times, you look straight on the window to hit someone and it doesn't connect.
I believe since they use the same size for all colliders/hit boxes, it often doesn't hit the vault itself but something else and cancels it or something like that. To fix this the vault detection needs to be bigger than the environment/collision detection.
Collision detection should be the smallest size, followed by vault and than Survivor. Generally i would say follow the order of importance:
Smallest: collision, middle: vault, biggest: survivor.
-
Sounds actually feasible and kinda balanced, i am thinking along the lines of Hillbilly without being able to attack, with cooldown, just for long distance traversal with very limited steering. Would also fit his lore very well, extra points for nostalgia.
-
They also have to take into consideration, that this is an dedicated server based online game, you can't expect that lag, stuttering and mismatches aren't influencing hit detection. Something so small as the current version would work better if there weren't ping and such aka a peer to peer host or single player.
-
Good job, i agree, this all seems pretty fair.
About the relocation/chain bound duration i found that it also takes more time to relocate because of the 20cm Environment Collision, since you have to take the size into consideration aswell and basically always bound next to objects it takes more time to get the angle. Aswell as sometimes clipping invisible sharp geometry of objects with a bigger collider than the mesh itself. I dont see why wesker should clip like this in generall and would think values like these could be good starting points : Collision: 16cm, Survivor: 32cm.
Since there were so many reports about this, i am pretty sure they will do something about it.
-
@RonMan32 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3163052#Comment_3163052
In that case they should just have the geometry more tight to the models in the maps, I rarely hit stuff I didn't "deserve" to hit so reducing it feels like over kill. But yeah obviously 30cm is probably the perfect spot for survivor collision
I agree with the part "they should just have the geometry more tight to the models in the maps".
And while we are at it, they should also put the survivor collider in line with their model while running (tilt the angle a little, so that it fits).
But both of these are more work than just increasing the ranges of his ability.
-
Ah, sorry i misread your post, i dont think you need to compensate the collision hitbox. I suggested a decrease since you can sometimes still get stuck on sharp walls seemingly while not hitting them on some props with invisible geometry.
-
-
@RonMan32 said:
Completely agree. 30cm would be fine for the survivor hitbox. If they need to increase the collision hit box to compensate 25cm would probably be acceptable for that. They always over do it with their changes but hopefully for once they'll work this one back to a nice middle ground.
I think 25cm for collision would make him hit invisible geomeotry too often, no need to compensate for a bigger survivor detection, survivor should be a little bigger than collision.
And i don't think 25cm for Survivor detection would make a big enough difference, the issue is quite severe if you watch clips of wesker going right through survivors like in this :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCNmmohe2dg -
@Marius1234456918 said:
They really need to put it back up to 40. I played him on ptb and he felt good not op but just like a good killer i would say maybe a bit like pinnhead in the way how good he is. But now you can only use the power if you are right behind a Survivor otherwise they will dodge it 100%. He got nerfed so bad its just sad.
They reduced it from 40cm for a reason, but it only needed a few cm imo and not -50% to 20cm. Should have tested it a bit more before they push it like this.
I am beginning to think something like this could be a good ratio:
Collision: 16cm
Survivor: 32cm.
Of course some testing would reveal the "sweet spot".
-
Yeah, this is not a bug as far as i know, only if you grabbed one of them and it got canceled for example.
I also thought about console and how horrible it must be for them as i evaluated the current situation with his power for myself.
I am beginning to think something like this could be a good ratio: Collision:16cm Survivor: 32cm. Lets see how BHVR thinks this should go but many people are agreeing that this is an issue right now.
-
Its a stereotypical expression, you know what words they used to descibe the changes from the PTB, right ?
Quotation: "slightly toned down the Survivor collision detection" and "will require a little more precision".
So if this is the standard BHVR sets, my words go along these lines aswell.
-
I bet they will pump out a hotfix which hopefully fixes some of his bugs and also increase the survivor detection range.
I hope it doesn't take until the midchapter for it to see the light of day.
-
Now just a slight mismatch from lag or your angle or position can cause you to miss. Also you can not hit around any obstacle or corner, since the width is to small for that.
On the ptb version you just had to get used to his bigger hitbox, for me it worked quite well.
Why not let the collision detection stay the way it is right now, but increase the survivor detection to 30cm for example ?
-
@danielmaster87 said:
The whole "He was grabbing survivors who weren't in front of him" thing, I don't buy it. I think sadly Wesker is gonna be a killer like Nurse who has wildly inconsistent attack hitboxes.
I think how the devs handled fixing his bumping into everything was to nerf his grab's hitbox, but I don't think they have to do it that way. I'm no game designer, lucky us, but I would try to find a way where the bumping into objects hitbox was small and the grab detection hitbox was still big. This idea could also be applied to Victor, Demogorgon, Huntress... oh it would solve SO much.
Funny how they had the exact opposite ratio you suggest in the original version on the ptb
(Collision detection for Virulent Bound was 45cm)
(Survivor detection for Virulent Bound was 40cm)
I agree with you, it should be the inverse order of the one they did originally: bigger survivor collider, smaller collision collider.
Just let the collision detection stay at 20cm and increase the Survivor detection to 30cm.
-
Exactly, once this stuff gets fixed he could be pretty fun, but right now he is a little too taxing. Can still kinda work but requires highest level play and concentration. Most players probably cant use him well in his current state.
-
Exactly, i noticed this aswell, you can touch the survivor and still miss, i hope they increase the Survivor detection a bit.
-
Yeah, the Survivor detection is a little to small. What you are experiencing is also caused by the survivor hitbox(collider), which is smaller than the running survivor animation, you need to hit a little behind the survivor to get them, but this wouldn't be the case if the Survivor detection would be a little bigger than 20cm.
-
I agree, the Survivor detection is a little to small, you can sometimes touch the survivor and still miss your attack.
-
Happened to me as well, along with other things like it. I believe the Chalice (Gold) addon causes it to happen more frequently.
-
I believe no one likes to loose control mid attack to a system, which actually causes you to miss your attack instead of you hitting it on your own. Luckily thoose cases are pretty rare but they do happen and are quite memorable and annoying.
-
Also tight angles close to a obstacle can cause it to go into the obstacle and not into the survivor.
-
@BaschFonRonsenburg said:
It isn’t auto aim as much as it is server correction and the game facing (not moving) you where the survivor is, you would have missed the survivor regardless.
Let me quote this guy for example :
unofarto317: "Aim dressing is when the game adjusts your aim during an attack to make it line up with the attack hitbox when it predicts you're about to hit a survivor. It snaps onto the survivor so that it looks better from the killer's POV."
Meaning its already a hit from the games perspective, but a sudden movement can screw with it.
-
@BaschFonRonsenburg said:
It isn’t auto aim as much as it is server correction and the game facing (not moving) you where the survivor is, you would have missed the survivor regardless.
Not really, as far as i know they call it aim dressing and it actually is more like auto aim. Also it was in the game before servers were a thing and even back then it often did more harm than good imo. I dont know what bhvr's plans are considering that feature but yeah, its a thing.
-
Well i already had such a case, not for dbd but something else, where my ticket took them over a month to report to. I understand your frustration, this is the worst case szenario.
-
Since the update was on July 19th, maybe they still need time to check your account and get back to you ?
Maybe they are flooded with tickets i dont know.
-
@Sparks741420 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3116160#Comment_3116160
I did numerous actually but they've basically ignored me for a month now.
Damn, if thats the case, what is even the point of a support ticket ?
I really hope they do get back to you and fix your account and also give you compensation.
-
If i had to guess, why this bug happens i would have to say, that it might be, that the server actually has the right progression details but the client wrongfully overwrites its own data once you prestige or something like that, so once you restart the game the details get loaded from the server. Its definitely weird.
-
@Sparks741420 said:
can you imagine losing roughly 200 million bps worth of prestige having perks you already bought and paid for then grinded up to unlock now being locked after 6.1? because my account was completely gutted because of this "new prestige system". So I feel your pain that you lost something lol.. my entire account got ripped into a third of what it should've been.
Damn, whatever happened to your account seems very serious, maybe you should open a support ticket ?
I just changed the bug report, since i noticed that after i restarted the game, the perks reappeared, it seems to be visual bug basically.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756428#Comment_2756428
I dunno, maybe. I just know getting rid of the timer completely would be bad. Slowing it down would have to be tested.
I've actually been a supporter of the suggestion that AFK crows be more aggressive, because in a lot of matches I see it get down to two survivors and then both stop working on gens and start stealthing around the map. I used to equip Whispers all the time specifically to avoid being held hostage in those types of matches. That's a completely different topic, and I'm not trying to bring that into the conversation. I just wanted to make it clear that I have a bias in this instance. Slowing down the AFK timer in certain instances might be viable, but it's not something that I personally would support.
Yeah you are right, the headline went maybe a bit overboard, i mean afk crows are named because they are ment to trigger when you are afk, but sure they also have a different use. There certainly also are issues like you said where the game gets dragged on unnecessarily long. Sometimes by killers that want to get those extra points for closing the hatch and get endgame hook points and slug the survivors but most of the time by survivors that hide unnecessarily. They added the endgame collapse for that but its also a big risk to open the exit gate as killer just so that the game will end in 2 minutes.
Also the survivors get such a boost when they get hit, that the save zone to escape an open gate is quite big.
-
Hmm yeah i haven't thought about Head-on yet, but isn't that situation also kind of niece ? If you wait 60 seconds out you will in most cases loose the game as killer.
About the Terror Radius, how about this : the afk timer ticks half as fast if a killer is within 5 meters of the survivor and gradually goes back to the normal speed until the killer is within 20 meters of the locker. A linear gradient.
-
@AsherFrost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756415#Comment_2756415
If you are moving outside of a locker it is a lot easier for killer to find you in the map through normal gameplay then if you're hiding in a locker. So the visual indication of the crows is less necessary. Even if you're exiting and entering a locker the killer at least has the chance of seeing the doors open and close.
@AsherFrost True but its only a short time frame where you are visible and a long timeframe where you are hidden.
You can stay 60seconds in the locker until the first crow spawnes and you will probably have a short window in that time where you can leave the locker, move a bit and re-enter the locker in most situations and i believe the situations where the time does matter are the ones where you can not leave the locker to reset your timer.
-
@AsherFrost said:
Ok. Afk should always spawn crows. The afk timer in DbD is already quite generous, and nothing is gained by overly immersive survivors who refuse to move. I played before the afk crows worked as they did, and the experience on both sides is better for them being added.
Nice, thanks that's constructive feedback.
I see your point, i agree that they have their upside and can partly fix the issue of overly passive players.
But i believe most overly immersive survivors will just crouch walk and crows do not trigger in that situation. You are able to bypass the crows entirely just by moving a bit, but you can not move in a locker so its kind of a weird spot to be in, in my opinion.
Especially since overly immersive survivors will just leave the locker move a bit and than re-enter when they have the option to do so.
-
@AsherFrost Because i still had more to say about it, it just happened to be after i sent the first message, why do you care ?
Yeah i know, that's the game right now, and that's totally fine. But that's also the reason why i post in feedback, because i think this can be improved. You haven't once said anything about the afk mechanic itself, you just kept talking about my example game.
If you want to bring something productive to the table talk about what you think of the gameplay mechanic and not of a unrelated topic.
-
@AsherFrost said:
She had no reason to leave. She was perfectly positioned to send crows at both gates, so she knew when you were going to make a break for it. Just the way it is, sometimes you're just stuck in a bad spot.
Also she had no reason to stay there either, she wasnt "perfectly positioned" like you said, one gate was closer and she just stayed because of the 2 survivors that she wanted to secure in the basement. But like i said that doesn't matter.
-
@AsherFrost said:
She had no reason to leave. She was perfectly positioned to send crows at both gates, so she knew when you were going to make a break for it. Just the way it is, sometimes you're just stuck in a bad spot.
I doesnt matter, she could have stayed right next to me and i would have escaped through the hatch. It was a matter of seconds. And i dont complain because of the situation, its about the afk mechanic, this situation would have never happened if the mechanic would be different.
-
@AsherFrost Also, the Hatch spawned right next to the Shack so even if the gate wasnt there, as soon as the second survivor would have died i would have been able to exit the locker and leave through it.
-
@AsherFrost said:
Counterpoint:
Once she was sitting next to your locker, she had you, crows or not. All you were doing was delaying the end of the game and keeping both of you from moving on to the next match. That's exactly what the afk crows were designed for.
I dont think she had me since she had no idea i was there. If the afk crow would have appeared 5 seconds later i would have escaped. The gate was 99 and if i had a running start i would have made it to it, even if she would have hit me a few seconds after i started running, but not if she would have hit me right in front of the locker. It was a close call.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2321183#Comment_2321183
If you're recording, it's quite obvious when you're being forced and when you're not. A person who's being forced to farm would try to get away, for example. They'd likely be killed on the hook (because they're not cooperating). There are many ways to tell.
If you don't want to farm, then don't. I don't understand why you're so concerned about other people being banned for forcing players to farm when you already said you don't like to farm and don't engage in farming.
About why i bother to discuss about it in such a way, well first of all i don't like waschy rules. Ones which aren't really clear and in the eye of the viewer to decide about. Secondly i like to ponder about things. And lastly i have nothing better to do right now, since i am waiting for the event.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2321144#Comment_2321144
A survivor being hook farmed, for example. The killer hooks them, allows another survivor to unhook, then downs them and hooks them again, while other survivors body block.
A survivor being downed, picked up and dropped over and over again so they're freed, then downed again.
I'm sure you get the idea.
In most farming cases the down after a unhook is so fast that there is not even the time or need to bodyblock. If the unhooking survivor isnt using borrowed time, as soon as the feet of the unhooked survivor touch the ground, they are down again. Not even a way for them to communicate that they dont want to farm.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2321144#Comment_2321144
A survivor being hook farmed, for example. The killer hooks them, allows another survivor to unhook, then downs them and hooks them again, while other survivors body block.
A survivor being downed, picked up and dropped over and over again so they're freed, then downed again.
I'm sure you get the idea.
My point is where do you draw the line ? Every survivor that took part in a farming session can state, that they were being forced. How do you prove it ? Its up to BHVR to decide who to ban for farming and who not to. Also what is too much and what isnt.
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2321115#Comment_2321115
The mods have already confirmed that farming is only bannable if you force people into it.
Again, what do you interpret as forcing someone ? Its either not the case or always the case if not everyone is doing it.