ad19970
ad19970
About
- Username
- ad19970
- Joined
- Visits
- 9,259
- Last Active
Comments
-
I do like the change, but the values seem a little high. 30% faster repairing speed for everyone that is running the perk seems a bit much.
-
I would love a buff to thanatophobia. But they should only buff the values for repairing speed, not healing speed, otherwise Sloppy Butcher will turn useless.
-
I'm surprised nobody is talking about the buff to her surveillance perk. That perk sounds like it'll be absolutely amazing. Or am I not getting something?
-
I could imagine the first bug is more a change to improve the sound of killers maybe?
-
@Acromio said:
@FrenziedRoach said:
This implies the Doctor is not powerful to begin with....... FFS, he might not be top tier like Nurse, but he's in a good place.No, he's not. He's just a M1 killer with a ginormus terror radius that can track relatively easily but can't do anything else effectively. He has no tool to traverse the map faster, no tool to down survivors faster, no way to deal with looping against survivors with more than one brain cell. If Freddy and Legion didn't exist, the Doctor would easily be the worst killer in the game. His power is borderline useless and is easily replicated (and, not to mention, outclassed) by perks and some killer-specific addons.
His ability is pretty good against certain window loops though. Plus he can definitely slow down the game a bit. A small buff to his chase potential is all he needs in my opinion.
I'd increase the base range of his shock therapy by 25%, so it's the same range as with the brown electrode add on right now. Than decrease the extra range his electrode add ons add from 25%, 50% and 75% to 20%, 40% and 60% and remove the extra time the add ons add to the charge time of doctors shock therapy. -
@Science_Guy said:
It should be an interesting change. In a given game, most of the time you'll probably be doing more healing than self-healing.You mean healing others? That's the thing though. With this change, everybody will pretty much need to run self care. Think of it, two survivors are both injured and running selfcare. Now they could both heal the other, that however would take twice as long as if each of them would just sit next to each other and heal themselves, since healing each other or healing themselves will no longer have a difference in speed. It would be awful.
-
@PeacefulFIN said:
some sound issues are fixed in PTB, yayYes thank god.
-
@zed7567 said:
@ad19970 said:
@Tru3Lemon said:
when i look at this post i was like this must be a bait but its not.. dude doc its a ok killer he dosent need buff but he needs a change that i want to see making the madness goes to phase 2 while youre hookSo a nerf? Seriously? That's the last thing he needs.
If only they would regress out of madness 2 and 1 so that you can get that initial revealing scream so the whole cycle can repeat. Scream to madening to chase and hooking. the buff doctor needs is for survivors in madness 1 and 2 to automatically regress back to madness 0..
Hmm. I don't know, getting them to madness 3 would take very long then, and that's part of his advantages too. Survivors having to snap out of madness 3 definitely helps slow down the game.
-
I agree. With this change, the most efficient way to win is for everyone to use self care and just heal themselves, so nobody has to heal injured survivors and instead can just repair gens. Wouldn't be a good idea at all.
-
@Orion said:
How come? Explain your thought process. Why does winning in a certain way make you worse than the player who lost to you?
Well it doesn't fully mean that the survivor was actually better than the killer, but in most cases, they were, otherwise the killer wouldn't have to camp like that. Securing a kill by staring at a hook doesn't take any skill at all.
-
Damn I would really love that honestly. Especially for a more chill experience.
-
@Master said:
@ad19970 said:
I'm just curious if there's any new information regarding this problem. Killers rely a lot on sound and when it doesn't work properly well then that's quite a problem. I hope it gets fixed very soon.As you said, its a killer problem......
Last time they broke sounds for killer it never got fixed properly again and the first patch adressing the problems (not fixing them though) happened half a year later
To be fair I highly doubt that the devs prioritize survivor problems over killer problems. It's more about how hard a bug is to fix.
However, I'm pretty sure they said they were wroking on it in one of their posts. I just hope it's soon.
If they wouldn't fix it at all, that would be unacceptable though. This is definitely a bug that needs adressing. -
I've seen another bug where survivors get hit while Hillbilly is breaking the pallet with his chainsaw even though the survivor is on the edge of the other side of the pallet and clearly out of range of Hillbilly's chainsaw. Never seen this bug before, but both could need some adressing.
-
I actually like a lot of the ideas here. However I don't like the idea of a perk always giving you bigger great skill check success zones, cause then that perk would make Hex: Ruin absolutely useless at high ranks.
Also I think Lithe should stay the way it is. I think faster vault speed could actually be a little too good, though I'm not sure. It would be better to just use that idea for a new perk honestly though. -
@Tru3Lemon said:
when i look at this post i was like this must be a bait but its not.. dude doc its a ok killer he dosent need buff but he needs a change that i want to see making the madness goes to phase 2 while youre hookSo a nerf? Seriously? That's the last thing he needs.
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@ad19970 said:
As far as I can tell most people do want the balance gap to be closed as much as possible, though. It's understandable if you don't, I myself like the feeling of being alone as survivor, not knowing where the other 3 sruvivors are. But I believe most people prefer better balancing, and it's something the devs need to adress.
You simply can not balance a game properly if playing with voice comms grants you such big advantages over playing alone. It's not fair for solo survivors, and as far as I can tell people who have been complaining about killers being buffed to much are people who play solo survivor and don't enjoy the game.
As long as this balance gap exists, either swf will be overpowered or solo will be underpowered. That's not how you should balance a game.The community seems to be split on this issue; Link: All Seeing VS Blindness
However I think most people who desire blindness (I inherently do as well) wouldn't have any real problems against the all seeing version of the game, or at least, less so than they pretend;
Hmm interesting. I can definitely understand the argument of these changes taking away more of the horror of the game. What a shame that there's no other way for the game to be balanced.
-
I like it. Kindred needs to be base kit without a doubt, and I'd even add Bond to that when injured, which is clearly another big advantage swf survivors have.
Thanatophobia as base kit would also be nice, but I would keep it the way it is now as opposed to your suggestion, just with slightly higher values maybe. Like instead of 6%/9%/12%/15% maybe 12%/15%/18%/20% for repairing speed and 9%/10%11%/12% for healing. Healing shouldn't be too high though since it would otherwise make Sloppy Butcher useless and would become overpowered. -
As far as I can tell most people do want the balance gap to be closed as much as possible, though. It's understandable if you don't, I myself like the feeling of being alone as survivor, not knowing where the other 3 sruvivors are. But I believe most people prefer better balancing, and it's something the devs need to adress.
You simply can not balance a game properly if playing with voice comms grants you such big advantages over playing alone. It's not fair for solo survivors, and as far as I can tell people who have been complaining about killers being buffed to much are people who play solo survivor and don't enjoy the game.
As long as this balance gap exists, either swf will be overpowered or solo will be underpowered. That's not how you should balance a game. -
@iTz_KilLaZ_x said:
Gens still get done incredibly fast and survivors get 3 lives unless there’s a Mori. Also, ruin is RNG based which is problematic considering it can either be a big help or a complete wasted slot.I won't disagree. I even made an suggestion in this post how to nerf gen rush a bit. It wouldn't be much, but it's at least something. The devs could still try and keep adressing this problem in the future. I just think camping is even worse than gen rush right now. Maybe not tunneling, but camping.
Just imagine we get a gen rush nerf while killers can still camp and tunnel like they do now. Would be horrible, and the game would finally turn into a fully fleshed out lobby simulator for killers. Camping and tunneling need to be adressed first, and then gen rush.
About Ruin, I know that. But that's exactly why I believe this game isn't competitive, and never was meant to be, there's so much rng that can influence a match. If Ruin gets destroyed immediately, I just think to myself well better luck next game, and just try to do as good as possible.
And games in which Ruin lasts long enough, well they are particularly fun. I can play fair and still usually do very well. -
@Shraar said:
It's a shame you're getting so many immature meme responses. Are some people so dumb they can only use pictures to communicate? How do they express themselves IRL? It's so annoying.You are right that Camping and Tunneling is the worst experience a Survivor can have. You aren't playing the game. You're AFK on hook, then mashing space (so tedious) then dead. Nevermind that solo survivor teams are adversely affected by this strat, it's bad enough that one person have such a horrible experience playing a game.
You are also right in saying that the way the game is set up right now basically encourages camping/tunneling. You want to focus a Survivor to reduce their numbers advantage ASAP. If it's not a SWF, camping ensures a killer and wastes everyone's time. And I'll mention it again, the person on the hook is having 0 fun and is probably considering uninstalling.
Kindred being made baseline is a good start. That change where Hooked Survivors are less effective repairing is even better. I hope the devs consider this! Hooks are the worst thing about this game!
Thx a lot. Nice to see people also agreeing with this post. I'm very much convinced this is the biggest problem for survivors and fixing that would probably increase the amount of survivor players.
After all the patches with killer buffs I think something like this in the patch notes would definitely win some survivor mains back. -
@Nickenzie said:
Tsulan said:
The_Crusader said:
ad19970 said:@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens.
Wut? Are you telling me a killer main being against camping is the equivalent of a survivor being against doing gens?
He is because thats what some people on here genuinely believe.
Tunneling is so widely used these days. Even if the killer wasn't tunneling at all. He gets accused of it. Same goes for camping.
How dare you not go a cross the map after you hooked someone?!
s/
That's not what I mean when I say camping. As you'll see in the changes I suggest.
-
@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:
@Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said: @Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens. You would have a point if camping was the only way to get a kill, but it's not. Bad comparison.
Yeah, tunneling a gen isn't the only way to finish them. Doing them only 50% and leaving them alone is way more efficient... Mmmh what? You hook someone and eventually dies, either because no one rescued or because you hook that survivor for a 2nd/3rd time. Gens don't get done by themselves. I swear your comments were smarter before my ban. Killer hooks someone, that survivor gets unhooked. Killer casually finds the same survivor = tunneling. Gens need to be done by survivors.
But I've never seen a survivor abandon a gen that was 80% done. They always stay close (camp) and continue (tunnel) the gen once the killer left. It's about perspective. If the killer does it, its despicable. If survivors do it, it's considered normal. But both sides do exactly the same thing. If survivors remain close to the gen killer just need to look around and chase them, if killer decides to camp the gen be sure i'll go do another gen, have fun camping that gen! If killer camps a survivor for no reason yeah, it's kinda cheap because the chances of getting out alive are (almost) or non existent. If a survivor camps a gen killer has chances to chase and down that survivor, especially because that survivor will be close. No Tsulan, they are different things, it's not about perspective. No, you're right. It's not the same. Since survivors got perks like BT which aim exactly at unhooking camped survivors. It's 4vs1 killer has to (I know this might surprise you) Kill. It doesn't matter how he achieves that goal.
Survivors have to do gens. Doesn't matter how they achieve theirs. BT is kinda useless when gates aren't open. And yes, killer has to kill doesn't matter how (i guess), that's why i just called it "cheap". But any killer who camps right off the bat without reasons clearly is not using all their potential. If you wanna get your kill that way then so be it... BT has been recently buffed. So the killer has to hit that survivor twice no matter what. Of course, the survivors skill impacts here. Since a skilled survivor could loop a killer for several minutes. Oh a killer needs a reason to kill? That's cute...
Not like his name is killer or anything... If survivor loops the killer for several minutes that killer is bad, plain and simple. No, i said a reason to camp. I get it if there are survivors close by, but staying there because killers feel like doing that? Those killers are simply not using their potential. But hey, i won't argue if you say that you have fun while staring at that hooked survivor for 2 minutes... I never said that. I find camping utterly boring. I rarely camp. Usually only if someone pissed me off.
BUT I fully understand killers that do camp. What do you understand? That they rather get bored and camp a survivor just to secure a kill because they are bad? In this case i totally agree. That's the problem. I mean who knows if they are getting bored or if they enjoy camping. But why reward bad players with such an easy kill? That's not how online games should work honestly. Especially when considering that it ruins the fun for the survivor being camped. Killer tracked the survivor, chased them, downed them, hooked them, secured the kill = bad killer.
Survivor failed to avoid the killer. Failed to lose the killer = deserves a free unhook, because he's clearly more skilled.
Chasing down one killer and finally hooking him is far easier than avoiding the killer and losing him in a chase. Just because he got downed once shouldn't be a reason to not get unhooked and to have the game end already. It's just no fun.
I mean sure stealthing isn't that hard, but at some point a killer will find a survivor, it's inevitable. Then he gets chased and eventually downed. And than that's it? That doesn't seem fair.
I'm sorry but one survivor isn't on the same power level as the killer, those times are no more.
I could name you some games, where you die even faster and there's no second chance.
Survivors shouldn't be able to 1v1 the killer. But they still can. Nothing changed in that regard.
They can't. The chances of losing an equally skilled killer are much lower than him downing you. They may have used to 1v1 good killers, but that's not anymore. Just maybe the weaker killers, like Freddy.
-
@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:
@Tsulan said: ad19970 said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens. You would have a point if camping was the only way to get a kill, but it's not. Bad comparison.
Yeah, tunneling a gen isn't the only way to finish them. Doing them only 50% and leaving them alone is way more efficient... Tunneling a gen isn't even a thing. Completing a gen to 100% is something completely different than tunneling one survivor until he is dead. Cause that just ruins the experience of the survivor. Which is why I suggest to balance the game more so that killers have more incentive to not tunnel and less incentive to tunnel. I don't want killers to have less chances of getting kills, I just want it to be fairer and more fun for both sides. Where is the lol button when you need it the most?!
Anyway, completing a gen and killing a survivor is exactly the same. Every side completing their only objective. Oh and ruining a survivors fun? That's cute. A few days ago I got called out for letting survivors escape on purpose. Btw, those very survivors didn't care at all about my fun. Even after making it clear, that I don't want to kill them. They insulted. Funny to think you need a lol button for that comment, but whatever. Sure, you've got a point, it's similar. But there's no common sense for survivors to just leave a gen when it's almost repaired. And yes, there's no reason to ignore an injured survivor. No doubt. And you shouldn't. But killers have quite the incentive to just purposefully focus on one survivor, ignoring everyone else. That's the problem. The difference is, completeing a gen doesn't make the game unfun for the killer. The game continues. Once a survivor is tunneled to death, the game is over and it wasn't very fun for him in most cases. I am not saying tunneling is a bad thing to do, I am saying this game would be better if there were more incentive for killers not to tunnel than to tunnel. Pretty much give killers the chances of getting kills without tunneling just like they do now with tunneling, and instead make it so that tunneling isn't quite as effective as it is now. Obviously this will never be totally fixable, but the devs could try and balance the game so not tunneling becomes more advantegous over tunneling than it is now. I get there are survivors that don't want the killer to have fun. Something the devs hopefully adress as well. But this is about all the survivors who just want to play the game to have fun and can't because the game supports strategies that give the survivors no chance of having fun. Most people shouldn't suffer just because there are some toxic people in the community. Devs addressed the issue of tunneling. By giving us BBQ. But survivors don't really like this perk. Some would even prefer a camping killer. Which led to its nerf. Kinda ridiculous btw.
A killed survivor can enter a new game instantly. I don't see an issue here. But survivors take it strangely personal if they get killed. Doesn't matter if they die at the start of the match or right in front of the opened gates. They are equally mad.
Yeah pretty sure the complaint with BBQ was that it made stealth more problematic, especially on Hillbilly, not that it made killers not camp. But BBQ is fine, no need to nerf it, and the locker change wasn't really a big nerf.
Being tunneled or camped from the get go, and then having to search for a new game isn't very fun though. Especially when it happens multiple times in a row.
I'm not talking about those survivors. There's a clear difference between dying because of getting camped and tunneled and dying to a fair killer. One game was still enjoyable, the other not. If people get mad just because they lost in general, that's their problem, and I'm definitely taking distance from those people. But every game has those types of people. Who just can't lose.
Stealth...
Who is stealthy? A ninja who's next to someone else, who doesn't notice that he's there or the rice farmer who's far away?Well you've got a point, but I'm guessing the main complaints came from Nurse and Hillybilly. Cause they can easily reach you within 4 seconds. Still, I agree BBQ didn't need a nerf, but I also believe that the locker buff didn't hurt that perk too much.
-
@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:@Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said: @Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens. You would have a point if camping was the only way to get a kill, but it's not. Bad comparison.
Yeah, tunneling a gen isn't the only way to finish them. Doing them only 50% and leaving them alone is way more efficient... Mmmh what? You hook someone and eventually dies, either because no one rescued or because you hook that survivor for a 2nd/3rd time. Gens don't get done by themselves. I swear your comments were smarter before my ban. Killer hooks someone, that survivor gets unhooked. Killer casually finds the same survivor = tunneling. Gens need to be done by survivors.
But I've never seen a survivor abandon a gen that was 80% done. They always stay close (camp) and continue (tunnel) the gen once the killer left. It's about perspective. If the killer does it, its despicable. If survivors do it, it's considered normal. But both sides do exactly the same thing. If survivors remain close to the gen killer just need to look around and chase them, if killer decides to camp the gen be sure i'll go do another gen, have fun camping that gen! If killer camps a survivor for no reason yeah, it's kinda cheap because the chances of getting out alive are (almost) or non existent. If a survivor camps a gen killer has chances to chase and down that survivor, especially because that survivor will be close. No Tsulan, they are different things, it's not about perspective. No, you're right. It's not the same. Since survivors got perks like BT which aim exactly at unhooking camped survivors. It's 4vs1 killer has to (I know this might surprise you) Kill. It doesn't matter how he achieves that goal.
Survivors have to do gens. Doesn't matter how they achieve theirs. BT is kinda useless when gates aren't open. And yes, killer has to kill doesn't matter how (i guess), that's why i just called it "cheap". But any killer who camps right off the bat without reasons clearly is not using all their potential. If you wanna get your kill that way then so be it... BT has been recently buffed. So the killer has to hit that survivor twice no matter what. Of course, the survivors skill impacts here. Since a skilled survivor could loop a killer for several minutes. Oh a killer needs a reason to kill? That's cute...
Not like his name is killer or anything... If survivor loops the killer for several minutes that killer is bad, plain and simple. No, i said a reason to camp. I get it if there are survivors close by, but staying there because killers feel like doing that? Those killers are simply not using their potential. But hey, i won't argue if you say that you have fun while staring at that hooked survivor for 2 minutes... I never said that. I find camping utterly boring. I rarely camp. Usually only if someone pissed me off.
BUT I fully understand killers that do camp.
What do you understand? That they rather get bored and camp a survivor just to secure a kill because they are bad? In this case i totally agree.
That's the problem. I mean who knows if they are getting bored or if they enjoy camping. But why reward bad players with such an easy kill? That's not how online games should work honestly. Especially when considering that it ruins the fun for the survivor being camped.
Killer tracked the survivor, chased them, downed them, hooked them, secured the kill = bad killer.
Survivor failed to avoid the killer. Failed to lose the killer = deserves a free unhook, because he's clearly more skilled.
Chasing down one killer and finally hooking him is far easier than avoiding the killer and losing him in a chase. Just because he got downed once shouldn't be a reason to not get unhooked and to have the game end already. It's just no fun.
I mean sure stealthing isn't that hard, but at some point a killer will find a survivor, it's inevitable. Then he gets chased and eventually downed. And than that's it? That doesn't seem fair.
I'm sorry but one survivor isn't on the same power level as the killer, those times are no more. -
@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens. You would have a point if camping was the only way to get a kill, but it's not. Bad comparison.
Yeah, tunneling a gen isn't the only way to finish them. Doing them only 50% and leaving them alone is way more efficient... Tunneling a gen isn't even a thing. Completing a gen to 100% is something completely different than tunneling one survivor until he is dead. Cause that just ruins the experience of the survivor. Which is why I suggest to balance the game more so that killers have more incentive to not tunnel and less incentive to tunnel. I don't want killers to have less chances of getting kills, I just want it to be fairer and more fun for both sides. Where is the lol button when you need it the most?!
Anyway, completing a gen and killing a survivor is exactly the same. Every side completing their only objective.
Oh and ruining a survivors fun? That's cute. A few days ago I got called out for letting survivors escape on purpose. Btw, those very survivors didn't care at all about my fun. Even after making it clear, that I don't want to kill them. They insulted.
Funny to think you need a lol button for that comment, but whatever.
Sure, you've got a point, it's similar. But there's no common sense for survivors to just leave a gen when it's almost repaired. And yes, there's no reason to ignore an injured survivor. No doubt. And you shouldn't. But killers have quite the incentive to just purposefully focus on one survivor, ignoring everyone else. That's the problem.
The difference is, completeing a gen doesn't make the game unfun for the killer. The game continues. Once a survivor is tunneled to death, the game is over and it wasn't very fun for him in most cases. I am not saying tunneling is a bad thing to do, I am saying this game would be better if there were more incentive for killers not to tunnel than to tunnel. Pretty much give killers the chances of getting kills without tunneling just like they do now with tunneling, and instead make it so that tunneling isn't quite as effective as it is now. Obviously this will never be totally fixable, but the devs could try and balance the game so not tunneling becomes more advantegous over tunneling than it is now.
I get there are survivors that don't want the killer to have fun. Something the devs hopefully adress as well. But this is about all the survivors who just want to play the game to have fun and can't because the game supports strategies that give the survivors no chance of having fun. Most people shouldn't suffer just because there are some toxic people in the community.
Devs addressed the issue of tunneling. By giving us BBQ. But survivors don't really like this perk. Some would even prefer a camping killer. Which led to its nerf. Kinda ridiculous btw.
A killed survivor can enter a new game instantly. I don't see an issue here. But survivors take it strangely personal if they get killed. Doesn't matter if they die at the start of the match or right in front of the opened gates. They are equally mad.
Yeah pretty sure the complaint with BBQ was that it made stealth more problematic, especially on Hillbilly, not that it made killers not camp. But BBQ is fine, no need to nerf it, and the locker change wasn't really a big nerf.
Being tunneled or camped from the get go, and then having to search for a new game isn't very fun though. Especially when it happens multiple times in a row.
I'm not talking about those survivors. There's a clear difference between dying because of getting camped and tunneled and dying to a fair killer. One game was still enjoyable, the other not. If people get mad just because they lost in general, that's their problem, and I'm definitely taking distance from those people. But every game has those types of people. Who just can't lose. -
@Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said:
Vietfox said:@Tsulan said:
Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens. You would have a point if camping was the only way to get a kill, but it's not. Bad comparison.
Yeah, tunneling a gen isn't the only way to finish them. Doing them only 50% and leaving them alone is way more efficient... Mmmh what? You hook someone and eventually dies, either because no one rescued or because you hook that survivor for a 2nd/3rd time. Gens don't get done by themselves. I swear your comments were smarter before my ban. Killer hooks someone, that survivor gets unhooked. Killer casually finds the same survivor = tunneling. Gens need to be done by survivors.
But I've never seen a survivor abandon a gen that was 80% done. They always stay close (camp) and continue (tunnel) the gen once the killer left. It's about perspective. If the killer does it, its despicable. If survivors do it, it's considered normal. But both sides do exactly the same thing. If survivors remain close to the gen killer just need to look around and chase them, if killer decides to camp the gen be sure i'll go do another gen, have fun camping that gen! If killer camps a survivor for no reason yeah, it's kinda cheap because the chances of getting out alive are (almost) or non existent. If a survivor camps a gen killer has chances to chase and down that survivor, especially because that survivor will be close. No Tsulan, they are different things, it's not about perspective. No, you're right. It's not the same. Since survivors got perks like BT which aim exactly at unhooking camped survivors. It's 4vs1 killer has to (I know this might surprise you) Kill. It doesn't matter how he achieves that goal.
Survivors have to do gens. Doesn't matter how they achieve theirs. BT is kinda useless when gates aren't open. And yes, killer has to kill doesn't matter how (i guess), that's why i just called it "cheap". But any killer who camps right off the bat without reasons clearly is not using all their potential. If you wanna get your kill that way then so be it... BT has been recently buffed. So the killer has to hit that survivor twice no matter what. Of course, the survivors skill impacts here. Since a skilled survivor could loop a killer for several minutes. Oh a killer needs a reason to kill? That's cute...
Not like his name is killer or anything...
If survivor loops the killer for several minutes that killer is bad, plain and simple.
No, i said a reason to camp. I get it if there are survivors close by, but staying there because killers feel like doing that? Those killers are simply not using their potential. But hey, i won't argue if you say that you have fun while staring at that hooked survivor for 2 minutes...
I never said that. I find camping utterly boring. I rarely camp. Usually only if someone pissed me off.
BUT I fully understand killers that do camp.What do you understand? That they rather get bored and camp a survivor just to secure a kill because they are bad? In this case i totally agree.
That's the problem. I mean who knows if they are getting bored or if they enjoy camping. But why reward bad players with such an easy kill? That's not how online games should work honestly. Especially when considering that it ruins the fun for the survivor being camped.
-
@Raccoon said:
Not everything is about you - I'm pretty certain that the general consensus is hanging on the hook =/= fun.You're a "player," not multiple "players."
Anyways, it's sad to see another thread become:
I'm guessing that's a reply to my last post? Anyway it just sounded like you were referencing me because that was exactly what you accused me of. Forcing my rules onto others.
I know I'm just a player? Not sure what that means? I just doubt that being camped on a hook is fun to anyone. All I wanted is to suggest ways to improve the experience for survivors by making camping less effective. I mean in the end, every developer team should try and improve their game to make it more enjoyable for as many people as possible. And camping is the most common complaint regarding this game, I feel. So it would be only logical to try and improve the game in that area.
I enjoy this game a lot, but I feel like there are still improvements that can be made to the game. For both sides. -
@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:@Tsulan said:
Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said: ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens. You would have a point if camping was the only way to get a kill, but it's not. Bad comparison.
Yeah, tunneling a gen isn't the only way to finish them. Doing them only 50% and leaving them alone is way more efficient...
Tunneling a gen isn't even a thing. Completing a gen to 100% is something completely different than tunneling one survivor until he is dead. Cause that just ruins the experience of the survivor. Which is why I suggest to balance the game more so that killers have more incentive to not tunnel and less incentive to tunnel. I don't want killers to have less chances of getting kills, I just want it to be fairer and more fun for both sides.
Where is the lol button when you need it the most?!
Anyway, completing a gen and killing a survivor is exactly the same. Every side completing their only objective.Oh and ruining a survivors fun? That's cute. A few days ago I got called out for letting survivors escape on purpose. Btw, those very survivors didn't care at all about my fun. Even after making it clear, that I don't want to kill them. They insulted.
Funny to think you need a lol button for that comment, but whatever.
Sure, you've got a point, it's similar. But there's no common sense for survivors to just leave a gen when it's almost repaired. And yes, there's no reason to ignore an injured survivor. No doubt. And you shouldn't. But killers have quite the incentive to just purposefully focus on one survivor, ignoring everyone else. That's the problem.
The difference is, completeing a gen doesn't make the game unfun for the killer. The game continues. Once a survivor is tunneled to death, the game is over and it wasn't very fun for him in most cases. I am not saying tunneling is a bad thing to do, I am saying this game would be better if there were more incentive for killers not to tunnel than to tunnel. Pretty much give killers the chances of getting kills without tunneling just like they do now with tunneling, and instead make it so that tunneling isn't quite as effective as it is now. Obviously this will never be totally fixable, but the devs could try and balance the game so not tunneling becomes more advantegous over tunneling than it is now.I get there are survivors that don't want the killer to have fun. Something the devs hopefully adress as well. But this is about all the survivors who just want to play the game to have fun and can't because the game supports strategies that give the survivors no chance of having fun. Most people shouldn't suffer just because there are some toxic people in the community.
-
@SenzuDuck said:
@Bbbrian2013 said:
Because a 3k is a loss. Did you really win as a killer if someone escaped? You failed in your objective to kill them.and this here is one of the biggest issues with a lot of killer mains. It's about killers not 4King every match, if they don't 4K every match they are "underpowered" which is the game was made so every killer 4Ked every time the game would be dead right now.
Maybe that's what they secretly want. Killer lobby times have already increased. > @Bbbrian2013 said:
@Vietfox said:
@Bbbrian2013 said:
@Vietfox said:
@Bbbrian2013 said:
@The_Crusader said:
Bbbrian2013 said:@ad19970 said:
@Bbbrian2013 said:
@The_Crusader said:
Poweas said:
@The_Crusader said:
Because killers can't accept that they suck.
I've lost count of the number of times I've been playing solo and the killer gets salty as accuses us of being swf.
Tbh they could be asking just because they face a lot of SWF. After every game, no matter how it went, I always ask if the team was SWF when I play Spirit since SWF is all I face.
They don't ask, they straight up accuse. Hell I've seen killers get a 3k and then throw a strop and say we were swf and it was unfair.
They really only will accept a 4k.
Because a 3k is a loss. Did you really win as a killer if someone escaped? You failed in your objective to kill them.
4k should be the norm because that's what is fun.
That's a joke right? 3k is not a loss. You can't honestly want a game balanced so killers can get 4ks every game because that's their objective. Survivors objective is surviving. With your logic, you can just as well say every survivor is supposed to survive, that should be the norm, since that's what's fun.
2k at the most should be the norm, quite simple.
Its a horror game the killer being scary is what they should go for. Escape should be almost impossible so it gets tense when it is close.
1-2 Survivors escape average isn't very scary...Killers should feel oppressive.
If you were locked in a room with myers you wouldn't be looping and tea bagging you'd be scared because he is guaranteed to [BAD WORD] you up since he saw you.
At the same time it's also a videogame. What's the point in playing if the odds of escape are too small? Whats the point in playing killer if you're almost guarenteed a 4k?
Emotional response? Why do people like Alien Isolation when you insta die if spotted by the Alien? Because it's scary it makes you react.
You're going into this thinking DbD needs to be a competition when it could be a fun scary experience.
How many hours do people spend on Alien Isolation and DbD? Also, once you've finished Alien Isolation twice hardly scares you anymore. Your comparison is wrong in so many ways.
I don't see how it is. Giving killers the power they should have to feel strong while making surviving something you actually have to earn makes sense...
Especially when it's 4v1 the 1 should be stronger than 1 of the 4. Even the best survivor vs the worst killer shouldn't be able to waste enough time for a gen to be finished.
Why should killers play if they're just going to get looped and insulted? Get a 2-3k and still survs ez in chat.
So buff killers or declare survivor team lost if only 1 or 2 escape...
"Even the best survivor vs the worst killer shouldn't be able to waste enough time for a gen to be finished."
That's when i stopped reading, when you say that role should be more important than skills. You just want easy matches, no point on keep talking to you.That isn't something i just said. From the start i've said killer should be about destroying survivors and survivor should be about rarely escaping.
Killer and Survivor should be flipped. Survivor hard Killer easy.
Don't you understand that that would just lead to you enjoying a lobby simulator? Nobody would play survivor anymore. Except if that's what you want. Then my mistake.
-
@Raccoon said:
Bravo0413 said:If you think I don't have fun watching a killer camp me after I loop them for 3-5 gens and settle just for 1k most times i guess I don't know what fun is... knowing that most killers fall for the same stupid mind games and get salty over the same crap I do brings me joy.... if there was more for me to do as a survivor I would be less focused on ruining someone's game but until I have more to do .. i'll enjoy watching the salt trail left by the killer from them patrolling my hook at the end of the match
I'm sorry.
Your idea of fun does not mesh with that of other players, so your entirely personal feelings and reactions are somehow wrong.
/s
I guess another reference to me? Dude I swear it's really not that hard to understand that that's not my point, by the love of god.
-
@Tsulan said:
Vietfox said:@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens.
You would have a point if camping was the only way to get a kill, but it's not. Bad comparison.
Yeah, tunneling a gen isn't the only way to finish them. Doing them only 50% and leaving them alone is way more efficient...
Tunneling a gen isn't even a thing. Completing a gen to 100% is something completely different than tunneling one survivor until he is dead. Cause that just ruins the experience of the survivor. Which is why I suggest to balance the game more so that killers have more incentive to not tunnel and less incentive to tunnel. I don't want killers to have less chances of getting kills, I just want it to be fairer and more fun for both sides.
-
@Tsulan said:
The_Crusader said:
ad19970 said:@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens.
Wut? Are you telling me a killer main being against camping is the equivalent of a survivor being against doing gens?
He is because thats what some people on here genuinely believe.
Tunneling is so widely used these days. Even if the killer wasn't tunneling at all. He gets accused of it. Same goes for camping.
You can be sure that when I say tunneling, I really mean the extreme tunneling. Same goes for camping. I'm not talking about hook patrolling when a killer has a reason to believe a survivor is near a hook. Cause a gen is almost completed for example. I've been called camper and tunneler as well, by people who don't know what tunneling and camping really means, or when it becomes an actual problem.
-
@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said: .. Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens.
Wut? Are you telling me a killer main being against camping is the equivalent of a survivor being against doing gens?
I assume that the survivors you mention, would leave a gen at 90% regressing. Instead of going back and finishing it.
What? That doesn't make any sense. Are you comparing that to camping or what?
-
@Raccoon said:
1. YesYes
Apparently my copy is the only copy of the game that allows for scenarios where it's 100% advantageous, if not necessary, to camp someone out of the game.
Most people in PVP games don't like being placed in difficult / losing scenarios, but it's necessary by the very nature of the game rules. If you can't handle a game's win/loss routine, don't play it.
The killer has no knowledge of the prior game's events.
I think that people play whatever role they want for their own amusement, and that fun, much like opinion, is subjective to the individual. I highly doubt that a killer being looped successfully is experiencing the same level of entertainment/excitement as the looper, much like a survivor getting mori'ed is probably on the opposite end of the emotional spectrum to the person getting a kill.
Both sides having fun, regardless of success, strategy, and gametime is entirely possible, and would probably occur far more often if both sides left their sense of entitlement and feelings/ego at the door.
@Raccoon said:
1. YesYes
Apparently my copy is the only copy of the game that allows for scenarios where it's 100% advantageous, if not necessary, to camp someone out of the game.
Most people in PVP games don't like being placed in difficult / losing scenarios, but it's necessary by the very nature of the game rules. If you can't handle a game's win/loss routine, don't play it.
The killer has no knowledge of the prior game's events.
I think that people play whatever role they want for their own amusement, and that fun, much like opinion, is subjective to the individual. I highly doubt that a killer being looped successfully is experiencing the same level of entertainment/excitement as the looper, much like a survivor getting mori'ed is probably on the opposite end of the emotional spectrum to the person getting a kill.
Both sides having fun, regardless of success, strategy, and gametime is entirely possible, and would probably occur far more often if both sides left their sense of entitlement and feelings/ego at the door.
Well wrong and wrong. I'm not trying to get people to play my way, I'm trying to give suggestions on how the game can become more enjoyable.
Which situations would that be? And how would they be affected by the changes I suggested? Don't get me wrong, I do believe you, I'd just like to know exactly.
That's not the point. Survivors can be put in losing situations without camping. The difference is they can still play the game and get some enjoyment. I don't see how looping is the same for killers. Chases have always been the core part of the game. I mean what are survivors supposed to do otherwise? It's part of the chases.Well you can call me entitled, but I'm not. I was just suggesting changes that would improve the game for survivors. Once again, getting camped is so unfun because you can't even play the game properly when getting camped.
And I do believe that if one gets camped multiple times in a row, well than that person might just stop playing the game because what is the point of still playing the game? Pretty sure that's one of the reasons why kiler lobby times have increased.
I mean all I can tell you is that a game is supposed to be fun for both sides, even when losing. But not being able to play the game properly is not fun. This isn't really about balance, it's about design. The better a game is designed, the more fun both sides wil have no matter if they are losing or winning.
FPS games for example. Even when in the losing team, I'm at least still able to play the game properly and have some enjoyment. -
@Sinner said:
You make some good points, but personally I wouldn't start working on anything until I'd fix the stupid ranking system, which, I've said so many times, should revolve around chases. What's the point of any balance, if your teammates or the killer are at the wrong rank. This has always been the biggest problem of this game. People at ranks where they don't belong.
Right now if the killer chases you whole match, you don't pip. Killer comes and complains on the forum that he is rank 1 and can't catch anyone, than the devs implement unrealistic changes. Meanwhile there are killers like truetalent that it's impossible to escape from, no matter what killer he plays. Yes, big surprise, he is not the only one, he is not Jesus. Go play survivor at rank 1 if you don't believe me.
Meanwhile, there's survivors with urban evasion and empathy, they do gens, chase injured players around the map to heal them to get emblem points, they reach rank 1, can't even drop a pallet or do a proper loop, get hooked and disconnect, [BAD WORD] the whole team over.
Until they fix the ranking system to be about chases and nothing else, there's no point to discuss any balance.Edit: today I had 2 matches at rank 1 vs killers that couldn't get a hook whole match, but they ended up sacrificing 2 survivors and pip because they had noed. Do they belong at rank1? No! Do they think survivors are op? [BAD WORD] yeah!
Yeah you've got a point there actually. The ranking system needs some serious work. Maybe even before they can properly balance the game. And I wouldn't say it's impossible to escape tru3ta1ent, but it's very hard and it shows that killers don't need any more buffs at the moment, no matter what some people say.
-
@Raccoon said:
Play My Way (The "Right" Way) or Lose Automatically - Patch TitleAny suggestion that tries to shoehorn people into playing a certain way/only use certain perks/don't do x on either side of the game is not going to help the game with its core issues.
Are you telling me that's what my post is doing? Forcing others to play with my rules? Are you missing the fact that nerfing camping is just for the better of the game's design? It's not about wanting other players to play the way I want them to play, it's about improving the game and making it more fun. How are survivors supposed to enjoy the game when they get camped? Especially multiple times in a row? You really think people play survivor so killers can get their fun time? They want to have fun to. That's where the design of the game is decisive. A game needs to be designed so both sides can have as much fun as possible. But right now, due to design choices, the game can be an absolute chore for survivors.
-
@Vietfox said:
@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:@Tzeentchling9 said:
..
Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens.
You would have a point if camping was the only way to get a kill, but it's not. Bad comparison.
Yeah I was asking myself if that was what he meant. Terrible comparison.
-
@Orion said:
@ad19970 said:
@Vietfox said:
@ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said:
..Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Some people like to use that picture when someone claims to be a killer main but don't support buffs for killers only. Same goes for survivors, but i don't see it that often.
@Tzeentchling9 is known for being an extremely killer sided member. To the point that i basically ignore him/her.Yeah I know what the picture means, I just can't believe I'm being accused of pretending that I'm a killer main just because I want camping to be nerfed and the game to be improved. I don't get how some people can be so biased. I mean I'm even for a gen rush nerf, just camping and tunneling is a bigger problem of this game in my opinion. Getting camped means you can't even play properly.
Here's the thing: camping is already bad for the Killer unless the Survivors decide to reward it. This is an indisputable fact. With that in mind, punishing the Killer (and note that punishment doesn't work, period) is absurd.
Ok I'll have to respectfully disagree with you here. Camping can be punished if the survivor team is really good, or if they can communicate with each other. But especially against lower ranks camping is way to effective. And the game can't only be balanced around swf and absolute pro players. Like I said in my post, a team of solo survivors only will most often struggle against a camping killer. This is because if someone doesn't get unhooked, than everyone not going for the unhook will think that nobody is going for the unhook, running to the hook only to then realise the killer is camping. The best they can do is run back to the gen they've been working on, but they've waisted a lot of time doing that. If every survivor does that, well then gen rushing the killer to punish him for camping won't work properly.
Camping is beyond unfun for survivors. Mainly the one being camped. There should be as little incentive as possible to camp. And honestly, why not punish the killer for camping? It takes no skill and grants the killer an easy kill. Couple that with NOED and you have a guaranteed 2k no matter what skill level you are. That's simply not good design. Reward the killer for playing skillful, punish him for playing bad.
Also, what do you mean with punishment won't work? I know there has been something tested on the ptb once that was exploited by survivors. But I don't see how the changes I suggest could be exploited. Especially not the ability to see the killers aura when in a certain range of the hook. That's just giving solo survivors the ability that swf survivors already have. It's an absolute must in my opinion.
Plus I've also suggested an incentive for killers to not tunnel in form of a killer buff. -
@Orion said:
@ad19970 said:
@Orion said:
Those calculations make zero sense. Read this thread, please: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/26495/psa-how-interaction-speed-reduction-calculations-workI don't get it. It looks like that's exactly the maths I used here on my post. Or where is the difference?
I get the same result when using the maths that I used on all the other numbers of my post on your example.I realized some of them were just a formatting issue. Specifically, you make calculations for healing using Self-Care and not using Self-Care in the same line without any obvious separation between the two.
However, these still don't make sense:
24% Repair Speed decrease: 80s/0.8 = 100s
12% Repair Speed decrease: 66.6s/0.9 = 74s (cause repair time is only 66.6 seconds once one survivor is dead)1-0.24 is 0.76; not 0.8. Similarly, 1-0.12 is 0.88. Maybe they were approximations, and if so, I'd advise against the former.
Yes no I'm sorry. Those are BS. I wasn't quite sure what numbers i wanted to settle with so I changed the numbers a few times and forgot to change those. Those make absolutely no sense. I had 24% and 12% at first, and then changed it to 20% and 10%. I'll change that immediately.
-
@Tsulan said:
ad19970 said:@Tzeentchling9 said:
..
Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Of course they can be against it. Just like survivors are against completing gens.
Wut? Are you telling me a killer main being against camping is the equivalent of a survivor being against doing gens?
-
@Vietfox said:
@ad19970 said:
@Tzeentchling9 said:
..Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
Some people like to use that picture when someone claims to be a killer main but don't support buffs for killers only. Same goes for survivors, but i don't see it that often.
@Tzeentchling9 is known for being an extremely killer sided member. To the point that i basically ignore him/her.Yeah I know what the picture means, I just can't believe I'm being accused of pretending that I'm a killer main just because I want camping to be nerfed and the game to be improved. I don't get how some people can be so biased. I mean I'm even for a gen rush nerf, just camping and tunneling is a bigger problem of this game in my opinion. Getting camped means you can't even play properly.
-
@Bbbrian2013 said:
@The_Crusader said:
Poweas said:@The_Crusader said:
Because killers can't accept that they suck.
I've lost count of the number of times I've been playing solo and the killer gets salty as accuses us of being swf.
Tbh they could be asking just because they face a lot of SWF. After every game, no matter how it went, I always ask if the team was SWF when I play Spirit since SWF is all I face.
They don't ask, they straight up accuse. Hell I've seen killers get a 3k and then throw a strop and say we were swf and it was unfair.
They really only will accept a 4k.
Because a 3k is a loss. Did you really win as a killer if someone escaped? You failed in your objective to kill them.
4k should be the norm because that's what is fun.
That's a joke right? 3k is not a loss. You can't honestly want a game balanced so killers can get 4ks every game because that's their objective. Survivors objective is surviving. With your logic, you can just as well say every survivor is supposed to survive, that should be the norm, since that's what's fun.
2k at the most should be the norm, quite simple.
-
@Orion said:
Those calculations make zero sense. Read this thread, please: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/26495/psa-how-interaction-speed-reduction-calculations-workI don't get it. It looks like that's exactly the maths I used here on my post. Or where is the difference?
I get the same result when using the maths that I used on all the other numbers of my post on your example. -
@Raccoon said:
After reading:What?
-
@Tzeentchling9 said:
..Oh come on. You're not being serious right? Or are you telling me killer mains can not be against camping and tunneling?
-
@AlwaysInAGoodShape said:
@ad19970 said:
I don't think that would work. It's unnecessary restriction that many survivors will dislike. In my opinion, buffing weaker perks on both survivors and killers side is the way to go if we want more diversity in builds, which I'd love to see.Exactly, not only that, but Removing SC actually causes more problems than it solves.
Killers become even more dependent on teammates, which further gives the edge to SWF's against solo's.We don't need more of that.
Yes exactly. I've even seen the suggestion of having self care be base kit which I personally wouldn't mind, although I think adding Bond to the Base Kit is the far better way to go.
-
I don't think that would work. It's unnecessary restriction that many survivors will dislike. In my opinion, buffing weaker perks on both survivors and killers side is the way to go if we want more diversity in builds, which I'd love to see.
-
To be fair the points you made make it sound like people should be happy the game isn't as broken as it used to be, so killer mains should be happy about that. Cause what you describe their is the exact opposite of a balanced game. But just because a game isn't as broken anymore in balance doesn't make it automatically a balanced game.
However, with that being said, I agree with you. Half of the killers at least seem very viable to me. It's just the weaker killers that still struggle a bit. Obviously a team with four insta heals or DS are still a bit broken. But there are barely any teams with that setup, and killers also have broken things like certain red addons and of course Ebony Moris. I think people just get frustrated with teams that use some ridiculous addons, but forget that killers also have stuff that is overpowered. -
10 has the most votes. What a surprise. I main killer and barely get any toxic survivors so I still don't get it though.
I'm guessing some of those people believe simply looping, gen rushing or mildly camping is toxic. -
@Tsulan said:
Maybe your subconscious is trying to avoid that you let others suffer from that playstyle you started to hate as killer.What playstyle is that? Escaping from the killer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USzQikC8juk