anarchy753
anarchy753
About
- Username
- anarchy753
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,021
- Last Active
Comments
-
It will never cease to amaze me how people can always find something even MORE insignificant to complain about than the last time.
"Oh no, what if people don't like vomiting? Plague needs accessibility options!"
"We can't have a spider killer in a game with a spider god that impales peoples heads, that would be scary!"
"I'm playing a horror game, where I impale people on hooks, cut them in half with a chainsaw, and sometimes eat their face off. Sounds of people sounding sad or in pain is unacceptable."
"I get anxious when I play a game where a monstrous killer is chasing me and trying to murder me."
Honestly, don't play a horror game if you don't want scary or unsettling elements in a game.
-
All my killers are p3-50, 4 of them have all perks.
I have a handful of survivors P3, been working on Jake since the announcement entirely passively through login rewards.
-
@Kaitsja said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2985983#Comment_2985983
Player feedback survey only exists so they can say they listen to their player base.
Oh believe me, I'm well aware of the many PA stunts they pull to pretend they give a ######### about what we say.
Speaking of, when is the next "Soon TM" compilation? Oh, sorry, I mean "Q&A."
-
What's it been, about a year now since the player feedback survey that literally asked "would you like linked sets to be less restricted, ie weapons not linked?"
Since then they've just kept pumping out sets that are linked for no good reason.
Hell look at that Trickster set. It has a lobby animation and they used that as an excuse to charge twice the price and make customisation impossible.
It just comes down to greed, and sadly there's people out there that are going to buy every linked Feng set that comes out just because they can.
-
Isn't Cheryl/Heather like the reincarnation of Alessa? As far as I remember they were meant to look similar, so it makes sense to sell her as an outfit rather than as a legendary skin for twice the price that looks much the same anyway.
-
Endangered species occur because the species does not reproduce enough to keep the population steady compared to how fast they die.
This is an apt comparision to Deathslinger, as he was castrated by the nerfs, and so will never reproduce again.
-
When it was announced for DBD I went and played te start of 1 on an emulator, but it was very slow and the controls were awful, like just trying to shoot something directly in front of me was pain. Nothing wrong with that though, it's a really old game.
Point is, I wasn't really enjoying it so I watched a few of them abridged on youtube.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2982477#Comment_2982477
Killers will be getting more add-ons though because of how much easier it will be to get perks. On a new killer with every other killer p3'd, you will only need to buy 9 perks and then the rest of the bloodweb is add-ons and offerings.
The default perks will still be around. You'll need to hit a little over P1 before you have all perks maxed.
-
@Mooks said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2981536#Comment_2981536
That wasn’t really the only or main reason for it and in David’s case, he was never said to be straight/not gay to begin with
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2981544#Comment_2981544
Bestiality is not a sexuality. Please don’t spread this false information. It’s paraphilia.
Actually their announcement stated the following:
https://i.imgur.com/IDz2OSG.pngThe roster did not feature any LGBT representation. Not 'our LGBT characters were secret' or 'we hadn't announced that any of them were represented.' The roster had none. Then it was changed to.
David was not gay, and now he is.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2981551#Comment_2981551
Asexuality is still a sexuality. Crossdressing is not a sexuality or gender identity.
Point is there's no clear qualifier of what gets lumped into the acronym.
If it's oppression then asexuality and aromantic don't belong.
If it's based on gender ideology then L G and B are all completely unrelated.
If it's based on sexuality then T doesn't fit.
And to be honest, 2S is pretty much none of the above.
It's just denial to pretend things aren't just added for being seen as 'outside the norm,' and lines of what can and can't be added are completely arbitrary, hence why there's so many different versions of the acronym.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2981533#Comment_2981533
Crossdressers are also not systemically opressed. Getting weird looks in the street is not the same as the government trying to ban basic human rights (marriage, medical care etc).
Well neither are asexual or aromantic people, but they're lumped in with us. What rights is someone being denied because they don't like sex or relationships? At worst it might be slightly harder to get a loan.
-
I just hope they manage to do representation well.
Tacking a new sexuality onto an existing character because they were popular in gay ships was lazy and tacky, but I'm not going to pretend it's an easy thing to do.
Hell, I'm a gay guy and I've certainly turned more than one of the movies/series you mentioned off because it started trying to preach gender ideology for like 10 minutes straight.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2978880#Comment_2978880
You don't think that Steam is fairly proportional to the playerbase on other platforms?
I don't see why it wouldn't be - there's no reason why consoles would be rising but Steam is falling, or vice versa.
It's not the gross player number that's interesting, it's the wax and wane.
Hang around here long enough and you'll be brainwashed by the "no form of data you find anywhere can be used to draw conclusions" PR talk too.
-
It's perk buffs like these that leave me skeptical for the 40+ perk changes coming up.
They are still very much out of touch with what makes perks pathetic.
-
I'll give you hatch when I play hatch-giver, but usually I'm playing killer, so I kill.
-
I see removing it as a win-win.
Killers win by not having crappy turnarounds because RNG decided to shove a middle finger up them.
Survivors win because it's harder to ######### on hook to DC without penalty.
-
Because most people don't obsess over pronouns.
-
Don't worry, they'll find a problem with it when it goes live.
-
I feel like it would be more balanced to just make smash the default, and snuff should be the perk.
In most cases (except Pentimento which feels like it was added JUST to make this discussion more complicated) it benefits the killer a lot more to have totems available. Perks like Plaything and most notably NOED require unlit totems to activate.
By making it smashing the totem, it makes the killer trade off a chance to activate strong perks in return for crushing survivors' strong perks. Then it makes killers who want to use lower skill perks like NOED bring something like a snuff-instead-of-break perk if they want the security to think they can trigger their perk.
-
@Annso_x said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2972266#Comment_2972266
You can have one survivor with many perks and prestige all the others while still being able to play survivor with good perks with the one survivor that has perks. On the contrary if you prestige a killer you won't be able to play them with good perks until you've reached P3 and kept going until you have the perks you wanted.
If you don't mind playing with bad perks and / or aren't a survivor main, then yes prestiging killers is probably better. I personnally don't play a lot so prestiging means I won't play the character for quite a while, which isn't a problem for survivors bc they're basically all the same, while it can be bothersome on the killer side, I'm already not very good at killer so playing with T1 bad perks is not something i enjoy at all lol.
The way I see it, prestiging killers gets them closer to what I see as a "finished" character, p3-50 all perks. Each killer is a unique playstyle so unlocking everything on them has some form of value.
Prestiging survivors is just spending points for the sake of it, when one character with all the perks is the absolute maximum gameplay value you can get out of the survivor side.
When the prestige change hits, I'm going to go from having a survivor with all the perks and like 3 killers with all perks to 28 killers with every build available to them. Meanwhile someone who spends their points on prestiging their survivors for the change will have exactly the same thing available to them after the patch as before.
-
I can safely say I have NO IDEA why anyone would start with the survivor side.
My killer side is done but my survivors have been in a mess of random prestiges from P3-50 all perks on on characters I use to the bulk of them still sitting at P0-40.
-
@ad19970 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2970959#Comment_2970959
When it comes to Dark Theory, I really wish they would try something like 4%. Maybe there could be situations where it could get out of hand, but seeing as how it would be pretty situational, I think they could buff the effect without breaking it, to a degree where it could actually be kind of good, or decent at least.
Right now Dead Hard pretty much does the same as Dark Theory, but better, and without an area restriction. Of course that perk is most likely getting nerfed, but still.
Overzealous is arguably more dangerous to buff. One suggestion I saw is to have it also affect healing, totem cleansing, opening gates and all kinds of other action speeds. Would be at least seomthing. I also think 6/7/8 % would be fine.
Even 4% speed is nuts. Thats between 1/3 to 1/2 of the difference between you and the killer. Staying near Dark Theory could up to double the duration of your chase.
-
He has both pressure in a chase, and high mobility. He should be 110.
-
I really don't understand the thinking that goes into perks like Overzealous and Boon: Dark Theory. Like obviously they recognise that increasing repair and movement speed is very quickly going to be gamebreaking at any significant value, so they make them insignificant and they become awful perks that aren't worth the slot.
Just stay away from affecting stats like that and make a half-decent perk instead.
-
@Freddy96 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2970865#Comment_2970865
Aint healthy at all but against killers such as blight and nurse is a must because those killers aren't healthy aswell.
Playing as nurse with double range vs no ds or dh at all will be very fun and healthy i guess
It's not worth a perk being disgustingly gamebreaking against 25/27 killers because it's a "must" against the other two. You know how we see less sweaty Nurses and Blights everywhere? By making the rest of the cast less miserable to play.
-
I'm really excited for it, especially since they said that after this "shuffling up the meta" would be a regular occurence. I'm so sick of a game where the same perks stay in the top meta for literally years at a time, and they're so scared of the backlash of nerfing any one of them that reworks take a full year after being announced.
I would love to see:
BBQ loses its bloodpoin bonus, which now becomes baseline. Same for WGLF, perhaps with a rework to the perk's effect as it's mediocre af without the points. Neither has ever been a great perk, but BBQ's BP bonus makes it feel mandatory to use or you simply feel like you're getting halved value out of playing killer. It would remove a perk from the killer meta, while not punishing the side for losing it, and allow better perks to take its place.
Second chances and slowdown being nerfed across the board. If survivors can't drag the game out excessively with free extra health states constantly, then the killers won't need multiple sources of slowdown just to bring the game back to baseline levels. I'd almost be down for some sort of debuff like exhaustion for both sides, where multiple sources of similar slowdown won't work together, and where multiple second-chance perks don't work together. Ie, if you wanna bring DS for a match, you can, but you can't have Unbreakable at the same time. You want Pop? Sure, but no Ruin or Pain Resonance alongside it. It would mean each individual perk could see better tuning and value without the threat that a buff to any will break the game because it stacks with everything else to be miserable.
-
@Smoe said:
The way I see it, one might aswell do it in case the reward is any good and even if it ain't then you still got it done and over with.
better safe than sorry.
Sadly I think that's BHVR's attitude; "If we don't tell them they HAVE to play in case!"
Classic BHVR and their love of FOMO.
-
I just can't see why he doesn't have an iridescent like "hitting a survivor with Rites of Judgement will inflict them with Torment."
-
It's definitely better.
If it gave 100% bloodpoints, I'd definitely use it over BBQ.
-
Last second switching is a great way to get a 10 minute loading screen before going back to the lobby.
-
I don't remember the last time I saw a Jeff.
Though to be fair the only Jonahs I've seen were doing adept so I don't think they count.
I don't see why this includes legendaries really. They aren't survivors they're skins for survivors that cost 1.5x the price of a chapter, of course people don't buy them often.
-
@jesterkind said:
Not really? The bonus that they're being secretive about is hardly the main draw for prestiging, it's just something to acknowledge the efforts of people who prestiged before the change.
We know plenty about the stuff that actually matters, so I don't really mind that they're saving something as a reveal. Maybe they don't have it fully finalised yet, or maybe it's meant to be a surprise, it doesn't make much of a difference either way.
I'm not fussed what the "main draw" is, I definitely agree that the better grind is more important.
But the reward is something very time-limited, it's rude to be so cryptic about it because those of us who could play a lot and grind for those rewards don't know if it's worth our time or not, but if it is there's no way to go back and change the decision not to grind now for some unknowable reward.
-
I don't get why this wasn't just announced in the first place.
It's the same nonsense as why we spent 4 years with crap add on descriptions full of vague terms like "slightly" and "moderately."
We play complex games, we LIKE knowing complex interactions, we LIKE exact values.
-
Hahaha, a bit naive don't you think? This is BHVR, as if they wouldn't take the opportunity to sell you the same 20 DLC packs again, just rebranded for the new game.
-
I'll be honest, every single time I've played against her I've completely ignored interacting with the condemed status and never had it build more than about 3 or 4 stacks. It's utterly worthless.
-
I don't like the perk in general, mostly for how unreliable and dependant on other players' decisions it is.
I don't want to be forced to run a perk I don't like for THAT LONG, just to prove how unreliable it is.
-
@GoshJosh said:
It does nothing to help the grind for those that need it the most: new players. And for that they should be ashamed.
All it does is lower the grind time and cost for someone already committed to grinding just because anyway.
It does fine for new players. It's the difference between getting a character to 40 and then moving on, vs getting them to 50 and now having all their perks permanently going forward.
-
Because when they added boon totems they didn't want anything to be good against them, so that the Mikaela chapter would sell well. If every killer would have been able to slap on Thrill and actually defend their totems from being booned, there wouldn't be much reason for players to buy her for her perks.
Now it's an absolute turd. No feedback on the work it's doing, it's still a hex so if you're not lucky it can be removed in a single cleanse/bless. It's frankly awful.
If they stopped it being a hex it would be a decent perk. It's already weakened by 20% per totem removed from the match, so there's no reason to ALSO have a totem which removes 100% of its effect instantly. Since you can't use it to protect hexes any more, it would make sense to at least be a reliable boon-stalling perk but being a hex itself means it never will be.
-
Because they're a company who wants a functioning game.
"Haha space billy funny" doesn't mean that a match where survivors just M1 gens or do nothing because the killer is goofing off trying to climb a roof is something they want.
-
I completely called that changed prestige system.
@anarchy753 said:
As we know BHVR has said perk tiers will not be removed, as despite this meaning the grind wouldn't be its current size for another 5-10 years, it isn't a permanent solution.
As far as I can see, there are only 2 ways a grind like DBDs can be permanently reduced:
* Bloodpoint gains or costs can be adjusted every chapter to make the total cost of all perks on all characters the same. This would be a lot of work, confusing, and is a very unlikely option.
* There has to be some way of unlocking perks which happens across all characters, rather than needing to do it individually. This would mean that each new chapters would add a flat amount to the grind rather than requiring a whole new character's grind, plus their perks on an ever increasing cast.
Therefore, this is my idea for a solution:
Current teachable perks are reclassified as "Bronze Teachables." They work the exact same way as they do now, and the shrine still has bronze teachables.
At prestige 1, 2 and 3 respectively, you can now receive Silver, Gold and Iridescent teachables.
Silver Teachables unlock the perk for all characters at tier 1.
Gold Teachables unlock the perk for all characters at tier 2.
Iridescent Teachables unlock the perk for all characters at tier 3, and unlock a bloody charm of the perk.
How would this fix anything?
By giving prestige more relevance, each character would only have to be raised to P3-40 to have every single perk on every single character. This would be substantially cheaper than maxing out all chracters currently, as bloodwebs are significantly smaller before 50, meaning the 200 levels to max a character would cost a lot less than a current character reaching level 50 and collecting all perks without prestiging. It is monstrously cheaper if we also include current prestiging into the mix.
Players who currently have a character at P0 + all perks should not be punished, as they could simply unlock the bronze teachables as they currently do and spend the small amount of levels to unlock them on a specific character, or they could P3 the new character and have the perks maxed regardless.
This would mean obtaining a new character would mean you'd start with many more perk options instantly, based on the characters you've already invested in heavily.
In order to reach P3-50-All Perks on all characters, each chapter would add 200 levels for each new character, rather than adding 200 to P3-50, plus 150-200 to unlock the perks on them, plus 5-6 bloodwebs on every existing character to unlock their teachables (which is currently another 150-200 levels and rising.
-
@Gibberish said:
https://news.deadbydaylight.com/en/news/Prestige_Progression
"Each prestige level 3 character on your account at the time of the update will receive a distinct reward, with specifics to be unveiled a little further down the line."
I strongly feel this should NOT be done.
But there should absolutley not be any kind of "distinct" or exclusive reward, like the old Legacy Prestige.
And I'm saying this as somebody who has the majority of the game's total roster at Prestige 3.
Time-limited stuff is dumb. Players should not be punished for simply not having enough playtime invested than others, which is exactly what this would do.
Give Bloodpoints, give Irishards, whatever, but dont give any kind of exclusive content.
I agree. We've had to endure years of "how do I get legacy" and the debacles around lost exclusives that they refuse to reinstate.
As someone who has every killer P3ed, I don't think there should be a unique reward, it should be sheerly bloodpoints, shards or auric cells.
Most of all, it should not be charms, because then it's BOTH an exclusive cosmetic people will nag about for years AND an absolutely pitiful reward.
-
It roughly translates to:
"I still parrot phrases from before Dead Hard validation, when you would have to anticipate a killer attacking in order to dodge the attack, therefore I still assume that just getting close to a good player will make them dead hard randomly and then you get a free hit."
In regards to CoH:
"I don't understand time dynamics in a 4v1."
-
@FFirebrandd said:
See, I really don't get this complaint. Not that mending is boring mind you... it's just that Legion has literally been all about chaining hits and spreading deep wound for years. This isn't new. Are you just complaining because you hadn't seen Legion in months so didn't have to deal with them and now you do or something?
Yep, Legion has always been suuuuuper unenjoyable and boring to play against, but they were also very weak so you didn't have to deal with that often. With them being much more popular their boring gameplay becomes much more prevalent.
-
In addition to Demo, Twins need the same treatment. While you can get downs with Victor, it'd be more in line with other killer dailies to include downs while Victor is on the survivor.
-
Also gotta ask, what's with the "we consulted extensively with gaymerx."
Way to put in way too much effort BHVR, you spoke to a whole gay person.
Glad to know a single individual speaks for a whole community.
-
Very, very tacky move to just pick the one a lot of gay guys like when it's in his existing lore that he isn't gay. Comes off as very "oh well just slap on the gay tag to shut them up."
-
@dictep said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2920832#Comment_2920832
Yes, it rewards bad killers. I play very few killer games, and I always do the same. I break as many pallets as I can and at the end I demolish survs with noed. Easy as hell
A strategy that only works because the survivors are choosing to be lazy and not remove your totems. It's entirely within their power to deny you the perk at all.
-
@dictep said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2920166#Comment_2920166
If gens are done and the killer only got 0-1 hooks yes, the killer is bad
If the gens are done and the killer only got 0-1 hooks, then you have had plenty of breathing room to go get rid of totems.
Noed doesn't reward bad play, it punishes lazy play.
-
I never understood how the same people that say "it rewards bad play" also argue that they couldn't possibly be expected to do all the totems.
Like if the killer is putting on so much pressure that you can't afford the time to find and cleanse totems, then they obviously aren't playing badly.
-
Overheating was a decent change. It was to combat Billys who would just hold chainsaw fully revved and go around a loop until they could drop it at an ideal moment where it was basically undodgeable. Having overheat means you actually have to have some semblance of skill to work out when the right time is to charge it up.
Personally I think they should remove it, but reduce Billy's speed while revving, as he currently drop to 100% speed which allows him to keep looping until a window arises. If they make him lower like 90-95% then you can chainsaw all you like, but holding rev at a loop would still be nerfed.
@DoomedMind said:
I love to overheat because I try to do only chainsaw and practice it, but the game says "No, you're punished for using your power".
I mean, he's nowhere strong as Bubba when camping, but the latter doesn't have any overheating #########.
Bubba tantrums if he charges for too long, and can't use his power to go an infinite distance.