crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4030455#Comment_4030455
Exactly, it's just a matter of following their vision regardless if some people agree or don't, coz then they know what kind of game they want to make and can learn and improve upon it from there.
By staying safe and doing nothing the game can't grow. Look at FFXIV or WoW, they may be different genres but they are good cases of gaming history where stagnation and staying safe/simplifying has only hurt them over time. You just need to look at recent interviews and history for XIV's caseI feel like I would have a lot more respect for BHVR if they never even brought up these huge changes they then back out of. As you said, playing it safe fails in the long run, but at least it would be understandable and they could focus their resources on bug fixes.
-
@Classic_Rando said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4030332#Comment_4030332
I’ve come to a similar conclusion that the whole initiative to “solve” the “problem” of tunneling is simply handholding bad players. I know I’ll get downvoted for this, but I don’t care because it’s a tough truth for some people to swallow. I play both sides about equally, and tunneling rarely works when survivors know how to deal with it. If I try to tunnel as killer against good survivors, I will usually get that one kill and that’s it. When I play survivor, if the target of the tunneling is halfway competent, they can keep the killer busy far long enough for the rest of the team to get all the gens done. Tunneling only works when the target can’t last more than 10 seconds in chase and/or teammates aren’t doing gens like they should be while the killer is busy focused on just one person.
I play both sides about equally, and tunneling rarely works when survivors know how to deal with it.For the sake of argument, let's say this is true:
Tunneling should absolutely be addressed.
1: First of all, this takes out all the killers who are saying 'you don't understand, you need to tunnel at high MMR'.
2: Why should "bad" killers have a strategy that works wonders against "bad" survivors, that is going to lead to them getting crushed later? That just leads to people rushing to complain about how "good" survivors are unbeatable.
3: This deals with none of the arguments about what is actually an enjoyable game. Great, the tunneled target runs the killer, everyone else just does gens and leaves. How is that a good game?
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
You delayed all your content to literally change nothing near enough lol, if you were gonna waste this much time on the Anti-Tunnel and Anti-Slug, couldn't you have just focused on bug and balance fixes exclusively instead to help lower tier killers and perks.
Like this non-committal attitude to change in this game is just gonna make it stagnate, to me this looks like so many resources wasted coz you keep getting cold feet UNLESS it's coming at a later patch yet again, but at this point why not just send it to live even on an event queue and just see what the actual public think of it, and not just PTB people who usually have been wrong (Ghoul, Krasue are recent examples).
IDK I'm just disappointed, we miss out on new content, get more bugs and issues instead of any meaningful change:
-Go Next was a failure
-AFK system a failure
-Anti-Camp a failure
-Anti-Tunnel a failure
-Anti-Slug a Failure
Meanwhile legendaries still look awful and bugged, Killer powers barely function at times, the servers are rubberbanding like crazy, Killer queuetimes are longer than ever. Solo Q is insufferable.
I know I'm just complaining but i really want the best for this game, surely there is someone over there with the experience or on the balance committy who has some sense to guide these changes in the right direction.
Something for everyone is something for no one in some cases, so just commit a direction pleaseIt's pretty shocking were we are ending up after the promised QoL changes.
I think BHVR's core problems is trying to reinvent things instead of starting small and building. Take the anti-go next, people had been asking for survivors not to be able to sacrifice themselves on the first hook for a long time. That probably could have been addressed with a few lines of code. Instead we got an overly complicated system that ate up a ton of time, was mostly removed, and we ended up with the obvious solution - just don't allow survivors to kill themselves on first hook. Lots of time was consumed trying to create an impossible system.
The 9.2 anti-tunnel was one of the few times were I thought they were onto a good idea to make a substantial change. Yes, things needed adjusting but they, as you said, got cold feet.
-
I've been somewhat surprised by the turn content creators have taken (I also generally think there's a lot of problems highlighting them). Somehow 9.2 PTB has gone from the worse thing in the world, to being fondly remembered as a great idea just in need of a few minor tweaks.
I actually come down on the great idea, minor tweak side, but I really feel like we've seen a massive shift in messaging from some people.
-
I really didn't think they were going to do it this time, but am also glad to have a few more days to play 2v8 as it has become my favorite mode as well, though it desperately needs more survivor variety.
-
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4029673#Comment_4029673
Having one side with unclear win conditions - play as a team, or play for yourself, BHVR is cool with both, but the MMR system only likes one.
This is probably why survivor MMR should be team-based instead of individual, or at least take an average of the team into account when matchmaking, so that you get a more accurate opponent.
I think that's generally what they should do (though average survivors MMR is tough, if you had hypothetical MMRs of a 9//8/8/3 hitting a 7 killer, the 3 is likely to drag the survivors down way more than the other survivors outranking the killer).
I've always thought the idea of designing a VS game without a win condition a fool's errand, but have to admit DbD has been incredibly successful with that formula. I think BHVR wants to keep the idea that sometimes the game will be a 4 person SWF going for a 3 out, and sometimes 4 solos each playing for themselves, so balance is always going to be an issue (and that they prize long term balance over individual trials). I think awarding MMR via overall team result would help, but do worry this could create an unforgiving low MMR hell where players who aren't very good are trapped with rats as teammates.
-
@Leon_van_Straken said:
Hello everyone,
Could you honestly answer these questions?
There is no correct answer to these but I am curious about your opinions.
How long should a chase be to be seen as good? (1 Gen? 5 Gens? 1 Stun?)
How many hooks happen before the first Survivor dies in a game? (3? 8?)
How long should a new thing (Killer/Perk/Item) exist before the devs touch it? (Instant/1 week? Never?)
What do you see as a win? (4K/4E? I escape?)
What should happen if devs change something? (Make it useless?/Fix numbers till it hits the sweet spot?, Change it completly?)
Please don´t scream at each other. I just want to hear your voice.
There is no correct answer to these but I am curious about your opinions.The thing that makes DBD a really good game is that questions like these never have correct answers and are pretty much always 'it depends'.
How long should a chase be to be seen as good? (1 Gen? 5 Gens? 1 Stun?)It depends on resources spent, starting position, and where the chase ends up. A survivor that pulls the killer away from a key gen still did an important job even if they passed up superior loops to do so. A long chase that ends up with a hook in the basement is a pretty bad result.
How many hooks happen before the first Survivor dies in a game? (3? 8?)Again, it depends, but if its happening on the 5th or 6th hook I think that's fine.
How long should a new thing (Killer/Perk/Item) exist before the devs touch it? (Instant/1 week? Never?)I presume you just mean as a balance thing and not it being bugged.
Again, it depends how unbalanced it is. If its completely throwing off games then it needs to be dealt with instantly. Presuming we're talking about just fine tuning something and making slight numbers adjustments, I think a month would be a good general rule for data collection.
What do you see as a win? (4K/4E? I escape?)DbD is not a game clear lines (win/loss), but better and worse outcomes. As survivor the best outcome is I escape, and everyone else does (followed by 3e including me, 3e without me, 2e with me, etc). I prize my escape above others, but still view other survivors escaping as an objective. As a killer, it depends who I hit. If I'm playing a weaker killer and hit 4 person SWF, I'll absolutely take a 1k as a good outcome, and against a group of soloq I'm shooting for the 4k (not counting hatch, which I do not care about in the slightest).
What should happen if devs change something? (Make it useless?/Fix numbers till it hits the sweet spot?, Change it completly?)I don't really understand this one. If something is broken, they should fix it. Now there is an idea about instead of balancing the game they should have shifting metas, but I don't know if that is what you are asking about.
-
I like how many different reasons people came up with to highlight the problems with matchmaking in DbD.
Anyway, I'll throw on a couple:
Having one side get MMR increasing events ~60% of the time, and the other ~40% of the time. This could balance out, but it creates more complexity.
Having one side with unclear win conditions - play as a team, or play for yourself, BHVR is cool with both, but the MMR system only likes one.
-
Kind of the all or nothingness of their power.
When you look at some of the weaker killers: trapper, Sadako, Pig, and Ghostface, they have powers that are absolutely devastating if they work. The stronger killers don't have that same potential, but much higher consistency in quick hits and downs.
To use the Blight/Ghostface comparison - the best situation for Ghostface is that he gets an early stalk, a quick down, and the survivors are in a 3v1. Blight is still going to need to get two tags.
However, everything else goes Blight's way.
The worst case scenario for Ghostface is losing the first chase, in which case he has nothing. If Blight fails on his first set of rushes, no big deal, he'll have them back pretty quickly. On top of that, Blight has much more ability to recover a match that is going poorly: he can play hit and run, he can slug and come back, etc. If GF is on the other side of the map, the survivors have quite a bit of safety.
-
1: I'm not sure a multiplayer game can ever be truly horror. I think horror in video games, movies, books, etc. frequently relies on controlling the viewers perspective. That's really hard to do in a multiplayer game.
2: I do think DbD is excellent at tension (being a thriller). In just about 40 years of gaming, I don't think I've ever cared as much about the end result as I regularly do in DbD as a survivor (I like killer, but it has the same feeling as lots of games). Getting down to the final gen, knowing even with the gates powered, escape is far from guaranteed, is amazing.
3: That said, and this is the feedback I frequently give BHVR, I don't think there's a game that I frequently find as absolutely pointless. Survivor tunneled out and 3 gens to go? I'm not scared, just bored. Slugging, camping, tunneling (old 3 genning being another example) - aren't tense, they certainly aren't scary, they're boring.
I probably wouldn't have stayed in DbD if I hadn't gotten the advice early - have something else to do planned as survivor. That is I think the harshest criticism I've ever given the game: the idea that a horror/thriller game is improved by having another activity planned for when it gets boring should inspire change.
On your point of never feeling safe - true, but it has to be balanced with 'you should never feel like you don't have a chance' (we're both slightly overusing never). Knowing you are going to lose isn't scary, its just boring.
4: I really don't see how the changes BHVR has been considering are going to change the idea of tension, but hopefully they will improve the feeling of the game being boring.
-
For background, I played DbD pretty soon after it released, then a few years later around Deathgarden (which I really enjoyed but had some massive flaws), but I only got into it about eight months before you.
-
@AcesSpeedo said:
well yes… when you eat every pallet as bubba instead of mind-gaming an unsafe pallet, youre likely gonna get ran for 5…
he also stupidly played m2 only bubba, if he used his m1 at a few points the chase would likely have ended a lot sooner.
Funny thing is that its not even a five gen chase.
-
I had a feeling this would get posted after I watched it and knew I was going to be late replying to it because of a busy Friday, but here goes:
It has a bad premise, especially because he talks about times he was okay with survivors DCing. It makes it sound like 'I as a Content Creator thought it was okay, but now that my Content Creator issues have been fixed, everyone else is just entitled."
Running through some things
Talking about dangling the carrot - he is aware the last PTB didn't actually go through, right? People are talking about survivors getting what they want like the last PTB wasn't yanked out after primarily killer complaints. I think we're seeing a lot of people have regret about the 9.2 PTB because they thought they could stop anything from happening. BHVR was going to give the survivors something, they tried a complex give things to both sides, and when that was shot down they went for the simple approach.
And we still have no idea what is actually going to happen.
More likely to see - watch SWF streams, or just really good loopers, and you'll see lots of rage quitting from killers.
Pallet density - its funny, survivors ask for anti-tunnel, BHVR gives them more pallets, and then people wonder why they aren't happy. Well, it wasn't what they asked for. It'd be like when killers complain about certain killers being not strong enough, if survivors responded with 'you just got Ghoul, be happy'. That has nothing to do with the person's original complaint.
MMR - the system has problems, but his argument is inaccurate.
If you lose, and lose, and lose - I like how this always seems to just apply to killers. Survivors literally are designed to lose more frequently, but somehow this doesn't result in them always running the sweatiest things or forming 4 person SWFs. People keep claiming this shift to all S tier killers is going to happen, but it doesn't.
Killers haven't got anything, killer rates have gone down - if you're not colorblind, sure, but killers are getting one of the most heavily requested changes with the scratch marks. It might not effect you the specific player, but in terms of an overall buffs to everyone who plays killer it is pretty substantial.
@Leon_van_Straken said:
Well I think what Scott is saying here is right and I can kinda prove it.
Since I am a Survivor main with a little bit of Killer Time (80/20) I see the exact same problem in DBD. Normally I get some opinions on my topics which I share and my opinions are not liked by all but by some so I get a tendency better upvotes than downvotes.
The only posts where the downvotes escalate are the posts where one of these two things are said.
First: There is a lot of the "The game is unwinnable as Survivor" propaganda in 1v4 for 2v8 and that the game is not worth the time to being played.
Second: If I ask the simple question. "What do Survivors want to feel that the game is fair."
I get downvoted for these two things into oblivion but I never get an answer which is strange.
If these people who say to me the game is unplayabe really have this point, why can no one answer me the question what they need?
So i just beg you before you downvote me, take your time and write an answer to my question, "what in your opinion do survivors need to feel winable for you"
So i just beg you before you downvote me, take your time and write an answer to my question, "what in your opinion do survivors need to feel winable for you"@AmpersandUnderscore did a good job answering this, the issue isn't winnable. It's why many survivors have loved the abandon option, they accepted the match isn't going to be in their favor, they just want losing to not be so incredibly boring. Survivors certainly have balance complaints, but their primary argument has been about gameplay that has just been extremely bad.
@cogsturning said:
I've had 3 people DC in my last 25 killer matches. That's 3 out of 100 players. 3%. So him saying he has them every other match or so seems a bit abnormal.
It's also not "entitlement" to give up. It's feeling worn down and hopeless. I've had a horrible string of survivor matches the last few days. Multiple hard tunnels, multiple toxic killers hitting people on hook, multiple people going second stage on first hook—even two in a single match—and tons of slugging. I was left to die on my first hook one match. That stuff wears you down, and when it seems like your next match is heading that same way, sometimes people just break.
And you don't see killers giving up as much because it's never over for killer until the very end. You can turn a 0k into a 2k-4k in end game. For survivor, some situations are unwinnable. Four gens ain't getting done by two players.
I've had 3 people DC in my last 25 killer matches. That's 3 out of 100 players. 3%. So him saying he has them every other match or so seems a bit abnormal.At a rate of 3%, its quite possible that 1 or maybe even 2 of those was a just an internet problem or something else outside of the game.
@ChaosWam said:
I get the arguments against Scott here, because DCs aren't as often as I see them either.
However, DCing isn't the only way a survivor can give up and mess up their team. At least the bots do gens.
I've had people DC against my Sadako, yes, but more often than not my TVs turn on and I notice survivors hiding all game, or blocking teammates, or throwing all the pallets, etc etc.
It happens with Sadako, it happens with Pyramid Head running the new Iri addons, it happens when I play wolf-only dracula, and for some reason it even happens with Insidious Unknown of all things. Frankly, it's tiring and I 100% get where Jund is coming from here.But some of that is either just
1: Bad survivor play, which is an issue in all games, but as an asym this hits one side more than the other.
2: Playing for hatch, which despite many community complaints, is still a position backed and supported by BHVR.
-
@Nazzzak said:
New Predator movie out, so that's a possibility. We got the Alien license so it's only a matter of time. Stranger Things could also be an option since it's the final season, so best time for everyone involved to cash in again on the franchise. Other than those, I'm drawing a blank.
I feel like if it was Predator then there would have been a bigger push by Disney for it to come before the movie to increase publicity and interest.
Being they are more welcoming of anime and video game additions, there are a lot more possible areas than there used to be.
-
@MDRSan said:
It wasn't outright stated as such but it was implied they'll be reducing pallets in the next patch. Don't worry, they'll be making all the maps nice safe kiddie pools for killers to play in soon enough.
You'd think after shrinking map sizes, handing out aura reads for everything, causing survivors to spawn clumped together in a predictable spot, increasing visibility, and eliminating stealth as a play style they might need to give survivors something to compensate and keep kill rates from going crazy but apparently killer players don't like to acknowledge all the other handouts they've gotten.
I do think this is a good point. In the long run, BHVR needs to keep things relatively balanced. It's something people probably should think about when asking for changes (example: would killers trade survivors starting off clumped together in return for more pallets on some maps).
-
I think it would be a no win situation for the devs, @Ryuhi touches on some of the points, but I'll add a few others.
If they played at high MMR and did well, they'd just be accused of faking the MMR.
If they did well with a perk that people think is very weak, they'd again be accused of just playing at low MMR.
If they lose to something, and that gets nerfed soon after, no one will believe them when they say it was always the plan (ala the flashlight nerf).
If they seem to enjoy one side more than the other, people will bring that up for any future discussion.
If they lost, but still had fun, I think there'd be massive blowback (I'm picturing the community reaction to them playing non-sweaty and not caring about the results).
I think a big issue is that the game is their job. While, based on past posts, many of them do play it, its probably hard for them to approach it in the same way we do.
-
Bring back the 9.2 system, 3v1 survivor bonus is based upon hook states not a flat target, remove the basekit BBQ, don't expect perfection on release and that some things will need to be fine tuned.
-
So we got world stats a little bit ago, Ghostface was number 8, Wesker was number 5, Wraith was 7, but this list has them at 19, 17, and 22.
Going to go with everyone else on there being no source.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4025463#Comment_4025463
There are no survivor comebacks as massive and common as killer ones. A killer can get 0 hooks and still get a 3k or 4k in end game and it's not even rare. Happens to me in both roles. Tell me the survivor equivalent of that. Everyone on death hook at 5 gens yet they somehow get them all done and win?
Yeah, I find it strange if anyone has the survivor as the comeback role. I think this might be lumping what get dubbed second chance perks with comebacks.
The ability to potentially snowball, or to grind the game down by protecting the last gens, is pretty unique to the killer side. A short string of fortunate events for the killer can upend everything that has happened before that.
-
@TheGoon224 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4025411#Comment_4025411
Otzdarva has a video that goes way more in depth into the PTB if you want to learn more about that because this post really isn’t about the PTB it’s really just me venting out my frustrations with the game recently
Yeah, I watched his video yesterday. Watched a few other content creators as well and everyone seemed to have things they liked, except they had different things.
That's normal for any patch that does a lot, you're going to get mixed reactions.
On Otz specifically I agreed with some of his points, disagreed with others, and then a few I kind of just felt were off topic, which isn't surprising because of how long the video was.
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4025411#Comment_4025411
You're not allowed to be pragmatic. Only doomposting is permitted right now.
Okay, I'll try to doompost
DbD is not going to win the Labor of Love award.
-
@Leon_van_Straken said:
Nobody got an opinon to this?
I am open to criticism aswellThe idea comes up every now and then and is the most direct solution. It runs into a few potential problems:
Mostly its a feel/fun issue. Yes, you've made tunneling impossible, but the issue isn't just about taking tunneling off the board entirely. Like a lot of game elements, its about finding the happy medium, not too easy, not too hard, with meaningful impacts from players choices.
DbD is an elimination game and finding the right balance between those eliminations being meaningful but not overwhelming is the challenge. Survivors should be nervous/excited/stressed when on death hook, but if it either to hard too get away from the hook, or too easy, then the game loses that exciting element.
-
I don't know. People have complained about tunneling for years, they are finally listening to those complaints. People complained about the last PTB, and BHVR listened to those complaints. Seems much more like they are trying to find the line between groups who have different desires for the game.
Some of the bugs and PR has been abysmal recently, that's true.
-
So the idea of intangible survivors has always kind of hung around anti-tunnel discussions. It's definitely the straightforward solution. But removing tunneling completely from the game doesn't seem to be BHVR's goal, and arguably it wouldn't really be very interesting to have an invincible person in play.
-
I want to agree, I also want to disagree, this reads like a rant meant to vent.
High skill players should absolutely not be prioritized over everyone else. High skill, average, new, etc. all have reasons to be considered and they aren't always in conflict. There's no simple rule about who to look to that's going to stay consistent.
If BHVR is seeing lots of new players quit, they absolutely should be focused on the reasons of those players.
Figuring out the logic behind BHVR decisions is the true challenge of the DbD community.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4024859#Comment_4024859
Okay, this why I mentioned streaming earlier as well. I don't watch a ton of live streams, but I've caught some of Hens videos were he's trying ideas, and the Youtube video that emerged didn't cover the times the idea crashed and burned. I don't think he's being deceptive, I think he is trying to focus the video on entertaining material, and so the matches that don't accomplish that get tossed. That's always the problem with using edited videos as evidence, we have no idea what is excluded.Thats why I was moving away from viability. There is no doubt that he had games where he didn't succeed, thats besides the point. Again, this is more in the sense of a smoke test, in that these numbers shouldn't be possible in a healthy game with the design philosophy around addressing LCD strats.
If I'm looking at the site correctly, it is actually split up by each individual killer, probably the reason for less results because its divided across all the killers.You're right, not used to the newer layout so didn't see the drop bar, just the categories. Still, its kinda funny that a killer like Nurse has a worse record than a Trapper :D
More possible, but you still have a few issues. Whether the killer gets a a slow start or not, and what constitutes 'serious' play, which if I remember correctly Hens worried was going to get their record video tossed out.Oh absolutely, the killer player isn't a machine in these games. There's always going to be variability in their skill, which is part of the point of the issue: Killer players are going to make mistakes, they're human. Even the best player is going to make misplays. Time is the killer's resource on how many/how severe their mistakes are allowed to be before their chances rely almost entirely on survivor misplays. Its an agency shift that any tunneled survivor should also understand very well, and the entire reason why second chance perks and mechanics have always been popular with survivors especially. That said, the SWF category in particular gives the best verification of whether the killer played in a reasonable manner despite the outcome. You simply get to see more of the match and have less left to assume., especially compared to a single perspective thats interacting with 4 opposing players frequently.
*we can then get into degrees of tunneling, such as proxy camping, just as we could get into degrees of gen rush, but that's going to explode into lots of variables.Indeed. Unfortunately, one of the things that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way is how they're being so generous with some of these definitions they can't even remember them for their own powerpoint. Agreed with the part above that regarding the "arms race" mentality.
The question is where is the line on fun. Having advantages based on what you selected in the lobby with no knowledge of what the opponent has, is pretty baked into the game. I thought tunneling went too far into the lobby guessing game. Does extreme gen rush reach that stage? I don't know, when I've had it run against me I don't find it particularly annoying because its at least quick and a rush, which I enjoy, but I can't speak for anyone else.Fun is extremely subjective, and has been ruined on many occasions in the name of balance. There are plenty of people playing this game right now who will only find fun in victory. Full stop. You cannot hope to cater to them in a game where you can't have every player win, which is my running theory on why they've been trying to muddy winning and losing so much from personal stats to how they treat abandoning (and the horrible mess the two cause together.)
If fun is a factor, than being able to reasonably get momentum without the exit gates already being powered should be a consideration. Just like a survivor likely won't have fun if they get tunneled out constantly, a killer isn't going to have fun if they get 2-3 medium chases before the endgame starts. Just like how you don't mind these games for being over quickly and their pace, I personally enjoy getting tunneled because it helps me get better in chase and sometimes even turns games around if I can get them to misplay enough. Perspective and reflection (or a lack thereof) are why enjoyment in these scenarios are going to vary, which is why they should be a consequence of balance and not the other way around.
I think talking about the upper end of the game is fine, even if that's the 1%, but once we start discussing the 0.000001 (the 1 in a million), I don't think its productive. That's why I've always thought it is better to focus on how many killer players have gotten things like a 50 win streak instead of the Blight (kind of like your comment on barely break 20, if a 20 win streak is seen as no big deal I think that's a bigger indication of balance).The big difference is that speedrunning escapes is actually more instructible than just winning as a killer. Were this not something easily emulatable by the average player (Hens even challenges his viewers to try to beat it, after explaining how it works) then it would be less of an issue: But most of DBD's content creation history tends to get things abused, exploited, and nerfed. Sub 5 escapes do not even require much special, but videos like this inform people on how to get those numbers when they wouldn't otherwise. In fighting games Touch of Death combos are like this, where people who don't even know the first thing about a characters game plan can learn a consistent combination to win a match from the first touch. That means that their opponent can be a better player in almost every metric, but one minor mistake can lose them the game vs a worse player.
Thats why gen efficiency is such an important topic to address those extremes. Its not a high skill interaction, in fact, the worst it really gets is getting multiple hyperfocuses in a row (which can be mitigated to an extent.) It doesn't require chase skills, saves, or pretty much any significant macro skill. You just maximize your build and follow the prompts until the loud beep goes off. I got carried in the game for years without even learning proper macro play just by being efficient on generators, and thats a power that the game kinda relies on being untapped to its fullest. So you have the most game winning facet of the game (gen efficiency) paired with both theory and practical application of how to do it, with a very high skill floor.
A killer needs to play well in more than one facet of the game to get even 20 kills in a row, and thats a streak that could still be achieved in even an uphill balancing scenario. You don't have to play well to reach a sub 3min escape, you just need the right build and teammates that are good enough to allow it to be possible. Thats the shared agency dilemma that always seems to throw people's perspective off on those types of comparisons.
Single videos are very evocative, they really get people to pay attention. Data tends to be pretty boring. That's why I'm saying its not fair to evaluate without all of the data and a comparison. So if this group played with a different, more traditional build, and got an escape rate of 80%, and with gen rush they got 80% or less, well its not an issue on balance (again, on fun, if people really dislike it that's a totally different story).Again, this is why I'm not pushing some type of narrative "This is what happens in all my games!" or anything that hyperbolic. Its not even about the fact this can fail, its about the fact it's possible. Its also why I compared it to the Blight streak, as the most reasonable argument against it is that no player should be able to win that many matches in a row in a balanced game. I specified I wasn't talking about common scenario because it doesn't apply regarding kill streaks either. They're just extremes that shouldn't be possible in a balanced game, and people seem to pick and choose when thats allowed to be ok.
This is were we are all at a loss in comparison to BHVR's decision making because we don't have the larger numbers they have access to, and even if we focus it on a specific player its going to be a smaller sample size (Otz and Hens have both done some larger data collections, but even then we're still talking relatively small footprints).I don't like making hypothesis under the assumption they don't have this data, its more about when, how, and how aggressively they ignore data when it outlines things like this. They can have the escape time for every single match that has ever been played of DBD, but willfully ignoring extremes like this breaks trust in how they analyze said data. Every time they put out bad PR over things that even remotely involve data, it makes people's trust in their ability to make proper decisions based on that data less assuring. They could have data that would be good enough to make feedback from players redundant, but if they don't analyze it right that uninformed feedback can be more insightful than a hundred layered spreadsheet.
I'm going try and shorten this up because I feel like it will quickly become a disagreement over the weighting of certain examples (note: I failed at shortening).
Still, its kinda funny that a killer like Nurse has a worse record than a Trapper :DLuck based, I presume, if the survivors happen to run into the early traps.
Unfortunately, one of the things that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way is how they're being so generous with some of these definitions they can't even remember them for their own powerpoint.Ugh, what got said at one point, something like 'and a third one that I can't remember'? Yeah, that was bad, I don't know why BHVR tries to keep putting people into live speaking roles that are not their skill set.
Just like a survivor likely won't have fun if they get tunneled out constantly, a killer isn't going to have fun if they get 2-3 medium chases before the endgame starts.So this is related to BHVR's bad definitions and what data they were getting from people. I don't mind being the target of the tunnel either, its far more annoying to be one of the three other survivors who are just slamming gens.
-onto the more disagreement points-
The big difference is that speedrunning escapes is actually more instructible than just winning as a killer. Were this not something easily emulatable by the average playerHmmm. I spent a bit thinking about this (and what you say after), because I don't think you are by any means wrong, but I also feel a little bit off about it.
Thinking aloud: Would a killer going for a world record change their build over one going for a win streak? Yes, absolutely, things like Lethal Pursuer and other early game perks would become more essential. Is the build giving them the same weaknesses as survivors on a gen rush? Maybe, I could see both sides being possible.
I guess I'd have to look more into the world records by killers. Where the players actively seeking to accomplish it, or did they stumble into it by everything going their way?
A killer needs to play well in more than one facet of the game to get even 20 kills in a row, and thats a streak that could still be achieved in even an uphill balancing scenario. You don't have to play well to reach a sub 3min escape, you just need the right build and teammates that are good enough to allow it to be possibleThey seem a little unalike in comparison. Could these survivor builds get to 20 wins in a row without needing to be good in more than one facet of the game. If they could, or even if they could just get a really high escape rate, then absolutely a problem. That runs into a structural design issue with DBD though that the amount of newer players who might be used for such a test don't have the necessary perks/items that a more experienced team does (if a person was actually going to test it).
Though I think the hypothesis would be moot if one had access to BHVR's data, do these builds result in a higher escape rate in comparison to other 'sweaty' builds (I presume BHVR compares sweaty levels which they might not)? Is so, problem, if not, still maybe a problem but a different one.
They're just extremes that shouldn't be possible in a balanced game, and people seem to pick and choose when thats allowed to be ok.I'm so tempted to get into a larger discussion of variability in games, but I said I'd keep this short and I don't really disagree.
They could have data that would be good enough to make feedback from players redundant, but if they don't analyze it right that uninformed feedback can be more insightful than a hundred layered spreadsheet.Yeah, true, though feedback is always going to tell them more about the 'fun' factor than data (hopefully). I guess if I had their data what I'd like to know is what happens outside the extremes with these builds.
-
Okay, I've failed at keeping it short, so theory time on the issue. There's only one 'type' of survivor so I think its critical to the game's health that survivors have multiple viable styles of 'character' they can build. I think these get split into either mixed (good at a few things) or focused (great at one thing) - with focused builds generally seeing less return for each perk slot invested. So survivors having the option to take a single healing perk and be stronger at healing, or spend their entire build and be great at healing but weak everywhere else, I think is healthy design.
Now ultimately this can make killers feel bad if looking at a singular trial as something outside their knowledge was, or at least felt like, the primary deciding factor of the outcome. In the above scenario if the survivor with the healing focused build is not the one chased and they go around healing everyone the killer is going to feel like the build is brokenly strong. For a fair evaluation we'd need to look at multiple games, best, worst, and middle of the road outcomes.
The going all out on one thing is the survivor risk/reward trade off, perhaps comparable to killer hex perks. If things go your way, great, but if not, devastating. I think that's fine, but recognize it walks a fine line that could lead to player unhappiness.
So where does gen rush fall on this? I think having a completely gen focused build falls into the above idea of doing something really well, but also full of many downsides, and thus an overall healthy option to have in the game. Is it too strong, especially with coordination? My gut leans yes, but I'd feel more comfortable with more data.
And a complete side note: When '1-2-3-4' was announced I said that BHVR was intentionally trying to reinvigorate the World Record chase (which was partly joking, but not fully).
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4024802#Comment_4024802
I've played 181 survivor matches in the last 30 days. There were maybe three or four Blights, possibly one Nurse. I play at different times, in different regions, with different people, so probably with varied matchmaking to account for different MMR levels. I see 5k+ hour players. I see p100 killlers. Yet I don't see these supposed numerous Blights and Nurses.
And yeah, true, I don't really see a long line of Nurse and Blight mains here either, yet they're somehow in every survivor match. An odd discrepancy.
I do think its more perception than anything else (outside of new killer releases). All of our data sources are limited, but going off what we have:
Nightlight shows the highest killer percentages at almost 6%, so 1 in 17 games.
This jives with their data release for Japan, with the top killer being around 7% (Japan was a little more extreme than the world, with multiple killers over 5%, but even then nothing that would rise to the level of match, after match, after match).
I've never seen a streamer or content creator post a video where they actually demonstrated hitting a narrow range of killers over a sizable number of matches.
And now with the stats page, which might be wrong on kill rates because of the abandons, but it should at least give people a way to post examples - I haven't seen anyone post something like 'here's my last 20 matches, 75% just three killers'.
I'm actually surprised we haven't seen this, I'd think by just random chance this would happen to someone.
-
@Cvz said:
What do you think about the next idea:
Introduce a new type of generator kicking, lets call it "Charged Kick". At the start of the match, this kick is disabled.
Once you hook teh first survivor, you need to hook another survivor. If you do this, the Charged Kick is enabled and some some generator damage bonus is stored (for example: 5%). Every time you hook a different survivor, new 5% bonus damage will be added to the stored number.
When the killer is in front of a generator, he can choose if do a normal kick or a charged kick, if the player choose the charged kick:
- It takes 1.5 or 2 normal kick time to complete the action.
- Apply the bonus damage to the generator and reset the stored value
- Disable Charged Kick (will be reenabled when the killer hook a diferent survivor)
- Can be combined with Pop or other perks.
The player can choose if he will be storing the damage bonus or use it beetween hooks, so this doesnt force any kind of playstyle. I believe this can be a nice incentive to spread hooks and feel that is rewarding to do so.
Conceptually sounds fine, but the 9.2 PTB felt to some like they were having to balance too many things, so not sure the idea of just 'I got this, when do I use it' would fly that well.
Like I think the basekit Pop idea accomplished most of this without having to worry about adding additional commands.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4024798#Comment_4024798
For discussing math/balance (not fun, which is very important but a different topic) on the gen rush the issue remains of if instead of trying to get the world record for escape, how much more or less successful would the team/player be under the same conditions using other builds? That a team can escape really fast I don't doubt, but what's the overall impact on their escape rate?When LCD strats are prioritized without the skill or game sense to apply them properly, they also tend to lose games more than save them. This will always be a perspective variable regarding matchups, and kinda misplaced since few of the matches in Hens' video for example were just 1 outs. I can't side with dismissing a very clear issue based solely on either frequency or viability downplaying. If we did, the same would apply to things like 3 hook 1K games. But we clearly want to reduce those as they are generally pretty unfair to the 1 who gets tunneled, regardless of efficiency or even effectiveness outside of that one result.
It also has the killer records, and some of them are also incredibly fast.Absolutely, especially since it is something that on paper should be able to take less time. That said, notice how its not a very contested category, the fastest time is still 2 minutes, and it has no rules around which killer or any other types of curation to the data? Its also a category that can be easily thrown off by things like ragequits/sandbagging/etc, which would not be able to be recorded or observed by the killer's perspective. As survivor (especially in an SWF) its much more possible to document everything in a way that allows verification of proper play.
But survivors maximizing gens have nothing else. A good chase by the killer, having the right killer/perks, and the survivors can crumble. Like lots of things that maximize efficiency, there's no backup, making a recovery extremely difficult.Agreed. The survivors are expected to utilize as much momentum at the start as they can in order to offset their gradually weakening position. The issue is that the extreme of said starting strength does not guarantee a reasonable ratio, which is why I compare it to getting one out through tunneling. Doing so forces a hard shift on the potentials of the two sides, and minimizing potential damage is just as important to game dynamic as strengthening one's own position alone. This is also why I compare it to tunneling, as it puts optimizing one's own chances of success well before the opponent's chance to have a fair match. Both are currently balanced around effectiveness in successful execution than they are allowing for dynamic gameplay from either side. At this point I don't even trust them enough to attempt handling both extremes fairly for both sides simultaneously, but its not a part of the formula you can balance like a jenga tower. Tunneling is an excuse because of gen rushing, gen rushing is an excuse because of tunneling. That tug of war over objective efficiency potential has been a driving force in the game for years because of how extreme the far ends on either side get, and its just another facet where they will never find fairness until they figure out how to normalize their landslide scenarios.
I don't have any problem with the concept, I think there's a lot of merit to it, but I think the speedruns are bad at exhibiting the reasons for it.Speedruns are like the kill streaks everyone loves focusing on hyperbolic examples of. For the Blight main who got over 2k wins, there are many who barely break 20. Some never even learn the killer fully, and just play him because he can play like a M1 and they heard he's OP as hell. People go to these examples because they represent extremes that they find unacceptable, regardless of whether they apply to their specific cases. The point of pairing the speedruns with the old early game collapse idea is that it would be focused on addressing that extreme: The world record is a death by a thousand cuts scenario. It utilizes multiple oversights and even the bardic perk to perform much better in a very focused application than they can in normal gameplay. The more layers that get added like that, not only do things get even faster with each new tool, but they create more moving parts that would need to be addressed to undo the damage. At this point having a grace period of reduced survivor efficiency (in whatever means are deemed best, it doesn't have to be a flat debuff or anything lazy like that) at the start of the match would be far more effective than reworking all of the elements involved (and potentially nerfing their normal case use just to address this kind of stacking.) Thats why I emphasize it would need to go side by side with a similar hemming in of killers getting an early down and tunnel well before survivors would be able to utilize any of that "power play."
Honestly, when they backed out on reworking haste stacking, I kinda lost hope they would do the right thing about these types of scenarios. We'll just continue to have people complain about individual pieces of the jenga tower and disregard how unstable it gets with each short sided adjustment.
This will always be a perspective variable regarding matchups, and kinda misplaced since few of the matches in Hens' video for example were just 1 outs.Okay, this why I mentioned streaming earlier as well. I don't watch a ton of live streams, but I've caught some of Hens videos were he's trying ideas, and the Youtube video that emerged didn't cover the times the idea crashed and burned. I don't think he's being deceptive, I think he is trying to focus the video on entertaining material, and so the matches that don't accomplish that get tossed. That's always the problem with using edited videos as evidence, we have no idea what is excluded.
I can't side with dismissing a very clear issue based solely on either frequency or viability downplaying.Not dismissing, though weighing in context, but I'll get to that a little more later.
That said, notice how its not a very contested category, the fastest time is still 2 minutes, and it has no rules around which killer or any other types of curation to the data?If I'm looking at the site correctly, it is actually split up by each individual killer, probably the reason for less results because its divided across all the killers.
Its also a category that can be easily thrown off by things like ragequits/sandbagging/etc, which would not be able to be recorded or observed by the killer's perspective. As survivor (especially in an SWF) its much more possible to document everything in a way that allows verification of proper play.More possible, but you still have a few issues. Whether the killer gets a a slow start or not, and what constitutes 'serious' play, which if I remember correctly Hens worried was going to get their record video tossed out.
This is also why I compare it to tunneling, as it puts optimizing one's own chances of success well before the opponent's chance to have a fair match.Sure, this is a good comparison
The argument that ultimately won BHVR on tunneling was fun, not balance. As a balance issue, tunneling was all or nothing. If the killer's strategy was to tunnel the first person*, and that person happened to have OTR and DS, killer probably lost (or another survivor had Reassurance, etc.). On that sense, gen rush is in a similar space, you're really hoping the killer doesn't have Corrupt and Dead Man's, and I suspect some of the killers might be intrinsically harder to run this against (the S tiers obviously, but also killers who can damage grouped up survivors would likely be very dangerous).
*we can then get into degrees of tunneling, such as proxy camping, just as we could get into degrees of gen rush, but that's going to explode into lots of variables.
The question is where is the line on fun. Having advantages based on what you selected in the lobby with no knowledge of what the opponent has, is pretty baked into the game. I thought tunneling went too far into the lobby guessing game. Does extreme gen rush reach that stage? I don't know, when I've had it run against me I don't find it particularly annoying because its at least quick and a rush, which I enjoy, but I can't speak for anyone else.
Tunneling is an excuse because of gen rushing, gen rushing is an excuse because of tunnelingAgreed.
Speedruns are like the kill streaks everyone loves focusing on hyperbolic examples of.For the record, I don't think that's a good argument either even if I get drawn into it on 'But what about this SWF that…' style.
I think talking about the upper end of the game is fine, even if that's the 1%, but once we start discussing the 0.000001 (the 1 in a million), I don't think its productive. That's why I've always thought it is better to focus on how many killer players have gotten things like a 50 win streak instead of the Blight (kind of like your comment on barely break 20, if a 20 win streak is seen as no big deal I think that's a bigger indication of balance).
But yes, people absolutely do over focus on Momo's Blight run.
People go to these examples because they represent extremes that they find unacceptable, regardless of whether they apply to their specific cases.This is where I'm going to kick back to the idea of dismissing an idea vs weighing it in context.
Single videos are very evocative, they really get people to pay attention. Data tends to be pretty boring. That's why I'm saying its not fair to evaluate without all of the data and a comparison. So if this group played with a different, more traditional build, and got an escape rate of 80%, and with gen rush they got 80% or less, well its not an issue on balance (again, on fun, if people really dislike it that's a totally different story).
This is were we are all at a loss in comparison to BHVR's decision making because we don't have the larger numbers they have access to, and even if we focus it on a specific player its going to be a smaller sample size (Otz and Hens have both done some larger data collections, but even then we're still talking relatively small footprints).
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4024496#Comment_4024496
I get what you mean about it being an extreme-yet-not-viable scenario, but the top 26 on the speedrun leaderboard are all under 5 minutes, and most of them aren't by Hens or his friends. In fact, the top 10 are almost all under 3 minutes, and the top 20 for solo specifically are all under 5 minutes. These are people who were willing to record and verify their results for the leaderboards, as well as follow any rule requirements for the category, and says nothing for the millions of games not represented. Its actually quite interesting to see how the times have changed over time. Here's the swf category, but it also has others like solo on there:
https://www.speedrun.com/dead_by_daylight
It doesn't mean your average survivor group is escaping lightning fast due to no fault of the killer, but this is the level of punishing that survivors lament in regards to tunneling: Your opponent's focus on maximizing efficiency reduces your ability to make mistakes (or sometimes even play) until you have no hope of recovering your objective. When criticizing killers in these games saying "if they made no mistakes, the time doesn't add up" is a laser focused perspective on the broader issue: how many mistakes are either side allowed to make to stand a chance. If survivors get all 5 gens done lightning fast, there is no time for the killer to build pressure and/or snowball, just like a survivor who is chased off the hook has no time to defend themselves reasonably.
Its an integral part of the game's design for the survivors to have their strength be at its peak at the start, while it slides into the killer's favor as resources are used up. That means that the burst potential of the survivors at the start has to be addressed in an equal manner to the killer's ability to force resource consumption, most notably in the cases of hook states and teammates in the game.
Short game durations also affect different killers differently, a nurse or blight isn't going to care as much (and will have more opportunity to even punish) vs builds dedicated solely to speedrunning trials vs a hag or trapper who might not even start a single chase by the time gens start popping. I remember a while back there was a push for an "early game collapse" style of phase for trials where the survivors wouldn't be able to maximize their strength at the start of the match, but in actuality an idea like that should only come with the introduction of more stern (and actually well implemented and totally not just lazy attempts at appeasement) anti-tunneling design.
In the end, that leaderboard is basically just a list of failures to a smoke test. Trials should not be able to go that fast, just like people shouldn't be able to be forced out of the trial before being able to have an opportunity to participate in a fair chase.
I get what you mean about it being an extreme-yet-not-viable scenario, but the top 26 on the speedrun leaderboard are all under 5 minutes, and most of them aren't by Hens or his friends.Actually the extremeness isn't really my point, though its related.
For discussing math/balance (not fun, which is very important but a different topic) on the gen rush the issue remains of if instead of trying to get the world record for escape, how much more or less successful would the team/player be under the same conditions using other builds? That a team can escape really fast I don't doubt, but what's the overall impact on their escape rate?
Here's the swf category, but it also has others like solo on there:It also has the killer records, and some of them are also incredibly fast.
If survivors get all 5 gens done lightning fast, there is notimefor the killer to build pressure and/or snowball, just like a survivor who is chased off the hook has notimeto defend themselves reasonably.But survivors maximizing gens have nothing else. A good chase by the killer, having the right killer/perks, and the survivors can crumble. Like lots of things that maximize efficiency, there's no backup, making a recovery extremely difficult.
I remember a while back there was a push for an "early game collapse" style of phase for trials where the survivors wouldn't be able to maximize their strength at the start of the matchI don't have any problem with the concept, I think there's a lot of merit to it, but I think the speedruns are bad at exhibiting the reasons for it.
-
@jamally093 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4024574#Comment_4024574
Well I find it useful maybe it's a placebo effect but I just find it better then using the meta of Pain: Res and dead man.
I don't think its as bad as others in the thread make it out to be, though I don't think its secretly S tier or anything like that. Pain res is going to beat it out on pure numbers, but also risk loss of time having to carry to a hook (possible sabos and body blocks). For Dying Light, you'll get it through however you want to play as long as its not chasing the obsession (which allows it to be combined with something like Play With Your Food when you already plan on ignoring the obsession). It can also make it harder for the survivors to pop the last gen, while Pain Res at that stage relies on finding a survivor you still have tokens for.
Of course, if the obsession brings a gen rush build, you're pretty cooked. And both styles of play require the killer to get downs early to have any impact.
Like a lot of perks in DbD it's risk/reward. You're almost certainly going to get some value from the perk, but in turn the reward is relatively low.
-
@Rickprado said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4024437#Comment_4024437
It would be true if they didn't stacked. You can stack Botany + Desperate measures and have a wooping 70% faster heal speed at all times; You can combine We'll make and Botany and have a 150% speed; Do no Harm and We'll Make it and heal someone under 8 seconds. I'm against this? No. It think we should incentivise builds that are not based on exhaustion and gen speeds. But i think killers should also have plenty of tools to hinder, reduce or even block healing at all. Its a much more fun way to slowdown the game than using gen slowdown perks.
But listing the percentages doesn't actually show the impacts of the stacking.
Healing another survivor with We'll Make It takes 8 seconds
Healing another survivor with We'll Make It and Botany takes 6.4 seconds - you've burned a perk slot for slightly more than a second and a half. Does it have an impact? A little, but I'd say less than if a survivor went for a more diverse build.
We'll Make it and Do No Harm (maxed) - 5.33 seconds - you now have a conditional heal for an extra second over the prior combo, or 2.7 seconds over just running We'll Make It.
This is why the multitude of perks doesn't really have an impact. Not only does this require you to meet multiple conditions (for We'll Make It and Do No Harm the survivor needs the hook rescue and it needs to be two stages for max values), even when you do you're getting relatively small benefits.
-
@Rickprado said:
Well, there is some stuff to point it out:
- As you've noticed, the first chase is game defining: if it takes too long it might be too late for a killer to comeback; if its too short the killer might as well start a snowball that survivors will have a hard time undoing.
- Toolboxes are broken. A lobby with 4 bad survivor with good toolboxes is harder to win against 4 good survivors with some flashlights and medkits. I've been seen these more and more and i hope something will be done soon, since its neither fun for survivor and specially for killers since its just rush the game for free.
This game is balanced around people not being too optimal in their strats. Luckily, its just a small percentage of the playerbase is focused on this. Otherwise this game would be hell, LOL
I will leave the Hens video here on how fast you can end a match in a focused team.
The problem with the Hens video:
1: If this team was playing to win, and not for a world record, what would their win rate/escape rate be?
2: What was their win rate/escape rate while doing this attempt?
Youtube videos are edited, what I've caught though from some of the releases (including prior videos and streams) is how many times they lost (and a team of this caliber should very rarely lose in pub matches). All they are trying to do is get a single survivor out as quickly as possible. If things didn't go perfectly for them, they could easily get snowballed.
If these survivors were trying to just win, would they be pursuing this strategy? Almost certainly not. They'd get a much higher win/escape rate with a more balanced approach. It's only the optimal approach if you are trying to maximize fastest out the door.
-
I also get a deep sense of trepidation when I see a math post, so let's dive in.
@AetherBytes said:
Match starts.
Survivors split and work on 4 gens. One gets found and gets chased.
At this point, from my observations, 3 gens almost always pop at the same time or very soon after the down
Here, 1 survivor on hook, 3 free.
If they just decide to crank a gen, and the next chased survivor can survive 90 seconds (or less depending on perks and time to travel) the other 2 gens can be popped and it's already end game. Even if the chased survivor now goes down, the other gets saved by one survivor and the last one opens a gate as the unhooked one gets healed, all at the cost of the stalled survivor going to death hook instead of just one hook. Even if killer abandons chase and hassles another gen, nothing stops the previously chased survivor just taking over the gen. If the previous chase went long enough, even if the new chase is shorter it wont be enough.
Suddenly, it's 3 healthy survivors, endgame with gates 99'ed/opened, and killer only has 2 hooks. 3 healthy survivors is enough to force an unhook (barring very specific killers, bubba being the only one who can guarantee there will be a price to pay for the unhook), take hits and block, and leave the game. Or just leave the first as a sacrifice and leave, and it's still considered a survivor win.
Now I understand that perks and powers can change this, but so can survivor items. Most forms of regression in the game are often not enough to save a gen if the survivors want it done, and while I understand not every squad is capable of doing this, the fact it's possible even with the killer making no mistakes (and even if the survivors make a few minor ones) makes me realize the balance is an absolute joke.
Yes, I know it doesn't happen every game, and in fact is rare that it would even play out like that, but a team dedicated to this, with at least 2 good chasers, can totally pull this off if they tried or get so close that they're still ahead by a mile. It also explains why gen regression is king, despite how pitiful it is, because no matter how bad it is, other perks cannot save even near that amount of time, with many of them even having penalties that make their bonuses pointless. Camping is a thing because killers simply cannot pressure gens in many cases in any effective manner, meaning their hook is currently the most important defence as it's the only time they can force other survivors into shorter chases. Tunneling stems from this too; every killer knows just how much the pressure they need to make drops the moment it becomes a 1v3, and in itself is the most effective form of gen regression; the complete elimination of a survivor's presence for the remainder of a match can save more than any regression perk when done early enough.
I want to clarify here that I am not excusing camping or tunneling, but once you realize just how little power a killer has you start to realize why many resort to it
It's also why killers like Nurse and Blight are the best. They cut out the most time consuming part of any trial; mobility and chase power.. The survivors can no longer reach that guaranteed "first hooked survivor will be fine" threshold and have to rescue now, slowing them down a lot and is the start of a snowball with a good killer.
Weaker killers, like Trapper or Hag (basekit) for example, just cannot compete with an ability that forces them to sacrifice time to setup, for the potential of no payoff or worse.
I wish I could end this post with suggestions or answers to fix this, but I'm truly stumped. Sure, turning up gen times would work, but then that means normal SWFs or solo queue become unable to win as well. Decreasing hook times back to 60 seconds per stage could maybe work, as that lost 20 seconds leaves only 0~10 seconds to save instead of 20-30, which is nigh impossible unless the killer is incompetent (in which case, it's overkill anyway)
And before someone comments it, yes, again, I know. This is not common place, but it's methematically possible especially against weaker chase/mobility killers, and with how bad the MMR system is, completely feasible to execute in a live match
What do you guys think?
Let's highlight something at the end:
And before someone comments it, yes, again, I know. This is not common place, but it's methematically possibleYes, this is true for any competitive activity. It's possible for one side to dominate the other. Example: in the semi-finals of the 2014 World Cup Germany was up 5 to nothing 30 minutes into the match. It happens even at extremely high level of play.
If they just decide to crank a gen, and the next chased survivor can survive 90 seconds (or less depending on perks and time to travel) the other 2 gens can be popped and it's already end game.If the survivors do really well in chase, especially two 90 second chases with the killer doing nothing about those on gens, yes, the survivors are going to win.
And if they only last 10 seconds in chase, they are going to lose.
Basically: if the survivors do really well, they win, if the killer does really well, he wins. Like I'm not sure what the issue is here.
fact it's possible even with the killer making no mistakes (and even if the survivors make a few minor ones) makes me realize the balance is an absolute joke.Wait, woah, when did we get to this? The killer was in two 90s chases. What exactly was happening that they made no mistakes?
a team dedicated to this, with at least 2 good chasers, can totally pull this off if they tried or get so close that they're still ahead by a mile.Not sure how the survivors force the killer to chase these two people, especially being they are cranking gens which should make them relatively easy to find.
It also explains why gen regression is king, despite how pitiful it is, because no matter how bad it is, other perks cannot save even near that amount of time, with many of them even having penalties that make their bonuses pointless. Camping is a thing because killers simply cannot pressure gens in many cases in any effective manner, meaning their hook is currently the most important defence as it's the only time they can force other survivors into shorter chases.These are common arguments, but neither makes sense.
Gen defense: what perk would make a difference in this scenario? The killer isn't getting downs, they can't really activate anything useful. Even blocking the gens is going to have a minimal impact if the chases are taking this long.
Camping: even less true. In your scenario the survivors intentionally leave the target on hook. Now instead of two people doing gens, its three.
-
Basically: you're arguing that if things go really well for the survivors then, mathematically, they are going to win. Yes, obviously. Its the same for the other side. None of this is getting into balance issues or game design (such as the guessing game in the lobby or the over weighted impact of early game). But I think the ease in this scenario at which the survivors are doing gens and the survivors are getting long chases would be indicative of killer mistakes, randomness really helping them out, goated survivor play, winning lots of 50/50 guess, or some combination of all of that.
-
@Rickprado said:
Hi! Hope everyone is doing fine.
This is not a "Us vs Them" post but i have a genuine question for the devs and the community:
Why perks like Sloppy Butcher, Gift of Pain, Deathbound, Leverage and many other perks and killer addons that are meant to slowdown heals are handicapped or just plain nerfed while we see every patch new perks to make healing even more fast than before?
I'm not against healing as i think they are much more easier to balance and healthier to the game than perks focused on exhaustion or repair speed, but why the counterpart to healing perks are nerfed or just forgotten every new patch? Even Thana that used to be a good slowdown for the majority of killer was nerfed to work at only 1 killer in the whole rooster.I used to play a lot with Sloppy and other now i don't see any reason for using the perks, since it was nerfed if i hit and run the effect will wear off eventually and survivor won't really bother to heal through the mangled because they can just wait it out or just power through the status with the big amount of perks they have.
That's it. Thanks for the attention.
we see every patch new perks to make healing even more fast than before?So new healing perks, by themselves, really don't change the balance that much. Because of how the healing math works running a bunch of them has declining returns and severely eats into what else the survivor can do. Conceptually whether there are four healing perks or twenty, it doesn't have too big of an impact on balance (kind of like exhaustion).
Now, can any of those individual perks be unbalanced? Sure, and some of the decisions BHVR has made on buffs/nerfs have surprised me, but quantity of perks is not a huge factor in that.
-
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4023676#Comment_4023676
Very good breakdown. I had a feeling you would do an analysis of this post.
I do agree on most of the points, and counter-points, but there are some I would do different.- Decluttering of the survivor (and killer) bloodwebs would make obtaining Bloody Party Streamers a little easier. I don't see why they need to be rarer than ultra rares, in relative terms. Sharing is caring after all, and with how much BP gains vary from game to game, you'd want a buffer on your BPS stack, in case you end up spending your hard-earned BPS on a match that sees you instantly tunneled out for instance. That is a very frustrating 1 million BP spent getting 1 lousy BPS, gone down the drain. Now, if every match guaranteed that you got good value from your BPS, then I wouldn't complain about it in the first place.
- Not sure about the linear level up, and how it would work as compared to the Bloodweb, but an interesting take.
- Not sure if adding 15-20 variants of each item would help any with de-cluttering.
- The killer add-on idea was interesting. I do think a mix of our ideas would work fine. At least when it comes to power-altering add-ons.
- So, if BP offerings are bad, then base gains definitely needs to go up, so that the grind doesn't become unbearable again, like it used to be in the past. The original Bloodweb was extremely grindy, and players really didn't like it. It's fine to leave some games grindier than others, but leave that to single-player games, or games that does not have PVP.
- It's fine, bring on your MMR hot takes. I made this megathread for a reason.
Let's kind of work backwards through this, though I'll do MMR at the end.
So, if BP offerings are bad, then base gains definitely needs to go up, so that the grind doesn't become unbearable againSure, though its all arbitrary. You could say that survivors got 20 BP on average, while also make the cost to purchase things 2.
Basically a company wants to set a number were progress feels meaningful, but attainable, then give it a number structure that people respond to (human beings don't like decimals, they like big numbers, but not so big it feels silly). But largely speaking, its all smoke and mirrors meant to disguise the grind into a more enjoyable format.
Not sure if adding 15-20 variants of each item would help any with de-cluttering.So it depends what you think items should be (now that I think about it, it would probably be 8 to 12, instead of 15 to 20, but that's a minor point).
If you believe that the ideal goal is that as a player you obtain the item / addons that you want to run all the time, maybe with 2 or 3 variations (i.e. a medkit, a toolbox, and a flashlight), then no, it doesn't work (though the bloodweb itself really serves very little point then).
But if you think one of the goals of the bloodweb is to encourage variety, it does. Maybe you want to run the medkit with extra charges, but you're all out, so you have to try something different. In this concept everything is still on the same level of 'good', so you aren't downgrading, but trying something new.
An additional feature of this is whether you believe survivors should be worried about losing their item when they die. Some games engage in this (Hunt: Showdown), where you the player actually risk losing something meaningful in the game. I think that is one of the ideas BHVR tried with the idea of keeping/losing items, but its largely pointless.
Decluttering of the survivor (and killer) bloodwebs would make obtaining Bloody Party Streamers a little easier. I don't see why they need to be rarer than ultra rares, in relative terms.Honestly, outside some of the Iri items, I have no idea what most things are rarity wise.
But you're jumping through hoops in your request. You want more BP, so you're asking them to make the BP item cheaper, making you engage in the BP spending to get it, when all of this could just be done with more points and/or cheaper purchases.
bring on your MMR hot takes. I made this megathread for a reason.So I wasn't around during ranks. I played DbD a few times before 2022 and it never really caught my interest, especially after really enjoying Deathgarden but thinking the flaws were even more extreme in DbD.
But a lot of what you say makes it sound like you want to just go back to ranks. I don't have an opinion on that being I didn't really experience it.
But, in terms of MMR, looking back to your post:
Sometimes you end up with perfectly balanced matches, but other times you end up in a very one-sided scenario.So, sometimes this definitely happens.
But there's a few other issues:
1: A single game isn't a big enough data point. In sports, sometimes a bad team beats a good team, sometimes by a lot. To go a step further and compare it to American football - there will be games where one team's defense shuts the offence of the other team down, but there might still be one drive where the offense tears down the field and the fans are wondering where they've been. Any game could be that outlier.
A single game isn't really big enough to see what happened matchmaking wise, especially given the high randomness. Especially given the snowball nature where the game starts really strong for the survivor and then swings hard in the killers favor.
2: Player skill varies by killers they are hitting. There are some killers I am just trash against, others were I feel like I really get the counterplay. I could look really weak, or really strong, depending on the killer we play.
3: A single event, that might just be a guess, can have massive impacts. An example I like to use: was playing survivor on Autohaven against Pinhead. I was first chase, got hit, and was running toward main. Pinhead throws the chain, its the start of the match so he and I have to guess at how its going to be played. I guess right, chain misses, and I make it to main and I can now run him for a good long while, or he can drop. That one play, which was very random, easily could have made me look like I was a garbage player or excellent at the game (I made it, he chased, then dropped, we got a 3e in the end).
4: A matchmaker can't tell if a player is taking it easy, tired, drunk, etc.
Basically, yeah, it messes up, but its also DbD's nature to swing to one side a lot of the time even if there was a fair match, thus making it hard to tell why a game was lopsided.
MMR should also be determined by more than just wins or losses. There has to be other parameters in play.In the long run, it doesn't matter. Now they should probably count survivors as a team, but if you play better, your chances of escaping increase, if you play worse they decrease. Trying to fine tune it would potentially lead to people exploiting it, but also could easily throw people off - you might escape a lot because you realized your stealth/gen rush build was actually great, but BHVR messed up the valuations and you got no chase time so your MMR stays low.
It's like wins and losses in sports. Ultimately, you need to have good stats in a variety of areas to be successful, but the ultimate goal is the win and it should be up to the individual participant to determine what they think is the best path toward it.
There's also the fact that survivor/killer MMR have to go up and down in equal number, so you would need to evaluate how many good things/bad things were done by each players, which is a lot of possible match when ultimately the escape/death would line up just as well.
There should also be a grace period when testing out new killers, so that you don't get put into a lobby that is way too high rated.This is understandable, but there's a few issues.
1: I don't think experienced killers realize how much they would dominate survivors if they actually got bumped down in MMR, even if it was a new killer.
2: On killer release day/week, this would result at a massive over abundance of this killer in the average MMR, potentially destroying queue times even more.
3: Speaking of releases, this also means the survivors are facing a killer new to them, and they are having to do it against someone with higher MMR.
-
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
Recent discussions with @cogsturning and some other players has made me wonder about what some actual good QoL changes might be.
The most debated topic: Tunneling.
As has been the case ever since the 9.2.0 PTB, the discussion around tunneling, prevention of said tunneling, and not being too punishing has been like a rollercoaster to say the least. My refined idea of anti-tunneling would be something like this:
- Delay the unhook notification by 5-10 seconds (could be changed depending on how strong/weak that effect would be).
- Tweak Elusive to always hide scratch marks, pools of blood, grunts of pain, and coughing for a solid 45 seconds, or until the survivor does a conspicous action.
- Reduce the Endurance and Haste portion down to 15 seconds. 30 seconds is a bit much for a base-kit effect of this magnitude. - Have a progressive killer status buff for spreading hooks, based on killer map traversal capability.
- Slow traversing killers like Trapper, Deathslinger, Pig, or anyone without any form of teleports, passive speed boosts from power, and that kinda stuff should get a 10% Haste (or some new) status effect for 15 seconds after hooking. A status effect that only disables upon power usage and attacking, not when kicking pallets or gens.
- Medium mobility, and certain ranged killers, like killers with shorter dashes, temporary speed buffs (like Clown), Huntress, and Trickster, should also get a 10% Haste bonus, but only for 10 seconds, which also deactivates upon power usage and attacking. - Nurse also falls into this category.
- High mobility, and fast traversing killers on the other hand, like Ghoul, Blight, Billy, Krasue etc. does not receive a special buff to the mobility aspects.
- All killers receive a stacking bonus to Bloodpoints earned (up to a 100% bonus), per unique hooked Survivor. Like old BBQ did, but this effect only stacks if every unique survivor gets hooked once before going for a second hook. To lessen the blow on Survivors that gets tunneled out (even after these suggestions), they will receive a +100% Bloodpoint bonus for every consecutive hook (+200% maximum), if the killer does not hook anyone else after the survivor is unhooked. - Anti-tunnel measurements deactivates in the end-game collapse, like anti-facecamp does
This way of changing the anti-tunnel system would be the best of both worlds. It offers a safer way for survivors to be allowed to reset, and it will not be overly punishing for killers who still decide to go the tunneling route. Just disincentiviced by offering no BP or speed boosts, as well as making the unhooked survivor harder to track.
Anti-slugging, another hot topic:
This is also a widely hated strategy among survivors. Especially the toxic 4-man bleedout slugging.
Tactical slugging on the other hand, like leaving the survivor downed while checking for teammates nearby is usually fine.
Late-game slugging for the 4K is also frowned upon.
Here is my idea for a good and fair anti-slug mechanic:- Reduce the proposed 120 second auto pick-up timer down to 100 seconds. Two full minutes is a long time on the ground.
- Stays active in the end-game to prevent excessive slugging for the 4K
- Does not include base-kit Tenacity, but crawling won't stop the auto-pickup bar from going up.
- Repeated slugging makes the recovery process faster, once the auto-pickup bar is full. +20% recovery speed for every repeat offense, up to a 100% faster recovery (same as being under the effect of Boon: Exponential).
- Plot Twist does not count towards being slugged.
- Alternative option: Slugging in the end-game would instead trigger an option for the survivor on the ground to instantly bleed out, if their anti-slug bar is full.
It has already been made some arguments about 120 seconds being too long, so maybe 100 seconds won't feel too much for the survivors being slugged.
Slugging in the end-game is just pitiful, and a waste of time, especially if one of the survivors are hiding.Anti-camping - Not sure about this one:
The recent proposal saw some changes to the anti-facecamp system, mainly the increased radius, and the progressive speed increase of the unhook-bar, starting at half rate.
Proxy-camping is still widely used in conjunction with the intent of tunneling, to instantly being able to track the recently unhooked survivor, or to force a second hook stage.- Not really sure how to truly fix this, without it being overly punishing, also for unintended proxy.
But the current proposal is not the right call. This needs much more thorough thinking before it should be considered. - Should there be a projectile-blocker in place around the hooks as well, to prevent killers like Huntress and Trickster to be able to proxy outside of the radius?
- Should there be a safe zone around the hooks where killer powers does not function, to prevent cases like Basement Trapper, Hag and Bubba, or blocking teleports near hooked survivors, like is the case for Dredge (could be applied to Springtrap). These suggestions could also tie in with the idea of a delay in unhook notifications, where there is a grace period for the survivors to get away from the hook area, in order to prevent tunneling?
Maps, and pallet density:
The increase in pallet density, and generalization of the tileset pools has been a mixed bag for sure.
Some maps really needed it, like Rancid Abattoir, Rotten Fields, Haddonfield and Temple of Purgation.
But a lot of other maps really didn't need this change, like the Autohaven maps (maybe aside from Azarov's), the MacMillan realm (aside from Shelter Woods), and worst of all, Crotus Prenn.
Other maps affected by the changes only saw safe areas become safer, while leaving other areas deadzoned. Like the Swamp maps and Yamaoka Estate.
And then you had the maps that got worse for both sides after the change, like Greenville Square (spawning more double-pallets, and has way worse jungle-gyms than before.We need a full revamp of the maps affected by the pallet density update, and a benchmark map to base the pallet, window and loop spread on. Something like pre-change Ormond Lake Mine, or the pre-change Coal Tower, which were both highly regarded as very balanced maps.
Survivor items and add-ons:
In the upcoming PTB, there are talks about changes to Styptics and Syringes, but no changes to items that are clearly under-used or under-utilized, because the alternatives are the only ones worth running.
- There needs to be a priority of de-cluttering the Survivor bloodweb. First off, reworking items and reducing the amounts of add-ons for each item. I am sure there are many good community ideas for this, such as toolboxes, flashlights, medkits etc.
- Fog Vials needs to be looked at, or completely reworked to function in a more similar fashion to the Void Crystals.
- Toolboxes and medkits does need a look at, but not necessarily in the terms of nerfing them.
- Maps and keys definitely needs another look at.
- Event items should always be common.
Some of the item reworks were really not that great. Windows on demand was an okay change for maps, but a lot of the features of the old Rainbow Map got reduced to nothing, or shifted to add-ons that are hard to come by.
Keys are essentially useless, as info perks does their job a million times better, and is now just a waste of an item slot, or something you hope to show up in a chest in the end-game (in a non-broken form).Killer add-ons:
As with survivor item add-ons, some of these are definitely a product of their time.
Many killers need an add-on pass to become better versions of themselves. One good add-on pass that was made in the past year or so, it has to be Pyramid Head's add-on rework.- How about an add-on pass that aims to add some variety, with add-ons that changes the way killer powers work, like a whole new playstyle baked into an add-on. Similar to how Myers' add-ons can change him back to his old form, or with Scratched Mirror offering a completely different way of playing. Or like Nurse's Spasmodic Breath, that disables blinking and makes you a normal M1 killer. Something completely unexpected. Offering add-on variety can definitely make for some more interesting gameplay.
- Some add-ons definitely needs some tweaking or outright reworking.
- Killers with ranged powers should all have that one add-on that helps new players learn the trajectory of projectiles. Unknown in particular could use an add-on like this.
Offerings, and the Bloodweb:
Many offerings has become pretty much worthless after countless changes. There is no reason for them to stay in the bloodwebs anymore.
- Map offerings being the worst offenders. The 20% chance to get to a certain realm is not worthwhile, as you are better off using the random map picker, and using the offering slot for something else.
Either make map offerings into a 50/50 coin toss (no stacking), or just simply remove them from the game. - Single-category Bloodpoint offerings, and some personal offerings are not that worth it either.
- Change the rarity of Bloody Party Streamers to anything but Rare, so that the chance of obtaining them goes up. There is no reason for them to be harder to find as compared to Brand New Parts or Syringes.
- Make event offerings stackable instead of personal, their rarities should be Common, and not take priority over Ultra Rares, especially if you are using a P100 character.
- Add a priority filter to the bulk spending and automatic purchase functions, so that you can use this feature and actually get more of the items, add-ons and offerings that you are looking for. Having to manually analyze the bloodwebs and select the nodes you want is pretty counter-intuitive, since those features was supposed to be time-savers, but due to how ineffective they are, in terms of "return on investment", they are not worth using.
These are just some of the changes I would have wished for in a QoL update.
Matchmaking and MMR:
This is another strong topic in the community. It is known that DBD does not have the best matchmaking system.
Sometimes you end up with perfectly balanced matches, but other times you end up in a very one-sided scenario. It is wildly inconsistent.Matchmaking should definitely prioritize an average of the players MMR, and the back-filling of lobbies should also take this into account.
In the old days of ranks, you would for the most part be matched against someone of an equal rank to your own, with a small deviation of 1-2 ranks up or down. Somehow, the matchmaking times were okay, even when considering that there was no crossplay back then.MMR should also be determined by more than just wins or losses. There has to be other parameters in play.
Using the emblem system, that could help in determining how good your performance was.There should also be a grace period when testing out new killers, so that you don't get put into a lobby that is way too high rated. Once that grace period is over however, you would face against opponents of your own skill level again.
This grace period should last between 4-6 matches, based on your average killer MMR, and could be highlighted through a golden frame (or something else to distinguish it) around the killer's portrait.More thoughts:
If anyone has more ideas on QoL, feel free to let me know, and please leave some constructive feedback in the comments :)
Tunneling ideas:
Agree on the hide the notification.
The number changes - I always feel like BHVR is a better position for these as they have more data, but they sound reasonable.
Killer buff - this is tricky and one of the difficulties of giving overall buffs to killers is that they are so different. I think its much more consistent to buff/nerf the survivor side. I mentioned it in a different thread, but the buff survivors get to gens after one is eliminated as a sliding scale. So something like 30%/20%/10%/0% - for 3, 4, 5, and 6 hooks. And let's go ahead and say if the killer doesn't get an elimination until hook 7, 8, or 9, gates take longer to open.
End Game Deactivate - Sure, I still think some basekit BT is necessary, but it doesn't have the be the same as during the game.
Anti slugging: I don't think anti-slug is necessary, but I'll approach it from the perspective of it is.
120 to 100: I don't really have strong feelings either way.
End Game: if it stays active, kill rates would drop quite a bit because lots of 4ks would become 3ks. I worry about the overall impact on BHVR's balance decisions based on that.
But broadly I think if gens are done, slugging is fine, and generally covered by the abandon system if all the other survivors leave/die.
No basekit tenacity: I'd do the reverse. I think faster crawling speeds are good, but crawling should be a trade off with the heal.
Repeats: Maybe its because I've been playing killer recently and I rarely slug for any extended length, but how often does this happen? Seems unnecessary.
Plot twist not counting: yes
Alt: Bleed out death, I also think this would be fine.
Anti-camp: I think the above idea about hiding unhook notification really solves a lot of issues on the proxy camp "problem".
This is one where I think it should actually go killer sided. No one should see the unhook notification until it hits 50%, then all the survivors see it. I think killers like Ghostface should be able to 'jump scare' the hook as a strategy.
I think if the survivor can stare at the killer for ten seconds while on hook, the killer's aura is revealed. This would do a lot to cut down on ranged killers who set up outside of the radius and just stare down the hook.
But I don't think there should be a projectile safe zone around the hook.
Maps: Again, this is one of those where I'd love to have BHVR's data to actually make a decision. But, they never should have done pallets at the same time as the anti-tunnel.
Survivor Items
Declutter - Okay, is this what I'd like, or what I think makes a successful game?
On successful game: have you ever wondered why ARPGs like Diablo bother to drop junk that no one will ever use? Even if we don't increase the drops of worthwhile stuff, people respond much better to that constant sight of things happening. It also makes the feeling of something actually worthwhile more impactful (looking through the junk to see a good item). The junk, in essence, tricks our brains into thinking the valuable stuff is even more valuable.
DbD's a grindy game with grindy mechanics.
In terms of what I'd like, two ideas
1: Permanent unlocks. Instead of the current system, players just level up in a linear fashion. Each level costs increasingly more bloodpoints to obtain. At each level you are faced with a choice of three options to unlock and you choose one and then you have it. The options not chosen? Maybe they'll appear next level, maybe it won't be for another 100 levels. I think that would keep it exciting without being monotonous.
2: The above would never be done, neither will this, but: remove all addons from survivors. Instead, create like 15 to 20 different types of each item. So a medkit with more charges, one that works off greats, one with a slow instant heal, etc. Roughly all of the items should be either balanced or have a niche purpose to fulfill. Totally discard the idea of 'rarity'.
Also, if a survivor doesn't bring an item, one is randomly taken from their inventory to start the match with.
Kill Addons
I think killer addons should fall into three categories - strong, medium, weak. The killer can run one strong, two medium, or four weak addons. So basically they can get one powerful effect, four minor buffs, or somewhere in-between.
Offerings
This is kind of like the idea of clutter. If you make it easier to get bloodpoints, you disincentive the worth of the bloodpoints (BP is just another big brain trick). I actually think BP offerings are a bad idea as it just leads to toxicity/expectations on how to play and the offering system should be reworked to be more meaningful.
MMR
I tend to end up defending BHVR on this and it gets a little long, and this is already pretty long, so I'm going to hold off on that for now.
-
@ImperatorHaze said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4023366#Comment_4023366
Are you saying DBD would be less fun if it wasn't chaotic, unbalanced, and an unhinged mess of a game?
It would be less fun if it wasn't as chaotic, that's part of the reason for the game's longevity.
Unbalanced, that's a trickier issue. It depends whether you mean per trial or over many trials. I think if you tried to make every trial balanced, you'd end up with a very boring game.
Unhinged mess depends on what you mean.
-
As others have said, a ranked mode would be a bad idea. Usually the justification given is to separate the player base, but without any way to ensure that players actually follow it (i.e. sweats could still jump into casual). Most of the benefits could be achieved by a strickter MMR system, that comes with its own downsides though not as many as a ranked mode.
-
@Dokta_Carter said:
TLDR: what sre the peoples thoughts on Stealth killers? I am curious
While playing killer a survivor said one time, a survivor said scratched mirror myers was to strong and needed a nerf?
So i know it could be hyperbole, and don't believe every thing someone says nerf this or nerf that it made me wonder…
Do some people legitimately think that stealth killers are to strong? What makes them think this?
All of the stealth based killers are primarily m1, with some having the ability to process insta down, but at the same time the killers is also wasting time to mark you?
With the right map they can be pretty strong, but the nerf to map offerings really hurt them.
They're also really strong against new players who haven't learned all the signs.
Other than that? They're fine. Being able to get up on survivors before they pre-run can be very beneficial. But the stealth aspect by itself is not going to win any games.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4023060#Comment_4023060
30 seconds is not harming player retention. Also, if we want to compare with your example of ending the game faster that isn't quite comparable because we aren't talking about kneeling and getting the game over faster, we're talking about you immediately walking off the field, no hands shook, no gg, just insta dipping. If using your examples we didn't just kneel but they immediately just walked off the field and exited the stadium that would be very different.
If the exit gate is open can we make it so killer can just immediately abandon to accept defeat? Same jist but I would also think this would be stupid. It's unsportsmanlike. I think the killer should have to ride out the end as well.
How is it fair that they've all abandoned and I'm only in the game with bots that I'm forced to finish out the game and can't leave to claim my win or the games not counted? Why is the killer forced to be the janitor and clean up? The games over after all. This is a double standard.
30 seconds is not harming player retention.Sure it does. The degree might be uncertain, but anytime you have a game element that is making people bored and they feel is pointless, its going to hurt. If you love DbD it probably doesn't affect you, but there's lots of players who are on the fence about DbD who are wondering why they aren't doing something else.
Also, if we want to compare with your example of ending the game faster that isn't quite comparable because we aren't talking about kneeling and getting the game over faster, we're talking about you immediately walking off the field, no hands shook, no gg, just insta dipping. If using your examples we didn't just kneel but they immediately just walked off the field and exited the stadium that would be very different.If we're comparing sports examples, and I know the community comes at this from a different perspective, this doesn't read like the survivors quitting the field. This sounds like the killer scored a touchdown to win the game and is insisting that everyone watch him spike the football and do an endzone dance. No, game's done, handshakes fine, but its not sportsmanlike to make the other team watch you celebrate.
If the exit gate is open can we make it so killer can just immediately abandon to accept defeat?Yes, absolutely, watching survivors teabag isn't part of the game, its again trying to make the other side watch as you spike the ball, its just the survivors doing it to the killer.
(Just to be clear: I'd put it into the game if I could. There are added difficulties because of lack of killer bots plus the doors being open and all the survivors being down is not exactly the same, so I have no idea what the time investment would be to put this in, but if we're just talking hypothetically I'd do it).
How is it fair that they've all abandoned and I'm only in the game with bots that I'm forced to finish out the game and can't leave to claim my win or the games not counted? Why is the killer forced to be the janitor and clean up?The killer has always been the janitor playing clean up in this scenario. As killer I also want this situation to end as quickly as it can.
The game not being counted is dumb. Everyone who advocated for survivors being able to quit did so fully expecting it would mean a loss/death.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4023012#Comment_4023012
For sure, idk why no one seems to care about this. It's allowed perpetual smurfing and bullying of players by game design. It's not just slugging either, you could apply this same scenario to any time the killer is allowed to abandon.
The core flaw in this design that's causing the problem is making a killer abandon a "neutral" rather than a "win". All of the criteria for when a killer is allowed to abandon is basically when he's only won. Like when all the remaining survivors are bots I'm not allowed to abandon and leave or it doesn't count as a win for me, even though it should be. Like the games already "over" at that point, which is why the survivors are allowed to leave early, but some reason that same rational doesn't apply to letting the killer leave or he's punished? Lol just what. Makes ZERO sense and makes the system feel very bias. So the normal killer player gets punished unless he plays janitor after the games over and the toxic killer is allowed to smurf all he wants and continue the toxicity.
Since there's no scenario where the killer can abandon unless he's already basically won, just make his abandon count as "wins"(because they are) instead of "neutral"(aka no mmr impact). This solves the entire problem. Now it doesn't punish normal killer and doesn't enable toxic ones.
I do find the abandon system flawed at concept though to be honest. Like it made sense when it was a tool to get out of "toxic" matches. That I completely understand and sounds good. However, realistically now abandoning has been allowed in so many scenarios that it's no longer for toxicity, it's just a "go next faster" button. This would be like me having a soccer game and as soon as there's like 10 minutes left in the game but my team is too far behind to win, instead of finishing the match out with good sportsmanship and shaking hands we just instantly walk off the field and head home mid match. It's just unsportsmanlike and would honestly be childish behavior..and that's how the game's actually designed. Just mind blowing to me. Finishing the dbd match out would cost them an extra like 30 seconds…we're not talking a long time here.
However, realistically now abandoning has been allowed in so many scenarios that it's no longer for toxicity, it's just a "go next faster" button. This would be like me having a soccer game and as soon as there's like 10 minutes left in the game but my team is too far behind to win, instead of finishing the match out with good sportsmanship and shaking hands we just instantly walk off the field and head home mid match. It's just unsportsmanlike and would honestly be childish behavior..and that's how the game'sactuallydesigned. Just mind blowing to me. Finishing the dbd match out would cost them an extra like 30 seconds…we're not talking a long time here.I don't want to sidetrack too much from the all important topic of telling BHVR none of us have any idea what they are talking about, but I'll also always defend the idea of a "go next faster" button being a good idea (in terms of mind blowing I've always been stunned how long it took them to get to it).
Soccer Example - In this scenario, you're still playing soccer. Whether the game is 20 to 0 or tied, you're still playing the game.
In DbD you're lying on the ground. There's really no game you are playing. The survivor has probably picked up their cell phone or alt tabbed to something else. There's nothing substantively different between it being a human at the computer, one who has gone to the bathroom, or a bot.
Counter Example - A good example to me is from American Football and the NFL. When a team scores a touchdown, they then get to kick an extra point or go for two. However (as of 2018), if the touchdown is scored after time has expired, and the extra point is meaningless (i.e. the game is now 20 to 7), it doesn't happen.
Even outside those extremes, in most sports the team that is winning tries to get the game over as quickly as possible (kneeling on the ball in American football, throwing the ball around in basketball, etc.) Better to speed up pointless things and move on.
Sportsmanship - My most recent sporting activity was an adult, indoor soccer league. If it became clear that the teams were extremely mismatched, we usually called the game, and traded players around. Having a balanced, enjoyable game was far more important than sticking out something that was one sided. If I'm winning a game, especially by a lot, I usually feel pretty embarrassed and bad and am just hoping for it to end as quickly as possible.
It's also worth noting there are many sports and leagues that do have mercy rules (which outside of professional play are generally good ideas). If the rules say 'here is when the game is or can be over', its not bad sportsmanship to recognize that.
An extra 30 seconds - Over thousands and thousands of games that many people will end up playing, it adds up. But there's a couple of other game design factors
1: It makes the end of the game boring. From a design perspective the best games have exciting ends (the last kill in team death match, a hectic fight over a control point, trying to push the cart a few more inches as time ticks down). DbD has too many times were the game just ends on an incredibly dull note.
2: It probably harms player retention. Ideally BHVR should want players to end a game, and think about getting right back into the next one. I know in the past when I was lying on the ground I wasn't getting excited for another game, I was probably thinking about what else I can do.
-
Nothing I say in the following post is meant to defend BHVR, because wow has it been confusing as of late, but hopefully to add some clarity:
@Leon_van_Straken said:
BHVR clearly stated that dc and abandoning games doesn´t affect MMR didn´t they?
Since you can abandon games where you get downed twice you can abandon so many games. Heck you even get the abandon mechanic if you are the last survivor (still healthy and hatch open, happend yesterday in my games)
And yes the rest of the games were slug fests and so on.
He dc´ed 2 times in total, cause he was left on hook and abandoned 7 times. After BHVR logic he shouldn´t lose MMR for these.
BHVR clearly stated that dc and abandoning games doesn´t affect MMR didn´t they?Balrog, who to my understanding doesn't meet what BHVR considers a Dev, said that abandons don't impact MMR.
Mandy, who is a dev, said that MMR and their internal stats track different things. This has not been clarified unfortunately. But, Mandy has said in the past MMR tracks complex factors, which to my understanding is not true, though it might depend on what your definition of complex is.
The 8.7.2 patch said that abandoning the match as a survivor when all other survivors were in the dying state would now be counted as a loss (instead of a draw).
-
BHVR's stated goal is that they don't want players thinking about MMR, but what they've done recently on communications has resulted in the exact opposite.
-
I really wish we had never gotten 9.2 PTB to see some bolder ideas or waited so many months into the quality of life to kind of get the obvious thing.
As some others have mentioned, also worried about what we'll actually have at the end of the PTB.
Going through the ideas
Tunneling - its an improvement, the unhooked should have more advantages. How much of a difference will it it make? We'll see.
Slugging - whatever, its going to be inconsequential the vast majority of the time. I'm worried soloq survivors will actually buy into the 'just leave them on the ground, they'll get up', not realizing the impact of a survivor being out of the match for so long.
Camping - we'll need to see it in action. Could be an improvement, could be much worse.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4022681#Comment_4022681
I'd assume the pushback is that even if you're not tunneling, you want the unhooker as a target if you hadn't found one yet. You also don't want them to silently unhook the moment you turn your back. That definitely lessens pressure, especially with fast healing.
That being said, I'd also like the delay. 5s would have been fine.
Knowing where the other survivor is - yeah, this is probably true, but this is such powerful meta game information that it seems strange that killers get it without even having to use a perk slot.
Unhook right after the hook - it would be risky because now the killer has a reason to turn and look behind them. I worry this will actually become more common, try to bait the killer into a tunnel with a strong looper who now has boosts, especially if you know they have DS.
But I saw lots of people really disliking the idea of messing with the UI. Which, their opinion, fair enough, I just didn't get it.
Thinking about the last PTB and the feedback - BHVR should have been more clear up front that something definitely was going to happen. No anti-tunnel, ever, wasn't very helpful if BHVR is absolutely set on something. I think if the discussion had instead been - some of this has to go through, what do you like the most or, if you hate the concept, what do you hate the least?' BHVR would have gotten more useful feedback (especially if they had clarified that the unique hook boosts were contingent on strong survivor boosts).
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4022690#Comment_4022690
Makes me wonder what they were banned for. I know some people had wild takes, but is that really bannable?
The post that leads to a ban is usually deleted, so unless you see the post that got someone removed you wouldn't know for sure (and actually repeating a post that led to a ban, or discussing an individual in particular, is also against forum rules).
I've had a few times in the past few years where I've gone to quote a post to reply to it only for the forum to tell me no such post exists (because it got removed).
-
@WriteByDaylight_ said:
I have to respectfully disagree with your perspective. As someone who has spent a great deal of time playing both sides, it’s clear that no genuine killer main would make the argument you’re presenting.
Dead by Daylight has, for the majority of its lifespan, leaned heavily toward the survivor side of balance. Much of the game’s design and ongoing adjustments have focused on keeping survivor win rates — particularly those of coordinated SWF groups — healthy enough to ensure retention. This has often come at the expense of killers, who have consistently had to adapt to stronger tools, faster generator speeds, and layers of second-chance mechanics.
Items such as flashlights, medkits, and Brand New Parts have long enabled survivors to bypass or outright negate killer pressure. When killers find themselves in matches where generators are completed in just a few minutes, tunneling becomes one of the few reliable methods of maintaining momentum. While it may not be an enjoyable strategy to face, it often arises from necessity rather than preference.
Furthermore, if a survivor is consistently being targeted and cannot create distance, extend chases, or coordinate with teammates for body blocks or rescues, that generally points to a skill or teamwork gap rather than an inherent flaw in game design. The strongest survivor teams rarely experience sustained tunneling precisely because they know how to disrupt it through coordination and counterplay.
Ultimately, the frustration surrounding tunneling would diminish significantly if generator progression and item strength were balanced more evenly across both sides. Until then, killers will continue to use the tools available to them — just as survivors do.
This argument comes up a lot, but there seems to be inherent logical flaw:
When killers find themselves in matches where generators are completed in just a few minutes, tunneling becomes one of the few reliable methods of maintaining momentum. While it may not be an enjoyable strategy to face, it often arises from necessity rather than preference.Furthermore, if a survivor is consistently being targeted and cannot create distance, extend chases, or coordinate with teammates for body blocks or rescues, that generally points to a skill or teamwork gap rather than an inherent flaw in game design. The strongest survivor teams rarely experience sustained tunneling precisely because they know how to disrupt it through coordination and counterplay.Basically - killers need this because strong survivors can get gens done quickly, but simultaneously its not a problem because strong survivors can counter it. How is it a necessary counter against good play if good players can also deal with it?
If strong survivors can counter it, but its one of the few choices available, the game has deeper flaws. As many people have pointed out if kill rates did actually see marked declines post the change, then the game could be changed in a healthier fashion. If this is truly the only way killers have a chance, killers should be hoping it gets deemphasized so that other strategies can actually be boosted.
Ultimately, the frustration surrounding tunneling would diminish significantly if generator progression and item strength were balanced more evenly across both sides.We've had that in the past. Weakening survivors, or buffing killers in other areas, just leads to more tunneling.
Until then, killers will continue to use the tools available to them — just as survivors do.Non-sequitur. The thread is about getting BHVR to make a change, not about how people should play.
-
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021913#Comment_4021913
For sure, it would have been the best way to implement anti-tunnel without any form of punishment. Maybe with a 5-10 second delay, to allow the survivor to get to a safe location.
I really don't get the backlash to this idea. To me it solved so many of the problems of the idea of killer just turning around and rushing hook. It would have had no impact on players not tunneling, nor even players who chased a survivor that went for the unhook. All it would have impacted where the proxy campers or the speed killers who plan to rush back to the hook the moment it happens.
-
In the long run he really doesn't seem to care much about the changes. He's spends a lot of time complaining about how the devs communicate, which, yeah, samsies.
Though its a survivor quality of life patch, so being somewhat survivor sided is what I would expect it to be. We'll see what happens with syringes/styptics though if we're talking overall balance.
As a few others mentioned, I liked the concept of the prior patch more, though it could have used some refinement.
I do think he, along with a lot of commenters, get the idea of the unique hook benefits wrong. If the killers are getting a sizable buff with every unique hook, then it needs to be accompanied by a sizable challenge to escape the penalties (6 hooks), or otherwise things would swing wildly out of balance.
Right now the survivor buff is very situational, if the killer is not tunneling it really doesn't do anything (other than the aura read, and we'll see what they do with that). Thus the hook benefit also needs to be relatively small.
-
@Filipino1490 said:
The tunneling, camping and slugging aren"t the only reason why people are quiting the game. Its also because gens are flying way to fast, the meta is stale and repetetive and the reason why killers are tunneling, camping and slugging is because those are strategies to win And IT DOESN"T ALWAYS MEAN THAT KILLERS ARE ######### JUST BECAUSE OF IT. Killers for example are slugging because cause of the meta or sabo team(sabo teams aren"t often but still) if generators are going to fast then why can"t killers slug? To be clear the upcoming changes for them aren"t that bad But like for killers getting only bloodlust effect and more bloodpoints? like WHY? WHY CAN"T THEY HAVE MORE JUST LIKE IN THE LAST PTB WITHOUT THE PUNISHMENT LIKE WHERE COULD HAVE BASEKIT BARBECUE AND CHILLIE OR POP, OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT!? I hate to say it but i feel like that you BHVR are survivor sided. plus in the livestream when you were talking about the maps. the gideon meat plant you had no idea like it is the map with the most slugging. Its becuase its litterally an pallet factory like why can"t we have less pallets but more vaults? And one more thing PLS DO SOMETHING TO THE SURVIVOR META LIKE PERKS ADDONS, ITEMS ETC. (keys, maps, fog viles, flashlights, medkits and toolboxes are fine without addons but the addons need some changes and we can"t forget that there is Genrushing that isn"t capped (the same with healing) and also the stake out and hyperfocus meta. Overall playing killers right now are misserable and if the changes from ptb hits live then its gonna be even worse then ever before.
And IT DOESN"T ALWAYS MEAN THAT KILLERS ARE ######### JUST BECAUSE OF IT.Sure, but that's true of everything that has ever been nerfed. Just because something is overall a problem for a game does not mean every individual who uses it is a problem.
But like for killers getting only bloodlust effect and more bloodpoints? like WHY?60% kill rate target which, according to their latest worldwide stats, they are slightly above.
WHY CAN"T THEY HAVE MORE JUST LIKE IN THE LAST PTB WITHOUT THE PUNISHMENT LIKE WHERE COULD HAVE BASEKIT BARBECUE AND CHILLIE OR POP, OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT!?Because the punishment went hand in hand with the buffs, which no one seemed to get. The more survivors get, the more killers do, works in reverse as well.
I hate to say it but i feel like that you BHVR are survivor sided.As mentioned, they have a 60% KR target. If they were survivor sided that would never stay true.
And one more thing PLS DO SOMETHING TO THE SURVIVOR META LIKE PERKS ADDONS, ITEMS ETC. (keys, maps, fog vilesThe strongest way to use keys was recently nerfed.
And fog vials? The speed at which those were nerfs was like BHVR had come up with their own version of a speed run.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4022574#Comment_4022574
I have four possible theories
So, I feel like #1 (simple) is at least the most plausible. Although it's a bit baffling that they would release both abandons and stat tracker so close together without consciously considering the outcome.
Yet, it's not unheard of to think that the "right hand isn't aware of what the left hand is doing", especially if they're different teams working on those different projects.
If it's a communication issue, or a technical limitation those are explanations. And, the simplest answer is usually correct.
That said, if anyone from a marketing standpoint looked at this, then it's also possible that #2 is an option. Telling everyone collectively "look how good you are at the game" can help mitigate subconsciously how people perceive things. It's also dishonest, assuming of course that this was a conscious decision to basically manipulate the data.
The real issue here is that the data we have isn't reflecting the player experience. So why is that the case? Even if I have to see a third option of escapes, deaths, or disconnect/abandons that would at least be transparent.
But they should never be telling players that their escape rate is 60%, (simply because we aren't counting half of your games tonight).
And, (tin foil hat time), especially with this community, if I had the goal of "driving engagement", all I would have to do is simultaneously tell killers they have an 80%+ kill rate, and survivors that they have a 60%+ escape rate, and then stand back and watch the community feed off of that to fuel outrage.
And, (tin foil hat time), especially with this community, if I had the goal of "driving engagement",One of the reason I think this is more true than I probably would have in the past, is how they handled the 9.2 PTB. We first got an incomplete drop of information of what was going to happen on a Friday, so we could all fight it out over the weekend with guesswork. It definitely drove engagement, while also meaning most of the comments would go unnoticed because of the weekend (which, incidentally, is true about this as well).
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4022574#Comment_4022574
I personally think it's a mixture of things.
I can believe this was a coding issue, but it's been a minute since the stat page and the abandon feature were introduced. If it's hard to fix, close the stat page until it can be. At the very least, but a big, loud banner that says the stats are inaccurate.
But instead of doing that, they're pushing the page in the new survey. They've also been awfully quiet in regards to our inquiries. Many people use this page as their only reference, and people in the forum are constantly dropping thier survivor stats as an example of how easy survivor is. BHVR can see this is how they're being used. It's hard not to think it's nefarious at this point.
They've also been awfully quiet in regards to our inquiries.I think about it too much, but I'm always interested in what they stay quiet about.
An example is all the talk about the exit survey this week. We got a pretty quick 'actually, this is where we get the data from' post.
Did we get one updating that the original screenshots that got posted where actually out of date and the survey was a little different? No
Did we get an explanation of how much impact this survey has in relation to other feedback? No
Did we get actual numbers on how many people chose this? No
Explanation of why they chose the options they did? No, that was for the community to argue out
Now, I'm of the belief that BHVR trying to make detailed responses to every complaint that arises on the forums would be a waste of their time. But when multiple threads are popping up over an issue that could hypothetically have been solved with something like 'hey, when we said we saw this as a reason in the livestream, that was just meant to drive home the importance, not imply that we didn't have lots of other feedback and data leading to this conclusion' and most people would have moved on.
The abandon system feels like it is in the same place. Every time they've ever made a comment on it, things have blown up, but they've avoided making any statement (that I've seen) over why they did it the way they did.
-
I do tend to hate comments that just amount to 'this is handholding for survivors', because I agree with the OP that the things the killer gets are absolutely handholding.
Now, does this handholding lead to a better game? Absolutely. We should be discussing what leads to the best game, not some tag line to avoid argument.
-
@FrankTheTank said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4022505#Comment_4022505
Agree 100%. The way I am interpreting this now is that BHVR has their own internal data for balancing purposes, but that’s not what is used for the player stat tracker.
I’m sorry, but….WHY?? This seems simply crazy to me. Why would BHVR give the players a separate set of data to use that they know is inaccurate due to the significant percentage of matches that have abandons? I am having trouble comprehending the logic behind this decision.
The way I am interpreting this now is that BHVR has their own internal data for balancing purposes, but that’s not what is used for the player stat tracker.That's known, though BHVR doesn't do a good job explaining it. They have discussed that while they have simple data they track and report (i.e. kill rates), they also follow things like splits of 0k, 1k, 2k, etc, game length, and lots of other data.
Why would BHVR give the players a separate set of data to use that they know is inaccurate due to the significant percentage of matches that have abandons?I have four possible theories
1: The simple - when they coded the stat tracker for individuals, it was set up without a parameter for abandons, so it just calculates abandons the same way it does DCs.
To me that is a massive oversight, though at least its a reason.
2: The deceptive - by excluding abandons, they give survivors an inflated sense of how frequently they escape, making them feel better about their performance and thus the game.
3: The conspiracy theory - everyone has conspiracy theories about BHVR it seems, mine is that they intentionally leave themselves some 'low hanging fruit'. Lots of changes to DbD are inevitably going to be controversial, so they leave some clear wins. Past examples to me of this are improvements to the bloodweb, but another example would be a 'hey, we just improved the stats' tracker!' to give themselves a 'good job' from the community.
4: They actually think its what should happen - basically, whoever set this up believes that people think of abandons as games that didn't happen. This by far the most illogical to me. Which is saying something, I would far rather believe there was a massive oversight or actual devious behavior than that a human being thought 'well, obviously abandons shouldn't count'.