crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4022302#Comment_4022302
Again, I agree some killers need buffs. But that's a slow, lengthy process. How long do survivors need to wait for a little help? If they get that help, we'll have a clearer picture of where things stand and more targeted adjustments can follow.
The forum discontent goes in waves. We're in a killer wave right now. We'll be in a survivor when this inevitably gets cancelled or nerfed. What I've noticed, overall, is survivors mostly feeling like beaten dogs that feed other's egos, and killers feeling like persecuted victims who deserve the world. I get it, because I also feel these things occasionally. I'll lose 10 survivor matches in a row, many to cheese tactics, and I'll still ready up yet again even though I feel like crap, because I'm used to being a punching bag. On the flipside, I've been winning a lot as killler lately and I'm starting to feel that nasty entitlement. I played 10 killer matches the other day. Eight were 4ks, one was a 2k, and one a 0k. I had a brief but severe crash out about that 0k that was totally unlike me, despite wining almost all night. Then I sat back and thought, "ah, so this is the problem." Killer is easier to win but it's more stressful, which is why I think the emotional responses from killer players are so much more intense, hence all these I QUITs we're seeing, even over something as minor as pallets. I think most of the survivors who leave will quietly drift away. That's what I've seen with my own friends, who I'm losing rapidly.
I completely disagree about perks though. You shouldn't have to devote your build to someone potentially slugging everyone. If you could see that you're going against an Oni or Twins then it might be different. As killer, I can see if survivors have flashlights and bring Lightborn. Survivors lack that info. And I don't need any particular build as killler just to be allowed to play, or to even have hope.
I'll lose 10 survivor matches in a row, many to cheese tactics, and I'll still ready up yet again even though I feel like crap, because I'm used to being a punching bag. On the flipside, I've been winning a lot as killler lately and I'm starting to feel that nasty entitlement.I do think this will be one of the hardest things about making any significant change. There have become built in expectations that might be impossible to shift.
-
There are some decisions that BHVR makes that are so baffling that I would love nothing more than to hear their logic process at how they arrived at their conclusion.
It should be simple: you abandon, you lose (i.e. dead, or if killer, they escape).
I don't think I've seen anyone ever want anything else (except perhaps the idea of killer abandoning if two survivors are in extended hide mode). I would love to know how, even though I think 99% of players would have done the opposite, they ended up on this.
-
@ImperatorHaze said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021536#Comment_4021536
That’s a fair point — the exit survey’s main goal is definitely to understand why players quit, not to gather broad gameplay feedback. I don’t disagree with that purpose. My point was more about how contextual questions could make the survey results more insightful.
For example, if a large portion of players select “killer imbalance” as their reason for quitting, it would be helpful to know which killers or what kind of imbalance they’re referring to. That extra layer of detail could help Behaviour prioritize fixes more effectively rather than just identifying the surface-level reason.
I completely understand why BHVR included questions based on the most frequent quit reasons — like issues survivors have raised — and it makes sense that those would appear. I just think expanding that approach slightly to cover both perspectives (killers and survivors) would paint a more complete picture of why players are leaving and how both sides are being affected.
In the end, gathering exit data is valuable, but pairing it with balanced context could help drive better, more targeted updates for the whole community.
I just think expanding that approach slightly to cover both perspectives (killers and survivors) would paint a more complete picture of why players are leaving and how both sides are being affected.I said this elsewhere, but, if BHVR is missing any reasons from the survey, they are missing important information. That could be a general reason, a different survivor reason, or a killer.
But, if they add too many options, and people don't take it, its also a failure.
There's a challenge to doing a poll like this in an asym (well there's a challenge to doing any poll, asym makes it harder). Not only do survivors outnumber killers 4 to 1 (or alternatively people play 4 times survivors as much as they do killer), but those killer experiences are split between very different killers. People who love stealth killers and those who love ranged killers are going to have different feedback. There's really no issue on the killer side that rises to the consistency of tunneling in complaints, and some of the biggest ones BHVR is almost certainly never going to touch (SWFs).
-
@Geist said:
I am trying to remember the ideas, projects, and powers that BHVR put into DBD, that sounded good on paper but in reality they were rubbish. If anyone else remembers other cases please let me know.
1.) (More) Complex Killer Counterplay
Prime examples include The Singularity and The Xenomorph.
The idea of Survivor counterplay has been a part of this game since the beginning with The Trapper. We can see as time goes on we see more interesting interactions between Killers and Survivors. The Idea of counterplay is a good one, players are more engaged, there are more things you can do besides repairing, this makes the game overall more interesting. Where this stops being a good idea is when the counterplay is too strong or complex. Take the singularity for example, a strong teleportation power that can be used aggressively tempered by an item the survivors can use to make your power essentially useless.
Then there is The Xenomorph a killer with a ranged attack, a cool fast travel with their tunnels, and some minor stealth(when crawling the killer is lower to the ground and terror radius shrinks sightly). The Survivors counterplay are the flame turrets which will burn the killer knocking the killer out of their power, slightly hinder the Xenomorph, and beep faster as the killer approaches the flame turret. So with one item the survivors can delete your minor stealth buff, ruin your power and slow you down(I could go on a 5 hour rant about how horribly the xenomorph has brought into the game, but now is not the time)
The end result of these powers, is that against new players the killers are utterly overpowered and against good players they go from "The Killer" to "The Harmless". Now both have them have received quality of life and are decent, even good now. In any case they are much better now than their past feeble selves. But the problem still remains against good players who know what the counterplay is the killers aren't that threatening. If you buff the counterplay items to help the beginners the killers are trash at every level of play, if you nerf the items the killers are unstoppable.
Do I have any ideas how to fix this? No not really I don't even know where to start. The idea of the strong power and strong counterplay is baked into their powers and to fix this would probably require an entire rework. Seeing how long it's taking them to rework The Sk*** Mer***** "Rework", a single rework of these killer powers could take years. All we can do is hope the developers learn to never ever try to create a new killer with a complex conterplay ever again.
2.) Made for This and Dead Hard
These are the two most infamous survivor perks that make killers experience PTSD flashbacks to uncatchable survivors and the seemingly nonstop endurance status effects on every survivors. But currently they are ok at the moment, and dead hard specifically is a shadow of its former self(which is a good thing make no mistake).
Lets start with dead hard, when it was introduced it had very simple and strong effect, press a button and you will dash forward, and gain endurance. Now that was really strong with almost no downsides other than a cooldown after you use it. After a the exhaustion status effect was introduced dead hard was worked into an exhaustion perk but it was still very strong. It stayed like this for many years until patch 6.7 I believe, where dead hard was reworked where you have to unhook someone or yourself, making the powerful perk activate when you save your teammates which encourages players to be more active with helping your teammates.
Then there is Made For This a survivor perk that at the beginning sounded subpar but turned out to be a menace of a perk that reshaped meta builds for almost a year. Its effect was very simple whenever you are injured and not exhausted you gain a 3% speed boost. The issue was that the speed boost was permanent as long as you were injured, and 3% speed is just fast enough to make it to a new loop/pallet against most killers. An additional downside is that this perk also made subtle hackers harder to reveal in game. Currently the perk was reworked to only grant the speed boost when you are deep wounded which is much better as it reward players who correctly use the nerfed dead hard to take time their ability to absorb an extra hit from the killer. Overall the perks are strong together, dead hard is still useful and just requires an extra step, and Made For This only really activates on successful dead hards, legion, deathslinger, and ghoul attacks/abilities.
3.) The Previous and Upcoming PTB and the Anti Slugging System
Do I really need to say more?
Fine, fine, I will explain it. The basic idea for the upcoming PTB is that when a survivor is slugged for 120 seconds then they can get back up. You can recover faster if more people are downed on the ground. In a perfect world I truly believe that you can make a basekit recovery from the crawling state that pleases everyone. But this is NOT a perfect world and the developers have a history of balancing with a sledgehammer not a scalpel. I believe at this current point in time it is best to leave the ability to pick yourself up attached to perks, and let the developers think more about this massive change that will dramatically alter the state of the game, possibly for the worse.
4.) The Sk*** Mer***** "Rework"
I do not need to explain this situation, the developers nerfed a killer, made her unplayable, and then have the gall to say that they want to CANCEL her rework to move the developers to other projects. Now allow me to make a statement on behalf of the people who enjoyed playing Sk*** Mer***** and her add ons before/during/after your 3 billion reworks, you dug this hole and now you are going to fix it, and this attempt to escape and avoid responsibility for the mess you made is just pathetic. I completely understand that the rework with the drone crash and amp projectile will take a while but it sounds really fun and I actually am looking forward to seeing the end result even though I have to wait a bit longer(as I personally hate laser tagging mechanic and it just doesn't feel like the juice is worth the squeeze, sorry PixelBush)
1: Xenomorph et al - As an asym, DbD is always going to have difficulty putting in gameplay elements that create equal degrees of difficulty for both sides. Things like turrets or Sadako tapes are primarily dependent on the survivor, as they get better the killer is going to have a noticeable drop in power. This is why 'dash slop' seems to be becoming so common, it does create equal skill progression and counterplay on both sides.
I'm personally in favor of having some unique killers, even if they fall off at higher MMRs.
2: There've been a lot of these. The Overbrine meta that was supposed to cut down on tunneling for example. Flashbangs through the killer model. Sometimes they introduce perks or playstyles that end up being way too strong.
3: PTB - testing things out and them failing is not inherently wrong. That's part of testing, if you're afraid to test possibilities you won't move forward.
Personally I don't think any form of anti-slugging is actually needed, but its a common complaint, and 120 seconds is rarely going to have an impact.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021999#Comment_4021999
The truth is a cop-out answer, apparently. Looping certainly isn't the Survivor equivalent of tunneling. You'd need something else. Closest approximation, which again isn't going to be 1:1 since the roles are functionally different games, is ironically Seal Team Six SWF with toolboxes. It stacks the odds in your favor on the off chance that you get a really good Killer. But, for 99% of games, you just roll them. Considering how much you rant and rail against those pesky Seal Team Six SWFs you apparently get in 90% of your matches, seems like you should be against it.
Now, what would we say to a Survivor who insists they need to bring map offerings, a full SWF and genrushing perks/toolboxes in order to stand a chance in 90% of their games? Well, we'd tell them that's not really true.
Tunneling will stay because BHVR fears Killer players, which is ironic because it used to be the other way around when I was starting out. Now that BHVR has given the green light to continue tunneling, there's nothing anyone can do about it. There is a counter to tunneling, of course. You need to play in a SWF or accept that you just aren't going to win often, unless the Killer is very bad compared to whomever they are chasing.
Now, we'll see more Killer mains carried by tunneling without any skill and more Survivors who only know how to rush gens. Absolutely sad to see the role I invested so much time into become a mockery of itself, rewarding low-skill tactics and punishing anyone who tries to be different. Tunneling is a plague on the game that is preventing Killers from being in a healthier spot, and I wish more people saw that.
Now, what would we say to a Survivor who insists they need to bring map offerings, a full SWF and genrushing perks/toolboxes in order to stand a chance in 90% of their games? Well, we'd tell them that's not really true.I've been thinking about how we don't see posts like this.
'You want to nerf syringes? You don't get what its like to be high MMR hitting a sweating Blight. You need a syringe to just stand a chance!'
Sure we get the 'if BHVR goes through with this, all the survivors will quit' type posts, but I don't recall the same 'this is needed because I'm mythic MMR and anyone who disagrees with me must not be.'
-
@Leon_van_Straken said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021878#Comment_4021878
I will give you right. It is not fair how I made my question. But I am still curious how a good game should look like.
First one says it should be a close game
Second one says it should be a game with 8 hooks before someone dies.
One wants a fast paced game the other a stealthy one.
I just wanted opinions so you can discuss with me. Open my eyes or see flaws someone else didnt think off.
Thats why I said okay if tunneling, slugging and camping are removed what is left.
I got examples from @Firellius that Hit and Run and 3 Gening is still an option. But I don´t think that if the Meta goes that way survivors would be happy.
But if these playstyles are ######### too and let Survivors deinstall the game, where is the line?
We all kmow that people are never happy and I am afraid that If you give the children candy it wants more.
It feels a bit like the time as Skullmerchant got nuked. After BHVR nuked her because the complains got to loud it was okay for a time. Then some people on twitter and this forum demanded lets give ghoul the Skullmerchant treatment and BHVR will nuke him. Or an example for the other Side lets complain about Fog vials till BHVR nukes them.I think too that a good anti Tunnel or Anti Slug should exist. But when we start to nerf these "Strategies/Cheap Tactics" where do we stop? Is a dead survivor at four hooks tunneling? Or only at 3 hooks? Is tunneling two survivors out at hook 5 and 6 enough to nerf tunneling more?
Thats why I asked, what is in your opinion a good survivor game? Cause I can´t know that. I try to recognize patterns here and I am really afraid that this game will not be balanced at all but just the side which is crying louder gets their feet kissed.
First one says it should be a close gameSecond one says it should be a game with 8 hooks before someone dies.One wants a fast paced game the other a stealthy one.But that's normal, not just for this game, but any game (or entertainment activity really).
Most of the feedback BHVR takes is 'do you enjoy this', not 'how would you the customer fix it?' (again, this is pretty normal). For two main reasons
1: There is a finite amount of things that already exist, and infinite amount of nuanced possible paths that could be taken.
2: We are all experts on whether we are having fun or not, but whether future change will be fun or not is an educated guess.
If it was solely up to me I'd strip entire core concepts out of the game. If it was just anti-tunnel, I really liked the idea of hiding the unhook, I would have been fine with just that and see what happens, but lots of people seemed to dislike that concept.
Things like 'will X work to reduce Y', or 'how would the 9.2 PTB changes have impacted kill rates' are much more objective discussions to have. Beyond that, people answered broadly what they are looking for - the answers are usually the same for both sides, a sense of agency, engagement, and feeling like their choices are meaningful.
But if these playstyles are ######### too and let Survivors deinstall the game, where is the line?Well, you do what BHVR is doing even if people argue over whether they are executing it well. You try to find out what is preventing your product from being better, you think of ways to address it, then you run it past your players to see how they respond (there's a lot of smaller steps along the lines but I'm trying to summarize). If they respond negatively, you go back a step and work on modifying your idea.
But when we start to nerf these "Strategies/Cheap Tactics" where do we stop?Slippery slope fallacy.
People are always going to complain. Again, that's perfectly normal. Take your examples about the Skull Merchant / Ghoul / Fog Vial. Well each of those was dealt with in very different ways (and each person has differing opinions on whether they took the right approach with each). There's no overall good / bad, each issue would have to be discussed on its own.
Is a dead survivor at four hooks tunneling? Or only at 3 hooks? Is tunneling two survivors out at hook 5 and 6 enough to nerf tunneling more?BHVR could clear up their line on tunneling, but the general issue faces a lot of subjective questions.
Do you want to eliminate tunneling?
Do you want to eliminate problematic tunneling?
Do you want tunneling to just be harder?
Do you want tunneling to be an option, but it to not be as impactful?
Do you want tunneling to be dealt with by perks?
Not only are people going to differ on the goal, they are going to differ on how they'd accomplish the goal.
-
@Leon_van_Straken said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021849#Comment_4021849
If all things survivor have would be trashed and still someone says to me "They are to strong, boring, or whatever I would ask them what they want survivors to do. Standing there like scared chickens? If they say "Yes thats exactly what I want" I would ask them if he wants a competitive game or a farming sim.
Belive me or not I am a Survivor main which sometimes plays Michael or Chucky (whatever the difference between them is thx bhvr for that…) and I want a fun game for both sides.
I don´t want the blight to rush screaming back to my hook the second my feet touch the grass, I don´t want to be slugged for 4 minutes while the Killer is searching for the last mate which is hiding. But I don´t want the feeling of "I can waste every pallet on the map and know after all gens are done i can still throw 10 more."
I simply had the question. "IF" and i want to have the focus on the IF because it is a theoretical question. IF all things survivor say is unfun, cheap or unskilled would be bannished from the game (which many players on this forum do) what would be the playstyle for the killer players.
I think that some of the tunneling, slugging or camping is part of the game we all play. But if I ask how much is okay or when is it okay I get downvoted but not a single answer.
But why I don´t get an answer? Do survivors really want a bot running behind them looping for 5 gens and clippfarm? Or is there a vision?
I want to go away from the us vs them and ask openly to the other side. What do you want?
I simply had the question. "IF" and i want to have the focus on the IF because it is a theoretical question. IF all things survivor say is unfun, cheap or unskilled would be bannished from the game (which many players on this forum do) what would be the playstyle for the killer players.There's three issues here: poisoning the well, strawman, and presuming the conclusion.
Poisoning the well: You're starting from the premise of - 'you're unreasonable, please clarify how unreasonable are you?' You're going back and forth on this being a hypothetical vs being a meaningful game discussion. You don't have a person that you are responding to, its the starting point for where you are labeling the side unreasonable which leads to -
Strawman: You aren't responding to a person. No person said they wanted all of these removed (I'm not sure if anyone said they want any of these things removed entirely, so much as balanced). You're taking complaints from different individuals, going to an extreme, and lumping together to form a new entity you are arguing with (i.e. the strawman). Each individual is going to have their own nuanced complaints and thoughts about the game, which leads to -
Presuming the conclusion: You seem to be looking for an answer that is singular. 'I the survivor want the killer to play in X fashion'. But your presumption actually eliminates the answer others have given you - they don't just want one thing, in fact that is what they are trying to pull the game away from is singular tactics (i.e. tunneling, 3 genning from the starting, facecamping). This is why despite @Firellius giving you a very clear answer, you say he dodged question, because you'd already constructed the form of the answer that you wanted.
-
@supersonic853 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021839#Comment_4021839
Yeah but to say anything about killer issues you had to post them in the area below and bhvr had to actually read them. Thats harder I guess than just clicking a button and bhvr pulling up a data spreadsheet saying "which one of these was picked the most" of course thats gonna win over bhvr having to manually read each killer player putting it in the text bar in the survey below. Because I doubt bhvr even read half of them. They just did the spreadsheet stats and that happened to win. Because of course it did lol. They only counted for that part. So if they wanted to be truly accurate. They woulda put killer usual issues in there as well and counted them on their spreadsheet. But they didnt.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/BTL45M43IDGH/1000012409.jpg
Trust me I dont like to say biased either. But this sounds like they are.
They just did the spreadsheet stats and that happened to win. Because of course it did lol. They only counted for that part.It wasn't a vote. Nothing won. People could choose as many as applied. BHVR didn't even say this was the top chosen reason, they said it was consistently in the top three to five reasons chosen.
If a lot of players selected 'excessive tunneling' and a lot of players selected 'too many cheats', you have to deal with both. It doesn't matter what option "won", if a significant portion of your playerbase is quitting over the same reason, you need to explore ways you could solve it (which gets into lot more nuanced portions depending on the issue).
But like I've been saying, if killers would like their obvious issues to be addressed extremely slowly by this survey, have at it.
Edit to add because the bottom part either didn't load for me or I missed it:
Trust me I dont like to say biased either. But this sounds like they are.Did they respond to the issue when survivors complained about it repeatedly on social media?
Did they address it after it was brought up on other surveys?
Did they even address it when it became an issue or only when it consistently was repeated as an issue by players uninstalling the game?
When they finally tried their first attempt at addressing it, did they only listen to survivor voices?
Yeah, it sounds like they are biased. It sounds more like they are saying 'we made absolutely sure this was an issue before actually addressing it in a way we haven't for any other issue'.
-
@Leon_van_Straken said:
It is part of a discussion that I give you my opinion on your arguments.
I ask a question (Which playstyles make this game fun?)
You give me the answer (Hit and run and 3 Gening is viable)
I ask again (Thats what is fun for you and give examples why I think it will be not fun if these are playstyles which are enabled.)
I want an answer to my question ofcourse, because I like this game and I don´t want that survivors nor Killers are unhappy with it. So let me give you examples of playstyles and why they are disliked by me and many others.
Endgame builds: Personally I don´t fall oftern for them since I run counterforce in most of my matches and destroy totems so that noed is no problem which is most of the time a staple perk for these builds. The Problem is that with perks like remember me it is important to tunnel the obsession out and there is the tunneling problem again…
Playing on Devour Hope: I kinda like this builds myself. you don´t need to tunnel and you can´t camp if you want an effect from the perk. The big problem is if these build would become meta everyone would just hunt the totems down and you are completly perkless.
These would be two playstyles but they aren´t very consistent.
But you started with an extreme (all the killer strategies being eliminated) and are trying to work back from that to a more neutral discussion, that kind of poisons the well.
If I started off with 'when loops are eliminated, pallets are eliminated, items are trashed, healing is impossible, what do killers expect survivors to do' - its starting at such an extreme that then getting healthy response is very difficult.
Anyway, I think Firellius answers you here:
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021815#Comment_4021815
There is no singular desired playstyle. There's multiple ways you can play that survivors enjoy going up against.
Just not tunnelling, slugging, camping, or a 60-minute lock-out.
There is no singular desired playstyles.
I want, both as survivor and killer, an adaptive game. Were every game has its unique differences and its not just a repeat of what has happened before.
The worst offender of this, in my opinion, was the face camping Bubba. People would respond with 'just do gens and leave'. But there was no point to playing a game like that.
3 genning merchant was the most common community complaint and its a good one. Even if you had a plan to take it down, it was like doing a spreadsheet, not playing a game.
Tunneling is another extreme. Its the optimal strategy. So if you hit tunneling its like 'okay, we wait to the last second to unhook, body block, and do gens'. The best games of DbD, on either side, create scenarios were it is extremely unclear what the right play is (its also the reason I think the game has survived so long in comparison to its competitors).
So I want basically all of those aspects to be part of the game. Personally, I don't think even tunneling should be totally out of the question but it should come with heavy costs.
And this isn't even unique to survivor, its the same with killer.
Survivors should be able to loop. Does that mean some loops have been too strong? Of course.
Survivors should be able to do gen focused builds. Does that some builds have been too strong? Of course.
Survivors should be able to heal? Does that mean some healing builds have been too strong? Again, of course they have.
Anyway, I hope that is clear, you're asking what the desired play style is. There isn't one, on either side, but some styles do become too strong and/or boring/repetitive and need to be addressed. There's no overarching rule you can put in place, each game element needs to be discussed on its own.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021669#Comment_4021669
The survey was invalid because it wasn't properly representing both sides of the game.
Perchance you didn't see the post above: I agree! Let's not treat changes to killer issues as valid until they've been verified by the same type of survey. For example, we have an upcoming nerf to syringes and styptics. Now I think there is ample evidence that killers don't like these, and BHVR must have data on them for balance purposes, but let's throw it on the exit survey for a few years to be sure!
More seriously:
Adding one question, even if it is a question they should be asking, would change nothing about tunneling and camping data they received. It wasn't a vote and people seem to be confusing those concepts.
-
@Abbzy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021555#Comment_4021555
That patch 9.2.0 wasnt worse in ideas it was just overdone and all it nneded was to took it and shape it so something solid which wouldnt destroy either side would came live but all they did was just scrape the tunneling punishments (which were wrongly done becasue they should aim for hardcore tunneling on 4-5 gens like the one you see in DBD tournaments but instead punished even trapper on 1 gen left who hooked one guy two times in row who just stepped into his trap, not three times in the row thats tunneling that should be punished) and killer uniqe hook bunuses just got scraped and all we get is more blood points (which wont solve or change a thing and should be implemented long time before as some early stages to discourage people from tunneling early on) and bloodlast (which is even worse than haste becasue you will loose it if you use killers power, break pallet or wall or start chase with survivor so its just good for few killers that have power for chase only and no mobility,stealth or trap power like slinger,legion, maybe huntress but many killers wont benefit from it from blight to ghostface which is huge number of killers and many of them arent even mediocre killers but weaker ones that should get stronger benefits in first place).
The endgame part with antitunnel is now normal so no more haste with endurance for 30 seconds that was busted, antislug isnt that overtuned but still hardcore nerf for oni or twins and I didnt saw any news about their changes because of this change to their power to not making playing them worse because their main desing of their powers is just slugging when they can and than nothing more. Antitunnel changes are same exept the part where survivors had no collision which was more problematic than it should be and didnt stop forced bodyblocks just make them still posible and more like using flashbang inside killers model so he cant counter it even if he has wall infront of him etc.
Its just onesided "handholding" patch for survivor side that wont solve anything just forces you to play more dirty and sweaty from the start or pick stronger killers nothing more will change. They could do it better than this and even from their steam they didnt even said whats tunneling from their point of viev they just trying to balance the game from data which was back kere in history and it didnt went well but Im more surprised each time they are doing same mistakes over and over.
Last thing insulting pictures with problematic stuff like tunneling and sluging with merchant and not trapper (its insult not because its joke but depends who makes this joke about who and from history like they like and treated merchant this just makes it insulting). Antifacecamp changes that are just making huge problem on many indoor twofloor maps like rpd or gideon for sure not to mention untill all gens are done killers can face camp for long time. Merchant news which are few buffs for us to stop wanting solid rework or power up for her as compensation for her butchery.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHplLL6gfPE
This video gets it all and has points that arent easy to take it lighty.
This video gets it all and has points that arent easy to take it lighty.The video premise has 2 huge flaws: the first is in presuming that BHVR is simply data driven above all else. They take data into consideration, but its far from the only thing they are looking at. Just a couple of quick examples:
1: If it was, not only would the first PTB testing these changes have actually gone through, something would have been done a long time ago.
2: They wouldn't be worried about providing compensation to killers.
3: We wouldn't have perks like OTR being nerfed with explanations for weaponization, there would just be a simple number of the perk overperforming.
4: Nurse would get buffed, but BHVR has explained how they recognize she is the strongest even when the numbers don't show that (literally in there data posts they will talk about numbers being important, but not telling the whole story).
The second issue: BHVR isn't factoring in killers in their feedback and its going to be dominated by survivors outnumbering them is also incorrect: if that was true, we wouldn't have a 60% KR. Survivors have always outnumbered killers and BHVR has always done surveys, if that was true it actually would have happened.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021641#Comment_4021641
Wrong!
Both sides of the game should have their most popular complaints on the survey.
Wrong!! (does that make my argument better?)
Anyway, because I think arguments actually need reasons and not just explanation marks, I'll continue
1: If its known as the most popular complaint, why do you need an additional survey for it? As I said in the post, if we're truly being fair, killers should wait around for years for this survey to verify what was being said everywhere else before any action is taken.
2: You've gone from arguing a few days of the last PTB was plenty of data, to saying data is not valid because of 22 questions there is one that leans toward the survivor experience more than the killer.
3: You continue to insist that the game is made up of two sides of players when that is not even close to what the survey is doing, nor do you have any evidence that is even what the player base is made of (compared to players who play both sides).
4: You have no evidence or argument that there is a killer complaint anywhere close to the popularity of camping and tunneling.
-
@BorisDDAA said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021541#Comment_4021541
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/8FK5DVESXQGF/desktop-screenshot-2025-10-29-19-15-56-75.png
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/OZS7K6T2FVIK/desktop-screenshot-2025-10-29-19-16-18-53.png
(I did it now)
Thanks, looks like some things have been moved around that could be randomized. I've spent so much time on this, let's dive into the differences-
'Character perks are unbalanced' has been split into survivor and killer options (so we have the option for each, I'm sure complaints will die down)
None of the above and clearing storage space get more clearly separated.
'Too many bugs and cheats' has been split into two options.
The collecting currencies choice has disappeared, though I think this has been changed to 'the progression feels too tedious'
The introduction of new features has been removed
'Player communications are unfriendly' got 'in game' added to it for clarity.
Changes to existing features has been removed
Verifying files was made its own in step 1 (though I feel like I saw that might have been true before, in which case it would have been redundant)
-
So a couple of things that had two parts got split into their own section, some options got separated for clarity. But we have a survivor and killer option, so I guess the survey must be good now.
-
@Mr_K said:
I like to know how one gets the chance to fill out this survey. When you uninstall on Steam? I've never seen that with other games. Is it uninstalling on other platforms? Or does the person have to seek out this survey? If so, how do we know they uninstall or even had it installed to begin with?
I've been tempted to uninstall just to see if it pops up, but how are we going to argue on the forums if it ends up being a completely different survey?
I do find it funny that no one has actually verified the issue, though I'm part of the problem on that.
-
@ImperatorHaze said:
Regardless of the role you play, when a game relies on two opposing sides, it’s important to gather feedback from both perspectives. The survey would have been more effective if it included some of the common complaints about killers to better understand how widespread those issues are among players.
As someone who plays both roles, I see the challenges from each side. From the survivor’s perspective, most issues arise with specific killers rather than the core mechanics. On the killer side, however, certain base kits present clear imbalances, while survivors feel more consistent overall.
I believe targeted adjustments should be made—buffing underpowered killers and rebalancing those that are overperforming—to bring more fairness and depth to the gameplay. Survivors, in my opinion, don’t currently need major changes, but refining killer mechanics would help create a more balanced experience that reflects the advantages survivors have received in recent updates.
Sure, you should gather general information. But that's not the exit survey. It's a survey that is 'why did you quit the game'. None of the questions are in the vein of 'well, I think this is a little too strong'. The one checkbox that is clearly survivor sided isn't even asking them how they feel about the game overall, it is taking an issue that survivors have repeatedly said is a problem they stopped playing because of and BHVR has acknowledged they find 'excessive' versions of it to be a huge problem.
If people keep saying they are quitting because of a particular issue, it shouldn't be a surprise when that's the issue that winds up on the survey.
-
@BorisDDAA said:
So how much are we betting the ptb changes will get reverted yet again?
We're going to get a 1 second increase to the basekit BT and anti-tunnel will be declared solved!
More seriously:
I think something has to go through. They've also pushed back other things on their schedule which is not easy for them to do and possibly impossible to do again anytime soon. And they've literally said their data shows people are consistently quitting over this issue, so not addressing it makes it sound like they are fine with people quitting and that they won't address their issues.
But BHVR has had a big issue on overpromising and underdelivering (reworking killers, new items for survivors, the go next system),. so getting anti-tunnel/anti-slug knocked back to 'sometime in the future' is certainly a possibility.
Will whatever version goes on the PTB probably be nerfed down (say shrinking the aura range)? Probably. Will what they nerf actually be the right call? Sigh, here's hoping.
-
@Leon_van_Straken said:
It is funny because it is most likely the same all the time.
Someone wants things to be equal and others think they will lose anything about this.
Lets make the Survey equal for survivor and killer and all inbetween. Answer "HELL NO"
Give Killer a way to Abbandon the game. "HELL NO" because Killer can do things all the time (but hitting the floor two times in a row is completly unplayable cough cough)"
Let Killer see the hook status. "HELL NO" because this would make tunneling easier cause the killer who decided to tunnel will forget which person he is tunneling or stuff like that.
But you can say all these have "legit" counter arguments. Except for "Why it would be terrible that Killer complains could be heard if they decide to deinstall the game.
Someone wants things to be equal and others think they will lose anything about this.Let's have a 50% kill rate.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021373#Comment_4021373
The survey is still rigged even though it has an “Other” option. People in general are more likely to select options that are directly in the survey, especially if that involves a simple mouse click, and the Other option involves typing.
This isn’t up for debate. It’s how surveys work. Anyone that has had to conduct surveys for academic work, should have learned this fact.
This isn’t up for debate. It’s how surveys work. Anyone that has had to conduct surveys for academic work, should have learned this fact.1: Anyone involved in academics should have learned that just about everything is up for debate and approaching a problem with a single mindset is a good way to get bad data.
2: Anyone who has had to conduct a survey for real world applications understands the importance of focusing options to:
A: get people to answer it and not just skip it
B: Focus the questions on what people's issues actually are
C: don't dilute it by forcing choices that make not actually be people's motivating factor
D: get answers to things that can actually impact what you can do
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
Why are people so up in arms about this issue?
Do killers really want an option to say gen rushing is awful, have BHVR acknowledge it, put it in the road map, put it out for ptb testing, and then immediately pull the plug on the changes and do nothing meaningful?
I mean ok, I guess we could give "equal treatment" and have BHVR tell killers in plain language that their biggest concerns mean nothing and they will do nothing to change it. That's what this entire "survey" issue really is at the end of the day.
Do killers really want an option to say gen rushing is awful, have BHVR acknowledge it, put it in the road map, put it out for ptb testing, and then immediately pull the plug on the changes and do nothing meaningful?Maybe they'd be able to use the survey to learn that killers want OTR nerfed because of 'weaponization' or get colored scratch marks into the game. Perhaps it would even go so far as to getting syringes and styptics looked at.
Oh…
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021359#Comment_4021359
It's showing a double standard.
- Someone claims a survey is "for both sides" and "fair", as long as it has an Other "option where you can write down your own opinion"
- This person refuses to agree that it would be ok if the survey was filled with killer-sided choices, as long as it has an Other "option where you can write down your own opinion"
- Therefore, this person doesn't actually believe the Other option makes a survey fair
- Therefore, mentioning that a survey has an Other option, doesn't actually mean anything
This is absurd because you're starting off with a strawman as your first point.
IF the survey included a lot of killer sided options, AND people selected those options, AND BHVR making changes to those options led to a better game, you have a good survey.
IF the survey included a lot of killer sided options, AND people did not select those options, AND thus BHVR was unable to make a better game, you have a bad survey.
What a good survey would be requires two data points that we have no way of knowing
1: What existing data does BHVR have that has led to them including or excluding certain options?
2: What are they able to do with that data?
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021426#Comment_4021426
The survey had survivor-sided results because the survey was rigged to be survivor-sided.
If the killer-sided options were directly in the survey, then the results could have showed that both sides of the game were having issues, and both sides need to be addressed.
And that’s the real actual reason why a lot of people are against the surveys being fair for both sides of the game. If the surveys were actually fair for both sides of the game, then it might result in less time spent making survivor-sided changes to the game, and more time fixing issues on both sides of the game.
The survey had survivor-sided results because the survey was rigged to be survivor-sided.This is an US vs THEM non-sequitur.
If the killer-sided options were directly in the survey, then the results could have showed that both sides of the game were having issues, and both sides need to be addressed.And this would have absolutely nothing to do with the people who selected excessive tunneling and camping or a reason for BHVR to address it. It wasn't a vote.
Again, this could apply to any issue, survivor, killer, general. Hypothetically ("could have shown"), any person's particular complaint would be reflected by the survey data if it was just included, but you can't endlessly go off hypotheticals. Its also possible adding your requested options would have taken off other options that people were actually going to select, harming the ability of devs to address issues important to players.
On top of all of that, as has been mentioned by others, survivors outnumber killers. Trying to use such a survey as a voting system would be inherently lopsided and a really good reason not to try and make it a voting issue.
Edit to add: And as I mentioned, if anyone should be angry about it, it should be survivors. That after years of feedback, it took this long and this much to very slowly move BHVR to address the issue.
And that’s the real actual reason why a lot of people are against the surveys being fair for both sides of the game.The presumption that lots of people have are that the game has two sides instead of people who play the game. It also confused the idea of people having complaints about a side's balance (i.e. gens go too fast) with the idea that this what people quit the game over (compared to say complaints about earning currency).
Again, you want this to be an US vs THEM, when this survey is primarily looking at overall issues about the game.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021395#Comment_4021395
I didn’t even know the game had an exit survey, until BHVR said the phase 2 changes happened because of the exit survey results.
And it’s not “one single line”, it’s the fact that the entire survey was rigged. If a survey is massively survivor-sided, then of course the survey results are going to be survivor-sided.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021388#Comment_4021388
Are you honestly trying to claim that “excessive tunneling and slugging” is EQUALLY likely to be killers sided as it is survivor sided?
Like, for reals you don’t think the vast majority of people that selected that choice from the perspective of a survivor?
I didn’t even know the game had an exit survey, until BHVR said the phase 2 changes happened because of the exit survey results.If anyone should be furious, it should be survivors. For years survivors have been saying that these issues are going to cause people to leave the game. And now BHVR is like 'actually, these issues cause people to leave the game'. Yeah, that's what people have been saying and they've still slow walked the changes.
And it’s not “one single line”, it’s the fact that the entire survey was rigged. If a survey is massively survivor-sided, then of course the survey results are going to be survivor-sided.It wasn't a vote. Using terms like rigged doesn't make sense.
A lot of people who exited the game complained about tunneling. You've said earlier that the tunneling and camping is clearly a survivor sided option, did the killers who left accidently click the tunneling and camping box?
And they didn't even say it got the most selections. They say its consistently in the top three to five issues. Again, its not a vote.
This is one of the places the complaints about the survey fall apart. Even if there is an option that they were missing, this doesn't change that lots of people uninstalling selected the tunneling and camping option. How would adding things to the survey that are meant to be overtly killer sided have changed it? You'd still have lots of people exiting the game complaining about an issue (excessive tunneling and camping) and any company would be worried about such a thing.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021271#Comment_4021271
Nope, that's not going to work either.
This is supposed to be an exit survey, which means it's supposed to apply to everyone that is exiting, regardless of their favorite role.
This is supposed to be an exit survey, which means it's supposed to apply to everyone that is exiting, regardless of their favorite role.Your argument is circular.
You say it should apply to everyone.
I point out that can't happen. Inevitably some people will be excluded.
You then argue I'm saying no good survey can be done.
I respond, of course it can, you use your existing data to narrow the survey.
You then say it should apply to everyone, which brings us back to point 1 without you having actually responded to an argument.
It's the wanting to have your cake and eat it to problem.
-
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
This is an awful lot of manufactured outcry over one, single line:
Excessive tunneling and camping.
Which says nothing about which side of the tunneling and camping you're on. Especially since you can pick other options, like "gameplay is repetitive".
People are deliberately reading it as
"[I'm tired of my opponent choosing] excessive tunneling and camping"
But we've also heard from killers for years now that people (claim to) also feel:
"[I'm tired of feeling I have to choose] excessive tunneling and camping"
It's already written as a "survivor" or "killer" line.
People have been claiming they feel forced to tunnel for years, which is another way of reading this line (unless you're just trying to spin it as dev bias).
So, imo, this problem is either looking for outrage, which is status quo for the people starting the fire here, or people have been lying about "being forced to tunnel". Both options are being disingenuous.
This is an awful lot of manufactured outcry over one, single line:It's intertesting - this survey has probably been around for quite some time, potentially it has changed forms. No one has ever complained about it before (I feel like inevitably someone, somewhere has, but I've never seen it). And people certainly take time to complain before they leave the game, but no one popped onto say 'and by the way, the exit survey is survivor sided'. It's people who haven't uninstalled a game complaining about a survey that no one who has uninstalled complained about.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021226#Comment_4021226
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/B88D5CKZ07I8/image.png
You're basically trying to say that no one can possibly make a good survey that cares about both sides of the game, because it involves an "endless number of possibilities".
Literally, no. That's such a massive jump. You take my 'you're skipping over' and don't actually go back to the earlier posts where I explain it. Like with your earlier misquoting its misrepresenting an argument instead of engaging with it.
Let me try and walk you through it
1: There are pretty close to an endless number of possibilities.
2: Asking about too many issues dilutes the survey and decreases the amount of answers you get
3: You have to use your other existing data to narrow those possibilities down for what you are surveying
Of course you can create a good survey that gets an idea on player opinion. It might even be this one. You don't have that data. None of us do. We have no way to evaluate what they used to determine these questions, to what degree this is a general survey or targeted towards specific possible actions, or what other data they have to deal with other questions of player satisfaction.
What I'm saying is its foolish to say a survey is good or bad without that data.
-
@Deadman7600 said:
My response to jesterkind with the screenshot might clear up my thoughts a bit better but i'll also try to respond to your points.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021133#Comment_4021133
- That was just an example but even if that data can be obtained somewhere else, redundancy in data is still very good. Math errors happen and in a game with as many coding errors as dbd I'd want to collect as much data from every source possible including (or maybe especially anonymous surveys). Also looking over my question, I'd be better asking 'How many people uninstalled because of experiences from either role' because a survivor main could theoretically uninstall because of a bad killer experience and vice versa.
- When I said comparison I didn't necessarily mean against every other option possible. Say there were 2 killer specific options, BHVR could then look over those 2 options and see which one was 'more' problematic (in terms of making more people quit). This could then give them a heading for their next round of major changes.
- as I said redundancy in data is very good to confirm and make your arguments rock solid. another issue is that the survey would have already been answered by people who were missing that option stunting the information you can possibly get from the updated one, a good survey should be built with more consideration.
That was just an example but even if that data can be obtained somewhere else, redundancy in data is still very goodSure, but you also face the issue that people (probably) aren't going to stick around for too long for a game they are uninstalling and trying to get too much just might cause them to close the survey, making it a bad time to ensure redundancy.
I'd be better asking 'How many people uninstalled because of experiences from either role' because a survivor main could theoretically uninstall because of a bad killer experience and vice versa.I think the one issue here is that you create the possibility of 'pushing' answers onto the survey. If you have a survivor section, a killer section, and a general, potentially people are now answering there biggest problem with each. Which is definitely data, but its not 'why did you uninstall this game' and more of a general opinion survey.
I'm going to kick back to something you said to jesterkind
About the other data BHVR might have, I cannot respond to this because I have no idea what they have.That's the thing, none of us do. It's certainly possible BHVR's surveys are missing valuable answers for them in any number of directions. It's also possible that they already have the answers on the specific roles and/or they've found that these are the general issues that people have and they're focusing in on them.
That's why I have an issue with some people's insistence that the surveys have to include certain topics. None of us know where in the point of BHVR's data collection this survey falls or if those things would actually be meaningful data for BHVR.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021126#Comment_4021126
Nope. Not going to consider that either.
This whole "no one could possibly know anything" tactic isn't going to work. Unless you want to give 100% definitive proof for absolutely every claim you make on these forums, it obviously isn't a standard you expect for yourself.
This whole "no one could possibly know anything" tactic isn't going to work.Who said that? You're arguing with a strawman.
-
@Deadman7600 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021108#Comment_4021108
the issue was that the survey lacked questions specifically relating to the issues killers complain about. If I were looking at an ideal survey graph (with answers that were specific to either side) to answer the question 'which side has been leaving the most' I could then compare the killer specific answers to the survivor specific answers and see which category has been selected the most. I could also see what was the biggest issue selected by survivors and killers separately, I could make judgements of what should be high priority changes for both sides and generally I'd have a lot more information than 'people don't like tunnelling, slugging and camping'.
From what I've seen of this survey there was one survivor specific answer and a whole load of very general ones that killers could select but were too umbrella to really get any information from because survivor mains could also have these problems. This means the survey (intentionally or not) was biased, the information provides no room for comparison, which means there's no way to measure the severity of any of these issues.
As for the text boxes, those are impossible to accurately analyse because they cannot be graphed, and really act as filler which some poor employee is gonna have to mindlessly scan through and take a few notes on interesting quotes or what they see a lot of.
This isn't me being tribal btw, I don't mind the changes they've mentioned are coming to ptb. This is just bad data collection that provides no value other than throwaway statements. And given they take a data first approach, that is very troubling.
to answer the question 'which side has been leaving the most'Couldn't you just get that by having when a person uninstall it records on the survey the playtime for the sides? They don't need to ask, they have the data and asking just seems like an inferior way to gather it.
Even if they didn't do that, they can just look at the overall trend of player counts. If survivor numbers are going down and killer numbers are static, you're losing survivors.
This means the survey (intentionally or not) was biased, the information provides no room for comparison, which means there's no way to measure the severity of any of these issues.By what are you comparing?
Let's say a lot of people selected tunneling (to give a random number for discussion, let's say 30%). That means 30% of uninstalling players had that issue. Even if there is another issue that BHVR is missing, that's still 30% of people who had a problem. If you consider that a significant number, then you need to address it. It's not like people who quit because of a killer issue selected tunneling as their reason.
This isn't a public survey (we ranked the top ten complaints about DbD and they are…). It's a form for gathering data about why players quit that was likely designed off and goes along with their other data about the game.
As for the text boxes, those are impossible to accurately analyse because they cannot be graphed,Not really, if other is a big part of your graph its a clear indication the survey was missing needed options (and then someone needs to go and read and update the survey). But if not that many people are checking that option and are checking the options presented, you're getting a read of their feelings.
Again, even if such a survey is missing something, you're still getting data on what their problems are. It's far from their only data source and lots of other things go into what gets addressed (mainly how difficult is it and what are the other impacts it could have on the game).
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021066#Comment_4021066
Nope. That isn’t going to work either.
Exit surveys are meant to focus on the issues that actually causes a player to quit a game, but they can’t do that if the survey choices are rigged towards one side of the game.
People that uninstalled because they think the killer role is unfun, deserve to have dedicated choices in the survey for the most probable reasons why they think the killer role is unfun.
Nope. That isn’t going to work either.Sometimes I wish I just had the confidence to declare things without actually addressing the points the other person made.
Exit surveys are meant to focus on the issues that actually causes a player to quit a game, but they can’t do that if the survey choices are rigged towards one side of the game.You're just skipping everything about other data sources they might have because it disproves your argument. There are an endless number of possibilities that might cause a player to quit a game. Any set of options will inherently omit some possibilities and too many possibilities will harm the value of the survey.
People that uninstalled because they think the killer role is unfun, deserve to have dedicated choices in the survey for the most probable reasons why they think the killer role is unfun.Why is this group more deserving than people who uninstall because of cosmetic options, or general game length, or dislike the music, or don't think their favorite license is adequately represented, or whatever reason?
Or more deserving than survivors who quit because they hate a certain killer, or they don't like doing gens, or they hate stealth killers, or they don't think there is enough item variety?
And how exactly is it going to make the killer player feel better if a reason is included for killers but it isn't their own?
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021073#Comment_4021073
I'd be fine with this logic if it went both ways but it doesn't. I can play like trash as killer, get no hooks, and still win in end game by slugging everyone. That shouldn't be possible if my whole match was bad plays. Yet it is, and survivors have no equivalent comebacks. That's the unevenness of this argument: the punishments aren't just a little unbalanced, they are severely skewed towards killer.
Sorry, I should have grouped my responses but didn't refresh.
Conceptually I don't have an issue in an asym of one side having more of an onus to perform. That the killer role should have more comeback potential I don't think is inherently contradictory even if I personally don't like it.
My issue is that with such a stance survivors who are good or perform well have to win more. If killer has more comeback potential, or has an easier skill floor to skill ceiling, or has their handheld more by default, the only way such a game can possibly be balanced is for the skill balance to shift over time.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020935#Comment_4020935
This was my immediate thought when I saw the notes, particularly the use of the term "hand holding." It's such an unprofessional term but also one that was used endlessly in the arguments circling around the ptb, so it's logical they rammed everyone's complaints through AI and it regurgitated that term out.
And now they're paying for not editing the language by having everyone micro-analyze it.
It's such an unprofessional term but also one that was used endlessly in the arguments circling around the ptbAs you said, it was getting used endlessly. They're just picking up the terms that the community uses. Which isn't new and I don't think it necessarily shows AI.
And now they're paying for not editing the language by having everyone micro-analyze it.Again, something that isn't new, micro-analyzing is a forum tradition (though I've been critical of BHVR for being particularly sloppy in their terminology this year).
-
@ImperatorHaze said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020458#Comment_4020458
Thanks for taking the time to write such a detailed response — you bring up some solid concerns, but I think the proposed system actually covers more of these issues than it might seem at first glance. Let me break it down point by point:
“This isn’t enough. Quieter is irrelevant… 10 seconds is very little… does nothing about tunneling off hook.”
I get where you’re coming from — if the protection window is too short or weak, it doesn’t meaningfully help against tunneling. But full silence or longer invulnerability-type effects can easily swing things too far in the other direction and make fair chases impossible for Killers who aren’t tunneling.
The goal isn’t to eliminate tunneling entirely — it’s to make it less efficient. The 5-second Haste and reduced scratch marks/grunts of pain give the unhooked Survivor a small but meaningful chance to reposition. Killers can still commit if they want, but they’re spending more time and losing map pressure if they do.
This version keeps the gameplay interactive — the Killer chooses whether to continue the chase knowing it’s less efficient, or to spread pressure for better long-term results.
Also, tunneling off hook is indirectly discouraged through the Killer Incentive system, since the bonuses disable if the Killer tunnels (i.e., hooks a Survivor twice before everyone’s been hooked once). This gives an ongoing reason for Killers to rotate targets rather than chase the same person immediately after unhook.
“Too difficult to implement for the minimal change… Killers could play around it easily.”
Anti-Slug system is designed to be simple under the hood. It’s not a complex behavior tracker — it’s based on a timer + radius mechanic, both of which already exist in DBD’s codebase (think of mechanics like Terror Radius or Boon ranges).
A Killer would only receive the Hindered debuff if they choose to remain near a downed Survivor for 45 seconds or longer. That’s not punishing tactical slugging; it’s punishing intentional bait camping.
If a Killer slugs strategically and moves on, they never get the debuff. Survivors who try to bait the slug lose that advantage since the Killer can simply leave the radius — they’re stuck waiting or recovering. This keeps it fair, functional, and consistent with DBD’s design philosophy: reward active gameplay, discourage stagnation.
“Killers should be encouraged to play strategically and spread pressure, not punished for being aggressive… making things harder isn’t punishment…”
Completely agree — and that’s actually the foundation of my concept. The Killer Incentive system doesn’t punish aggression, it rewards smart aggression.
Killers still have freedom to tunnel if they want — but the optimal play becomes spreading hooks to earn bonus Bloodpoints and temporary aura reads on first hooks only. The moment a Killer tunnels (hooking someone twice before everyone has been hooked once), those incentives shut off.
This means the system doesn’t force Killers to play “nice”; it just makes smart, spread pressure more rewarding. Aggression still exists, but it’s refocused — Killers now benefit from making impactful plays across the map rather than locking onto one Survivor early.
As for the 3-second aura reveal: it’s intentionally limited to prevent abuse. It’s a small nudge toward awareness, not an overpowered wallhack. It lets Killers quickly decide where to go next after a hook without giving them excessive information.
“PTB isn’t big enough or long enough for proper testing…”
That’s a valid criticism of BHVR’s testing structure in general — but this concept accounts for that. Each of these features can be tested piecemeal or in combined sets without major reworks to existing systems:
- Momentum Protection can be tested as a standalone modifier to post-unhook states.
- Anti-Slug Radius can be applied to a single Killer or in a limited map rotation to measure behavior change.
- Killer Incentives can be toggled on or off server-side for specific matchmaking brackets.
This modularity makes it easier to test than large reworks. Even in short PTBs, you’d get measurable telemetry (time spent slugging, hook distribution, post-unhook survival time, etc.).
In Summary:
- Momentum Protection reduces early tunneling efficiency without removing Killer agency.
- Anti-Slug discourages bait-camping but rewards active play and decision-making.
- Killer Incentives reinforce strategic, map-wide pressure instead of repetitive tunneling.
- The system remains modular and testable even within BHVR’s current PTB constraints.
In other words, it doesn’t punish Killers for being aggressive — it rewards Killers for being efficient, strategic, and dynamic. Survivors gain tools to recover, Killers gain reasons to diversify targets, and overall match flow becomes more balanced and engaging.
if the protection window is too short or weak, it doesn’t meaningfully help against tunneling. But full silence or longer invulnerability-type effects can easily swing things too far in the other direction and make fair chases impossible for Killers who aren’t tunneling.The issue with the silence: I don't think it does anything. If you've got headphones I don't think making noises more subtle has that much of an impact. Noise levels are a part of the game, its kind of built into it, but you've just added an out of game factor to being a tunneler - if you have good headphones and good hearing, you can tunnel.
I also think the times you have proposed are so short that we're not even close to the worry of a survivor using them against a killer that isn't tunneling.
This version keeps the gameplay interactive — the Killer chooses whether to continue the chase knowing it’s less efficient, or to spread pressure for better long-term results.But its an extremely small change. 5 to 10 seconds more of bonuses that some killers/players can overcome easily? I don't think it will make a difference.
Anti-Slug system is designed to be simple under the hood. It’s not a complex behavior tracker — it’s based on a timer + radius mechanic, both of which already exist in DBD’s codebase (think of mechanics like Terror Radius or Boon ranges).I don't mean difficult to implement as coding, I mean difficult to implement in terms of figuring out the numbers that actually matter that don't create other problems.
Right now it just does what the proposed anti-slug does (just actually stronger I think). Killer leaves, survivor recovers. It has an added option for killers camping the body (I'd say its arguable to what degree its necessary given the ability to crawl to pallets to be saved).
But you create new issue - what about ranged killers who can stand right outside the radius? What about stealth killers whose position is now given away when the survivor can't recover past 90%? Is there any risk of a survivor going down in a strong looping spot and not getting picked up because the survivors now loop there to hinder the killer?
That's just off the top of my head. There's lots of other concerns I could imagine happening when the 'if down for X amount of time, get up' seems to deal with most of the same things without the additional problems.
The Killer Incentive system doesn’t punish aggression, it rewards smart aggression.But I think this is just a perception issue about what is punishment.
If you do X you give up Y reward vs if you do X you give Y benefit to the other side - if a game balances for a target kill rate in the long run these achieve the exact same outcome.
Even in short PTBs, you’d get measurable telemetry (time spent slugging, hook distribution, post-unhook survival time, etc.).Only if you can get a sufficient player base to actually test them. As is, PTBs tend to only get players for a short period of time because its more about seeing the cool new things, then back to the actual game.
Some of your suggestions also run into the issue of it also being a console game where doing small frequent updates isn't possible because of the need to verify patches ahead of time. If it was just PC some of this would be more doable.
-
@GeordieKiller said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021006#Comment_4021006
but there are options where for survivors they can say due to tunneling or camping etc where's the killer options ie gen effeincy or SWF for example
So please dont tell me balance issues arent the focus of the exit survey when there are balance issue related options for survivors in the exit survey and in fact in the stream the devs mentioned that the reason they are doing these changes is the fact its the most uninstall reason which we all know is bad data as there is no killer related options to give a clear picture on the actual game state
The fact you are still defending that killer players who leave shouldnt get a chance to explain their reason clearly via check boxes astound me how can we get the game to a healthier place if you keep ignoring one side of the community and dismiss their valid concerns or not give them a clear fair chance to explain why they uninstall the game
but there are options where for survivors they can say due to tunneling or camping etc where's the killer options ie gen effeincy or SWF for exampleSo please dont tell me balance issues arent the focusBut those aren't balance questions. They aren't asking if tunneling is balanced, they are asking if its a reason people quit.
For things like gen efficiency, they have data on overall kill rates. If a person is saying they think gens are too fast, but the kill rates are where BHVR wants them, what do they do with that? Broadly any balance questions that boils down to 'I feel my preferred side is too hard' isn't very meaningful.
Now they could ask whether the overall game feels too fast or too slow, which would be a question that applies to both sides, but there's no way to know for certain if they haven't investigated that or if its a common issue at all.
in the stream the devs mentioned that the reason they are doing these changes is the fact its the most uninstall reason which we all know is bad data as there is no killer related options to give a clear picture on the actual game stateThis is coming at it like the exit survey is a contest: whichever issue gets selected the most we change!
Except:
1: Tunneling and camping have been discussed for a long time. They've taken actions to address them in the past. They'll probably take more actions to address them in the future even if this PTB goes through. They are giving this as backing of it being an issue.
2: Even if we presume they are missing an issue causing players to quit, that doesn't negate all the players who selected tunneling. So the worst case scenario is that they are missing something, but they still have lots of players quitting selecting tunneling as their reason.
3: They fix plenty of issues that aren't on the survey. OTR just got changed on arguments about weaponization, something killers have been arguing for. The exit survey is not the be all / end all of BHVR decision making.
The fact you are still defending that killer players who leave shouldnt get a chance to explain their reason clearly via check boxes astound me how can we get the game to a healthier place if you keep ignoring one side of the community and dismiss their valid concerns or not give them a clear fair chance to explain why they uninstall the game1: The fact that so many people seem to think the community is just killers and survivors astounds me. Most people play both sides.
2: No one is ignoring one side of the community. See above: lots of issues get addressed that aren't on this particular survey.
3: The demand for checkboxes doesn't make sense. Yes, people tend to fill out checkboxes more than free fill responses. But if there were a lot of killer players quitting and even some of them were taking the time to write down an answer, it would be easy to notice a trend and make it a check box.
4: Why not add an option to ask if they quit because of lack of diverse survivors? Or an option about the cosmetics feeling too silly? Or finding the moris too gory or not gory enough? There's an endless number of possibilities that could be added, but at some point you need to draw a line to what your data actually indicates are the main reasons.
-
I suspect they will add a killer sided option to the exit survey if for no other reason than PR. It's certainly possible that there is a reason for quitting they are missing something with the survey, that's always the risk of a survey, too much and you dilute the chance of getting answers, too little and you miss possible reasons. But there's no inherent need to presume its a both sides issue if their other data is indicating its not a problem or that the exit survey should be so heavily approached in an us vs them setup.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4021006#Comment_4021006
Yeah, I really don’t think you understand how data collection works at all.
If “the game lost its horror feel” ended up being a top choice, BHVR could have released a more focused survey with in-depth questions, and potentially free-text responses. And if that survey isn’t enough, they could conduct interviews to have conversations with people about this topic.
But saying “they don’t have any way to gather info”, just shows you don’t understand how this works at all.
Yeah, I really don’t think you understand how data collection works at all.Given this and prior discussions, right back at you.
If “the game lost its horror feel” ended up being a top choice, BHVR could have released a more focused survey with in-depth questions, and potentially free-text responses.You're presuming that this survey is the starting point of the data collection. They have ten years of player feedback, surveys, fog whisperers, these forums, etc. The options that are listed might very well be the more focused survey you are discussing.
But saying “they don’t have any way to gather info”, just shows you don’t understand how this works at all.I do understand what it means to misquote someone by leaving out context to misrepresent their understanding of an issue.
You leave out how I say "on people leaving the game". Sure, they have lots of other surveys and resources about player opinion and nowhere have they ever said those are irrelevant or that the exit survey is the only thing, or even the primary thing, they use to make game decisions. But an exit survey is meant to focus on the issues that actually caused a player to quit the game.
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020014#Comment_4020014
Every free "i don't have to play better" mechanic is handholding. Whether you like it or not, you're simply in denial.
At that point the phrase loses all of its meaning. Any buff that ever happens means that you don't have to play better.
-
@GeordieKiller said:
this is getting so dumb the defending of not adding killer issues to a uninstall survey is insane
The fact is it should be on there to give clean data on reasons of uninstall which in turns gives healthier balance changes to address issues on BOTH sides. Getting told for killers to right in the others boxes instead of having choice boxes is also insulting as it would take devs longer to go through the others boxes compare to a check box
These excuses to not give killers a fair uninstall survey is pathetic and if you actually care about the game you would be saying there should be checkboxes to explain killers uninstall aswell
The fact is it should be on there to give clean data on reasons of uninstall which in turns gives healthier balance changes to address issues on BOTH sides.But balance issues aren't the focus of the exit survey. DbD has balance goals and they have actual data on that. They don't have anyway to gather info on people who are leaving because the game lost its horror feel, or people who are playing something else, or that they don't like the graphics, etc.
-
@chknTM said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020952#Comment_4020952
Brother what are you on about? Thats a whole nother sentence you just shoved in his mouth.
DbD gotta be the only place where you can ask for better Surveys and itll somehow devolve into US VS THEM nonsense
Why is this even an argument there is ZERO downside to having the survey have Killer issues as options aswell, unless someone call tell me why Killers being able to list why they uninstall is problematic.Why is this even an argument there is ZERO downside to having the survey have Killer issues as options aswell, unless someone call tell me why Killers being able to list why they uninstall is problematic.The point of a survey is to establish trends. Everyone who uninstalls will have their own nuanced reasons for quitting (as do people for playing), but as a dev they are looking for large general trends.
If you give too many options you lose the ability to identify any type of trend, too few and you can't ascertain people's feelings. That means you you need to narrow it down to the biggest issues that you need player feedback on.
The other option serves to clean up and look for trends that might be missed. If something begins to appear in the other option, you add it as a checkbox.
As others have suggested in other threads, we have no way of knowing if the players quitting are even primarily killer players. If they aren't then you're diluting the quality of the survey.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020988#Comment_4020988
That is completely false.
BHVR absolutely could have released surveys that contained both the popular survivor-sided complaints AND the popular kill-sided complaints. And the survey would have been better that way.
I'm not saying that any of the survivor-sided choices should be removed, so survivors would still have the option to make the exact same complaints as they did before. It's just asking for the killer-sided choices to ALSO be clearly and directly in the survey.
That is completely false.Which part?
And the survey would have been better that way.That's pure speculation. You have no way to know if adding the options you listed would have detracted form them receiving feedback on other issues that are more of a reason that people leave the game.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020901#Comment_4020901
Yes. These are two completely different scenarios. Whether or not enough PTB data was gathered from a PTB, is completely separate from whether or not exit surveys are rigged to be survivor sided.
And for reals, are we supposed to believe that if the exit surveys were all killer-sided reasons, you would have said “it’s ok, because survivors could write it the reasons why they uninstalled”?
For reals, if the exit surveys didn’t include any options for camping, tunneling, or slugging… and then BHVR said those things obviously aren’t a big problem because they weren’t popular responses in exit survey data… you would have been fine with that?
For reals, if the exit surveys didn’t include any options for camping, tunneling, or slugging… and then BHVR said those things obviously aren’t a big problem because they weren’t popular responses in exit survey data… you would have been fine with that?Whether people like it or not is not a reflection of whether it is an effective survey or not. You're arguing that if the shoe was on the other foot people would complain, thus that makes your complaints valid because of a hypothetical.
The purpose of an exit survey for a game is to try and get a general idea for why players are leaving the game. That means the creators need to limit the options to the things that are the biggest issues that aren't otherwise obvious (i.e. people being upset about perceived balance issues is basically a given).
Is it possible they are missing an issue? Sure, I doubt they'd even deny that it is always a possibility. But its also possible they put the options you suggest it would just take away from space from the more general options preventing them from getting an effective survey.
And for reals, are we supposed to believe that if the exit surveys were all killer-sided reasons, you would have said “it’s ok, because survivors could write it the reasons why they uninstalled”?There's two survivor sided questions, one of which is an extremely common complaint and frequently given as a reason for why people quit. The majority are about general gameplay feel issues. You're trying to make this a killer and survivor player thing, the survey primarily seems to be focused on overall game feel which is a more universal concept and not to the specific role people are playing.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020763#Comment_4020763
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/31QZS6ST8VW0/image.png
BHVR literally said one of the reasons why the phase 2 changes are happening, was because things like tunneling and camping were some of the most popular selections in the exit surveys.
…The exit surveys that had rigged questions. Popular survivor-sided choices were in the above survey, but popular killer-sided choices were not in the above survey. Of course, the survivor-sided problems are going to look more popular and important, if killers literally couldn't select the popular killer-sided problems.
During the PTB discussion weren't you arguing that BHVR would have data we didn't? Now you're on team bad data collection.
BHVR has been conducting surveys for awhile (not to mention all sorts of other feedback avenues), I suspect they have taken the most common reasons they've heard and simplified it down.
Even if there are substantial numbers of killers quitting the game, and even if they aren't taking the time to fill out the option to explain their reasoning, you still have lots of players selecting 'tunneling' as the reason they are quitting the game. They have lots of complaints about an element of the game, even if somehow BHVR has totally missed a large amount of players quitting for a different reason, it doesn't change why the players left because of tunneling and the need to address it.
-
@THE_Crazy_Hyena said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020843#Comment_4020843
I don't think changing the ways wins are handled would solve anything. Other than maybe make it so that the survivors are counted as a team, when determining wins/losses.
- 0 escaped / 4 kills - Win for the killer
- 1 escaped / 3 kills - Win for the killer - No additional gains for the escaped survivor
- 2 escaped / 2 kills - Tie
- 3 escaped / 1 kill - Win for the survivor team - No additional gains for the killer
- 4 escaped / 0 kills - Win for the survivor team.
But as a way to further improve things, having more factors play into how you gain/lose MMR would definitely be helpful too. Individual attributes, like chase time (longer for survivors / shorter for killer), chases won, objective percentage done / prevented, hook states, so on and so forth. These stats are already tracked by the game, so why not make it a part of the MMR system? 🤔These stats are already tracked by the game, so why not make it a part of the MMR system?There's a few things I'll defend BHVR on and this is one of them (though I do think they should treat the survivors as a group). But there's a few reasons why putting individual stats into the MMR wouldn't work.
1: Players that are better in chase or prioritizing objectives are more likely to escape, making rewarding doing the good action and the result redundant.
2: It potentially rewards playstyles that aren't actually as valuable. For example if you gave MMR for a successful flashlight save, and there is a survivor who never does gens but does flashlight saves, they are hurting the team (which is reflected in their overall escape rate, but if you gave mini MMR reward they might be increasing their MMR while hurting the team).
3: What is a good play is very context dependent in DbD (one of its best aspects). If you lead a killer on a two minute chase, but drop every pallet in the game, its not great. If you lead them on a chase back into the 3 gen that the others are trying to break, its not great. And we already have a system to determine whether players 'generally' are making the correct calls, overall escape/kill rates.
4: It possibly makes it easier for people to intentionally lower their MMR. Kill two survivors, then let a survivor lead you on an incredibly long chase.
5: The goal of the MMR isn't to determine whether a player is in the 70th percentile or 72nd percentile. It's to just generally put them in a category for matchmaking purposes. Even if such a system was done perfectly, and as I've mentioned above there's lots that could go wrong, you would be moving players very small distances which wouldn't really have an impact.
-
@ImperatorHaze said:
Hello DBD developers and community members,
I’ve been following the PTB discussions and community feedback on tunneling and slugging, and I wanted to share a comprehensive proposal that addresses these issues while keeping Killers’ agency intact.
The goal is to realign incentives rather than punish players: giving Survivors meaningful counterplay to exploitative behaviors, rewarding Killers for strategic play, and maintaining dynamic, tense, and fair matches.
1. Momentum Protection
When a Survivor is unhooked, they receive:
- A 5% Haste boost for 5 seconds, and
- Reduced scratch mark visibility and quieter grunts of pain for 10–12 seconds if the Killer immediately re-engages them.
These effects end early if the Survivor performs a significant action (healing, repairing, or leaving chase range).
Why it works:
This gives the unhooked Survivor a fair chance to reposition without granting immunity. It prevents instant re-hooks from being the most efficient play, while allowing Killers to capitalize on genuine mistakes or poor positioning.2. Anti-Slug System — Radius-Based Recovery & Hindered Deterrent
Slugging can be a strategic tool, but extended slugs and bait-camping create miserable experiences for everyone involved. The following adjustments preserve strategy while introducing fair counterplay:
- Survivors can self-recover up to 90% of their recovery bar automatically while stationary.
- If the Killer leaves a set radius (approximately 16–20 meters), the recovery bar automatically fills, and the Survivor recovers to the Injured state.
- If the Killer stays within that radius too long (around 45 seconds) without picking up the Survivor, they gain a Hindered debuff (10–15%).
- The Hindered effect ends once the downed Survivor is healed, hooked, or the Killer moves outside the radius.
Why it works:
This removes the incentive to camp a downed Survivor as bait while still allowing Killers to use slugging for short-term map pressure. It forces Killers to make an active decision — commit to a pickup or move on — while giving Survivors meaningful counterplay.3. Incentivized Killer Play — Reward, Don’t Punish
Killers should be encouraged to play strategically and spread pressure, not punished for being aggressive.
- For each unique, first hook, the Killer receives:
- A 3-second aura reveal of all Survivors, and
- A small Bloodpoint bonus for that hook.
- Bonus limitation: The rewards are disabled if the Killer hooks the same Survivor twice before all Survivors have been hooked at least once.
Why it works:
This creates a positive feedback loop for fair, skillful Killer play. The aura reveal provides valuable map information that helps maintain pressure and reduces the temptation to tunnel the same target repeatedly.
4. Data-Driven PTB Implementation
These features should be rolled out incrementally through PTB testing with telemetry tracking for:
- Repeat-hook frequency
- Average slug duration
- Kill and escape rate balance
- Chase duration and map pressure efficiency
The data can then guide numerical adjustments (radius, duration, buff/debuff percentages) to find the optimal balance between fairness and flow.
5. Synergy Between Mechanics
These mechanics are designed to work together, reinforcing balance and fair play:
- Momentum Protection + Anti-Slug Radius/Hindered: Survivors have multiple ways to counter tunneling and prolonged slugging, while Killers must actively make choices about pickups or rotation.
- Anti-Slug Hindered + Incentivized Killer Play: Killers are rewarded for spreading pressure and cannot rely on camping bait, encouraging dynamic map control.
- Momentum Protection + Incentivized Killer Play: Survivors get brief reprieve windows, and Killers are rewarded for targeting multiple Survivors, naturally reducing repeat-hooking.
Overall: Survivors gain fair counterplay without being overpowered, Killers are rewarded for skillful and strategic play, and SWFs are not disproportionately advantaged. This creates matches that are dynamic, strategic, and tense — but fair.
Final Thoughts
Dead by Daylight thrives when both sides feel like they have agency and counterplay. These mechanics interlock naturally to promote balance, fairness, and fun.
What do you think? Would these adjustments improve match flow and fairness for both sides? Are there specific Killer kits, perks, or Survivor behaviors that might need tuning alongside these systems?
1: This isn't enough. Quieter is really irrelevant, have to go all the way to fully silent. 10 seconds is very little, but you also weaken that by requiring immediate reengagement. Does nothing about tunneling off hook.
2: Too difficult to implement for the minimal change it would achieve. Lots of killers could play around it relatively easily.
3: I'll quote a part here:
Killers should be encouraged to play strategically and spread pressure, not punished for being aggressive.Making certain things harder isn't punishment. Having pros and cons to to various options increases strategic depth, but people didn't seem to want that.
But this is kind of like the overbrine days. Give us the tools to slow down gens and we won't tunnel, led to slowing down gens and tunneling.
Getting a survivor out is really strong. If you don't change that element (either by making the elimination extremely difficult or giving the survivors a boost after it happens), then you have tunneling plus as existed with overbrine.
Also a three second aura read without any limiting factor really takes out any chance of survivors being nearby.
Personally I hate BP boosts as a mechanism of solving problems but some would be behind that.
4: PTB is not big enough nor long enough to get that. Piecemeal would be okay in concept, but sometimes you need to see things work together to get an idea and its a moot point anyway as BHVR hasn't given themselves enough time in their schedule for gradual PTBs.
-
Basically, the changes are too minor with the 3 second aura read for the killer probably being the most significant change.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4020175#Comment_4020175
this map pressure phenomenon you're talking about doesn't exist. the best map pressure is killing survivors quick. otherwise you'll just walk around pretending to apply pressure.
You're confusing 'doesn't exist' and 'best'. Just because there is a way to do something in a game that is the best doesn't mean other strategies don't exist that could be viable. In fact if one so clearly outshines the others it is a good reason for it to be nerfed.
-
@chknTM said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/8KQMU5XZLZDS/screenshot-2025-10-27-055938.png
So next PTB every time you are unhooked, you will see the killer within 32m through undetectable for 10 seconds, ontop of 10% Haste, Elusive and Endurance for the 30 Seconds.
That's across 8 hooks 80 Seconds, 1.33 Mins of Aura Reading every match.
Healing Underhook cant be punished anymore cause you can just 99 the heal and if you spot the killer approaching and then run safely away while keeping the protection buffs. (Only lost if u get healed a full health state)
This just seems absurd, every single time someone is unhooked you can just scan the map with 10% Haste, Endurance, look for the killer and comm their position every single time, everytime you are unhooked you can get an exact update on the Killers location.
And all the Killer gets is T1 Bloodlust for 15 Seconds and some BP? (Bloodlust is 4.8% Speed, cancelled upon any action, so not even half the haste a survivor gets for half the time, and only on unique hooks)
I think people didnt really realize how crazy this is, its very clearly a patch that greatly benefits the survivor side objectively looking at it.
Even if you dont abuse these insane protections at all, it still gives u a guaranteed safe heal underhook everytime.
Imagine playing Killer on an Indoor map in this patch where your position is constantly known by the survivors, through Undetectable btw.
I dont really care about the basekit OTR theyre adding, but Aura reading is insane, every Unhooked survivor literally just becomes a better Scratched Mirror Myers, also able to run at full speed instead of slowing down for the aura reading for 10 seconds, and its not like the Killer can hide in a locker from the Aura Reading, + it ignores Undetectable.
I mean i don't really see how you punish this either, its a 10% haste survivor that can see you through walls, and leaves no sound or scratchmarks with endurance, this is insane, its literally multiple free perks basekit, anyone who thinks the game is decently balanced in its current state cant look at these changes and say its a good idea, unless you whole heartedly think this game is EXTREMELY KILLER-SIDED this cant seem good.https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/QW5TAG0OMY6X/screenshot-2025-10-27-061956.png
32M is an insane distance, considering its every direction thats like half the distance of some maps, its literally the default size of a full terror radius.
Im not gonna doompost or anything just talking about how objectively strong this is gonna be, its gonna be super strong for the average solo queue team, and abusable by the strongest SWFs.
I think the Elusive makes sense, the unhooked survivor being able to make distance by themselves without leaving a track, giving them a fair shake to get away, but the Aura is intrusive, it falls outside of just keeping the survivor safe to even giving them vital info which can be shared with their team.
(My only issue lies with the Aura Reading part, thats what this entire post is about)
Tell me what you all think.
I would MUCH rather just have better comms for solo queue than these types of changes that make SWFs even stronger.
(Please don't make the comments a US VS THEM thing)its very clearly a patch that greatly benefits the survivor side objectively looking at it.But anti-tunnel is going to do that. It's meant to be a survivor sided change.
BHVR tried giving an array of buffs to both sides and it got shot down.
-
As others have mentioned, handholding seems to be the word of the month. Call something handholding, argument over.
Questions about things being stronger or weaker aren't handholding (i.e. how fast should a survivor move in a certain situation). Those are balance and overall game feel questions.
Handholding is the game trying to tell you how to play, like the Basekit BBQ. You just hooked a survivor, and now the game is telling you which survivor it wants you to go chase. Again others have mentioned it, but probably the closest thing on the survivor side is the aura read which has survived (in my opinion unfortunately).
-
@Paribean said:
The devs keep bringing up that tunneling, camping and slugging are unhealthy parts of the game, but never why they accure. A big component as to why these situations happen is because the killer role just doesn´t have enough tools to combat things like fast gen speeds, rapid healing speeds or just purely unbalanced maps.
When are tool boxes going to be addressed ?
I think the biggest reason for tunneling is gens speeds and that the average killer mathematically can not keep up with a commodious tool box and addons like Socket swivels, Wire spool and Brand new part. If you´ve ever played on EU servers then you probably know the dread of seeing a tool box or two in your lobby as killer and going against multiple brand new parts leaving you with no option but to tunnel. Not to mention that even if a survivor doesn´t have a tool box they are going to spawn next to a generator and can instantly start working on it (that is if you don´t have corrupt intervention or mobility), which puts the killer at a severe disadvantage.
When are healing speeds going to be addressed ?
In the recent developer stream they have mentioned that they are going to look at addons like syringes and styptics, but that still doesn´t change the fact that a lot of healing perks this year got massively buffed making strategies like hit&run way less impactful. While antiheal perks like sloppy butcher and franklins got heavely nerfed. Which leads killers to do the next best thing, which is tunneling and camping.
Are there any options even left ?
If the antitunnel, camp and slugging changes go through I don´t think the killer has any option but to, well play like a bot. Just instakick the freshly added 20 pallets to every map and go after the first survivor you see. Which at that point why not impelement killer bots into normal matches because to be frank, I doubt anyone is going to play a role with no agency and no choices to choose from. An opinion which is already being echoed by content creators taking breaks from playing killer.
The issue is that your complaints are all balance related. It amounts to 'but what about how killers really want to win?'
Even if true, we have balance issues all the time. Nothing is going to change about that.
Having a game with a hard tunnel is never going to be fun. It's three survivors sitting around doing gens.
Having a game where you lie on the ground for an extended period of time is never going to be fun.
That's the difference. Yes, both sides want to win, but some things just make for a bad game.
I doubt anyone is going to play a role with no agency and no choices to choose from.This argument has never been true. Nothing about agency is being impacted, BHVR has kept tunneling in the game with both the last PTB and their proposed ideas. They've just made it harder, that's not agency being taken away, its calling for players to exert more agency on what they do instead of pursue the obvious 'optimal strategy'.
-
Okay, when I saw the title I thought this meant balanced across all MMRs. Basically which killer is likely to retain the same kill rate regardless of the MMR you look at.
On that criteria, probably Wesker. Oni is pretty weak for a new killer player, Wraith too strong for a new killer player and too weak later.
Other thoughts - Huntress, Dredge, Demo
-
@runningguy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4018088#Comment_4018088
the reason why survivors dont lose mmr for pressing the abandon button is because they dont want to encourage killers to slug more to force abandons so its neutral.
Not to say you're wrong on BHVR's thinking, because it has been incredibly confusing, but:
MMR is secret. BHVR has said in the past they don't want MMR to be a motivating factor in player decisions. And if they wanted it to work this way to discourage killer playstyles, then for it to have any effect they would need to publicly disclose it.
Not to mention plenty of killers would be happy to keep their MMR from skyrocketing which makes this an incentive, not a deterrent.
We saw this with the brief strategy of 'hold the survivor for 10 minutes than abandon to win'. Who cares if it secretly is counted as a loss if it shows all the survivors dying and giving a 4k?
-
@Rickprado said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4017164#Comment_4017164
I disagree. I think perk with very strong effects that serve for more than one purpose can definitely harm the game's overall health. Shoulder the Burden and Reassurance are far too strong if we admit they can be used against a killer who is not tunnelling or camping, respectively.
For Reassurance, its always a risk to save your teammate since the killer can go after them and just sacrifice/kill/put back on hook the recently hooked person. So there are some scenarios where leaving the person on the hook, finishing the gen and them going for the save give survivors a great advantage, specially if they break a trigen with this. What Reassurance does is turn this from a very risky play into a almost no risk play, since you would be in a hurry before your teammate goes into next stage but if you have 30 free extra seconds you don't need to care too much, even if the killer comes to defend the hook.
For Shoulder the Burden, combining it with Vigil make it so has no real downside since the exposed effect will be very short. And can really turn the tide of a match because it can remove one person from the death hook condition. So, being able to use it against non-tunneling killers is not a good design choice. It would be if a perk like Forced Penance work on "normal" chases (without bodyblocking). The perk would be far too strong and need some changes.
When i say healthy i mean its don't have a very strong effect that can be abusable by certain killers or coordinated teams.
@Firellius and @cogsturning already covered a lot of points I was going to say, but to focus on a few things.
I think perk with very strong effects that serve for more than one purpose can definitely harm the game's overall health.Sure, it CAN. A perk with a single effect that is too strong CAN harm the game's health. The issue is something potentially being too strong which could apply to any type of perk design.
Shoulder the Burden and Reassurance are far too strong if we admit they can be used against a killer who is not tunnelling or camping, respectively.Why?
It seems like you are starting at the premise that the perk should do one specific thing and if it can do more than that its an issue.
The version you laid out would be incredibly powerful, basically game winning, but only usable in one specific case. I think that is bad as it makes the games decided in the lobby screen and not the actual gameplay.
It's possible the current version is too strong, I don't think it is, but even if it was that would mean it deserves a nerf, its a completely different discussion than the idea of perks conceptually being able to be usable in a single instance.
It would be if a perk like Forced Penance work on "normal" chases (without bodyblocking). The perk would be far too strong and need some changes.But there are perks that work just in chase.
DbD perks tend to either be weak/limited, but really easy to get value from, or strong, but have a condition to trigger or downsides that come with it. StB, and Forced Penance, fall into the latter.
-
@supersonic853 said:
But does it truly break the game to warrant a killswitch? We know they said they'll normally only killswitch if something breaks stuff via crashes or the like. Thats why bugged streetwise and the like was allowed for so long. This one doesnt cause that kinda problem. So we will have to see.
After the streetwise fiasco they said they were going to revise their killswitch policy and give us more information on how the policy functions.
Getting the more information hasn't happened to my knowledge, no surprise there, but they at least agreed streetwise should have gotten the killswitch and they made a mistake.