crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
Apologies are great, unless the apologizer doesn't actually change, then its just an empty promise.
There's lots about DbD that is going to be really hard. How do you balance a game that's not just a asym, but also has an undefined win condition and various levels of sweatiness (though the game doesn't have to have the latter two, but its a BHVR decision)? Then you add in issues like SWFs vs soloq and how the game is played differently in different parts of the world. We're always going to have balance issues and when BHVR gets them wrong, its understandable.
There have been a lot of unforced errors lately. It's like the kill switch:
Community: Hey, this is badly broken.
BHVR: Got it, kill switched, we'll get a fix ASAP.
or even
BHVR: We understand, we will deal with the situation as quickly as possible.
It was a problem that was exploded when it didn't have to be.
The thing is, will they change? BHVR said they'll provide more info on things like the kill switch, we'll see if that happens. Are they willing to slow down the release of new content to make sure less bugs are in the game?
Basically, what's the plan to actually enact change is far more important than the apologies.
-
@TurboTOne said:
Yeah so i just keep on losing Match after Match after Match.
Even just getting 2 Kills as Killer needs me to hard tunnel, slug and Camp.
Also i need to bring like 4 Slow Down Perks if even want to have a chance of getting a kill.
I tried just for a bit not doing any of that. No Slow down, no tunneling, slugging or camping.
And i just lose every single Match. 0 kills. 0.
I know im not that bad at the Game. I've been playing DBD since 2019. 50/50 Killer and Survivor Main.
Let's say i really was that bad. Let's just run with the thought. Why doesn't the MMR match me with appropiate Opponents then? Why am i still getting the same extremly strong Survivors who can seemingly loop me for 2 Gens each. No weak link, nobody wasting.I get why People cheat. Because after losing so many Matches one after the other, i get why you would want to have an advantage for once. Just to get a Victory. Just to feel like your Time isnt completetly wasted. So, maybe, fixing Match Making, would also help with the cheater epidemic going on right now. at least, a little bit.
Here's a suggestion that's going to be ignored. Once a Generator has finished, all Survivors have a penalty on Gen Progression. Just to slow things down a bit. Each time a Survivor gets hooked, the survivors get that Penalty removed by a bit.
Basically what we have in 2v8. Just a bit stronger.And then, we nerf the Gen regression Perks. Just so it doesn't get Overpowered. The Code for it is already available. We just need to tweak the numbers a little so it actually works well.
Let's do it behaviour Style and actually overbuff it for a bit. Let's say, 3 Months. Then we go to something more balanced. Let Killer feel a bit better for some time again.
Thank you for ignoring me or telling me skill issue <3
Have a wonderful Rest of your Day :3
Why am i still getting the same extremly strong Survivors who can seemingly loop me for 2 Gens each. No weak link, nobody wasting.It's hard to say without seeing videos or what killer(s) you tend to play. Is it a recent thing or has it always been this way?
Also, what's your kill rate? Even if you are killing 5 to 10 points below the average it can take a long time for any MMR system to adjust.
-
The slow down definitely has an impact, with how fast gens can regress it can feel difficult to get gens done if the survivors get a good start (which is the point of the catch up mechanic).
Now its not as impactful as the survivor catch up mechanic, but they accomplish different things.
is repaired a hook or two just removes the penaltyYes, that's how it works, that's why its a catch up mechanic, one gen = two hooks. If the survivors and killers are both progressing their objective at roughly the same speed then neither side is going to get a boost and that boost is only supposed to have a small impact on the game.
-
Let's break this down into the parts:
Isnt it daunting for new players?- Absolutely, and it has been for a very long time.Are they planning to slow down releases?- Probably not for the next few years, at least.40 unique killers- I think they can keep releasing new killers for a long time, though they'll mostly be variations of the four to six broad categories people tend to lump killers into.146 survivor/124 killer perks- For survivor I think they can keep releasing perks without running out for quite awhile. There's lots of minor variations you can do on themes - example how many different types of healing perks and exhaustion perks there are. Killer is more difficult in that the perks also have to balance for every killer in the ever expanding roster.over 40 maps- I don't think this is a huge problem, and in fact might be a draw. If the norm for "average" MMR is that neither the killer or the survivors have the map memorized, I think many people will feel like that leads to a better game. Having more 'new' and 'fresh' experiences keeps new players involved. -
@TheGoone said:
Devs decided not to add any New Killers in 2v8 however that wasn't always the case it's been discovered in the Code that Chucky and Clown were supposed to enter this 2v8 iteration before devs decided not too.
Chucky and Clown were supposed to enterThe fact that the devs have code for killers who they are working on implementing, but have not yet finished, isn't a surprise. That doesn't mean they were planned for this version, though it might be an indication of which two killers are likely next when they are ready.
-
@Dem34888 said:
They added a new feature - play while you wait, it puts you in priority, and besides, you can also farm BP at x5, then use them for your killer's addons or for surv's items, a win-win situation
My friend and I played 3-4 games for survivors, basically our win rate was 60-70% and it was the same on killers, in most games either no one escaped, or 1-2 got hatch
Against 8 survivors SWF - yes, everything is as usual, 2 hooks - half of the map is already repaired
Survivors in this mode are mostly very casual and fearful, we have managed to pull the situation out of the triangle/quadron more than once, 1 runs and catches - the second patrols the generators and they all die on the last generator
The situation is the same with random killers, if a person plays for killers for some time, then he has an idea of how to change the game tactics over time based on the developing situationplay while you wait, it puts you in priorityMaybe I missed something, but does play while you wait actually give 'priority'? I thought it just 'held your place', but it doesn't get you to a match any faster, it just gives you something else to do.
@TheMonsterManor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3987950#Comment_3987950
You get put into a priority queue to be Killer if you play Survivor? So they can make queue times faster they just don't want to? Why not have a Prefer Killer or Prefer Survivor queues then?
Prefer Survivor queuesThe only way they can make my survivor queues faster is if they just skip the loading screen when I launch DbD and put me right into a match.
-
I voted for the permanent option in the survey, but I'm fine with breaks if they actually spend time developing the mode. But if the mode is basically 'finished', then yeah I'll take permanent 2v8.
-
I agree with @Foggyguy that certain killers just don't fit in 2v8 because having a 2nd killer negates the weakness/counterplay of that killer.
Mending is incredibly annoying, but its just one of his problems.
Though there could be a future where we have Legion and Plague in a match and survivors make the decision to stay injured and we're actually in an okay spot again.
-
Lots of difficulties in implementing something like this. One just straight up conceptual issue though is what exactly are survivors playing for? BHVR is incredibly loose with the win conditions but this would be pushing it even more. You create a weird scenario where it could be seven survivors escape, they all win, but the killer who got the one kill also wins.
You'd also have to rebuild some basekit functions because I imagine you'd have lots of instances of killers blocking each other. Once one killer is ahead the best strategy would be to just cut the other killer off.
It they ever get into PvE, if the survivors where all bots I could see a possibility, but it would be a lot of work for something with limited viability.
-
edit : queue times that's your argument ? its not the fact that player who is always alone is queueing up to play with a another killer no no it must be the fact survivors are lacking…does anyone have any common sense to the fact that YES THE LONELY ROLE WILL HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE QUEUEING TO PLAY AS DUO?????Absolutely yes, its the queue times.
30 minute queues aren't just another issue in DbD, they are a five alarm fire, all hands on deck, type of scenario that BHVR needs to think of a way to address. The mode cannot exist long term as is. Anything that might drive survivor numbers down should be treated with extreme care.
As for the point about killers wanting to play because it gives them a chance to be a duo instead of alone, yeah, obviously, what's the relevance? That's not going to change.
otherwise u gonna see more wesker / blight or blight / nurseWesker is fine.
Nurse is probably even fine as the larger maps weaken her (though I see her so incredibly rarely its hard to judge).
Blight's probably a bit too strong, but still enjoyable to play against.
-
A few Scouts are good and its a fun class to play as its the only one that gives you something unique compared to 1v4.
-
I was playing yesterday thinking 'why am I having so much fun? this is great!'
Then I realized I'd gone three trials without a Legion. Balance issues aside, they make the game really boring.
-
DbD has been trying to fight the law of supply and demand and it hasn't been going well for them.
People want to play killer more than survivor. This creates the obvious huge problem that the game needs more survivors. The one thing keeping people from playing killer has been the length of the queue times. BHVR keeps trying to think of ways to make the queue time not as bad, which in turn draws more players in.
Unless they can think of a way to make survivor radically more appealing (I don't think they can), this is basically what it will be.
-
@I_Cant_Loop said:
Link to video? I’m interested to learn how they know what version of EAC that is being used for this game.
I know the video @Dadeordye is referring to. The creator says that the executable to launch EAC from the DbD files is for the free version (I presume this means that there would be something different about the licensed version).
I have no idea on the validity of the claim, or the differences between the licensed and included versions, but that is the discussed process.
-
I'd say two things on the survivor side that I prefer:
1: Games don't seem to grind to a halt nearly as much. Once the killer gets the upper hand in 1v4, usually after an elimination, progressing the objective feels impossible, but the game might also last a long time (basically, I don't mind the loss, I do mind how annoyingly long it can take). It creates a feeling of being stuck in the game.
2: It doesn't seem as luck based. 1v4 feels like it is frequently won in the lobby screen. Killer camping? Well, I brought Reassurance (or, more likely, I just took it off). Getting tunneled feels either unfair or an automatic win depending on if you brought an anti-tunnel build or not.
1v4 has had some of the best experiences I've ever had in gaming, it also, by far, has had most of the worst. It feels like I'm searching for those rare games where the stars perfectly align. 2v8 I don't think ever matches 1v4 at its best, but its far more consistently 'good' than 1v4 is.
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
A few things.
Shareable perks have been a thing since launch. Survivor choice has always mattered mattered very little once their teachables were unlocked. This was intentional by the devs. And there were cosmetics. Not many, but there were.
And by golly there were shortcuts back then. Mori's working from the first down, and later the first hook. BNP's instantly completing generators, actual infinites. If anything, the game didn't revolve around skill back then. It revolved around fun.
The entirety of point 3 is flatly wrong. 2v8 gained popularity because of the novelty of playing with 2 killers and 8 survivors. If anything, the mode is less skill-based, because your individual performance isn't quite as important. It'd be far more accurate to make this point about Chaos Shuffle. Survivors are hardly "stripped-down" in 2v8.
Cosmetics being the main drive of revenue is a given for any live service game. You're right in that it feels like that it feels like montesation took priority over maintaining a fun, healthy game, though.
also… was this written by an AI?
@4thdslip said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3986470#Comment_3986470
Yes, it was written by AI. You can tell by the fact that it believes Blendette never existed, sharing perks was added later on, maps being included in DLC packs, counting the various multipacks and chapters together to get the DLC count, and that infinites took skill, on top of the numbered approach to paragraphs. It also seems to have anti-Otz in the prompt, when Tru3 complains equally if not more.
It also has that formatting AI tends to throw out with the title points in a larger font that most people don't take the time to type and roughly equal amount of words dedicated to each of the points.
It also has the distant voice AI tends to use instead of sounding like someone who played the game, for example typing things like 'players' instead 'I've heard' or 'according to' or 'I frequently experience'.
-
@Hannacia said:
Someone said 1v4 is not working eather not sure if this is true. Maybe behaviour should start thinking of adding more servers.
It doesn't feel like a server issue. if the game was going down in just one region, sure, but it hitting the whole world seems to be a different problem.
-
Wasn't this about the same time it went down yesterday?
Down for me as well, playing on Steam, US West. -
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3986061#Comment_3986061
Yeah, idk.
This is their only successful game, you'd think they'd put more time and attention into making it last as long as possible.
because once it's over, they go back to what they were before. A company that does other bigger companies work for them.
A company that does other bigger companies work for them.I think that is still what the majority of their workforce does.
-
@ManOMaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3985932#Comment_3985932
I understand that the model DBD has is successful, hell, I love the game.
But would making the grind easier really be harmful? I highly doubt it.
I would rather have it be easier. The game's grind may not appeal to all but then surely making the grind easier will make it more appealing?
But would making the grind easier really be harmful? I highly doubt it.I don't have any insight into their data, but the whole point of grinds is to find the right spot that invests players without seeming impossible. It used to be a lot slower in comparison to what it is now.
-
@ManOMaker said:
No, this is not a feedback or suggestion…
Everyone knows how god awful the shrine is, where it's practically impossible to get the perks you want without waiting millennia just for the chance of it being in the shrine.
I have theorized that it would be so awesome if the shrine just had every perk in it always so that newer/players who can't pay are able to get the builds they want at any point, but I have had the idea shot down in the past.
So like why not? I literally see no downsides to it…
@ManOMaker said:
Context: I already have every character and perk unlocked, but I have many friends who lost interest in DBD due to the grind and I feel like having shrine have all perks would make it a better experience. However, I have had my ideas shot down by other already experienced people because usually the mindset of "I had to grind so they should too."
we are not crabs in a bucket…
So like why not? I literally see no downsides to it…and
but I have many friends who lost interest in DBD due to the grindThe grind is the point. It doesn't work on/appeal to everyone, but it does for a lot of people. The Shrine also has enforced scarcity (get it now!) is meant to keep people invested / coming back so they don't miss anything.
It's an element of live service / games that has become more common over the last few decades in gaming. DbD is going into its 10th year so I highly doubt they see the model as anything but incredibly successful.
-
Just want to echo I'm also having issues. Was jumping in and out of games as survivor no problem at first, but now it doesn't seem like its connecting.
For the sake of any mod, playing US West.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3985512#Comment_3985512
I'm only a couple years younger than you, so I get it.
I played in tournaments when I was in college a few years back, I'd come home and get on my Xbox and play, then go to class the next day, tired as hell lol.
Now I'm back in school for a second degree, and I find I don't have so much time to game anymore.
I'm probably not the only who finds it very funny listening to a few people in their early 20s reminiscing about the good old days.
-
I guess it depends on how long and how much better.
A minute or two more and everything is matched up really well, sure. A minute or two more and only a slight improvement, no. If we get into the five to ten minutes, no, I'm not interested in waiting around that long.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3984437#Comment_3984437
whole victory is about defeating opponent, since when we condemn people for demonstrating this victory for others through the system that was introduced by the game itself? Mori isn’t something created by killer players, yet people actively dodge it and JUDGE when other people point on it. Like u are right now
since when we condemn people for demonstrating this victory for others through the system that was introduced by the game itself?We always have. Sitting around at the exit gates to tbag has always been considered BM.
Its also a normal part of discourse about any sport or game, there's a difference between celebrating and taunting.
Mori isn’t something created by killer players, yet people actively dodge it and JUDGE when other people point on it.We're both making judgements, whether you write it in all caps or not.
If you want to Mori the survivor as a killer, you can. Nothing about that has changed. Survivors have also always had the ability to alt tab off the screen or get up and do something else. Now killers just happen to know that the survivor did it and I'm still stunned how much of a problem that seems to be for some players.
Also, abandons are a system "introduced by the game itself", so following your logic that makes it absolutely okay.
-
All survivors have are perks. They are the things that give them uniqueness and strength. Killers have powers and killer perks have to be balanced around not being too powerful on any of 40 killers.
Until now, every killer play style can be countered.It would be a really bad game if survivors didn't have the possibility of counterplay.
-
@tes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3984359#Comment_3984359
I mean it’s killing, of course the main point to show it for your opponent. Better bring insta kill then, killers see their own mori even more often than survivors, so of course this animation is meant for both players.
As well as people won’t tbag or aimlessly stay on gate to keep wasting time until their target see this and push them out. It’s a way to show your win that game allows u to do
It’s not harmed or else, just question why one role can dodge this while other need to a) waste time pretending to ignore when you realize what they're doing. b) doing something else c)force yourself to pushe them out of gate warching absolutely same cycled animation of crouching.
It works in both sides, but somehow applies to only one
I mean it’s killing, of course the main point to show it for your opponent.I've tried editing my response a few times, but there's no way this can be said without being blunt.
If you want to celebrate after a win, no problem. If you need the opponent to watch your celebration for it to have meaning then you are more interested in their defeat than your victory.
killers see their own mori even more often than survivorsGood news, killers can abandon too after survivors have abandoned if they are bored of the mori! Everyone wins!
As well as people won’t tbag or aimlessly stay on gate to keep wasting time until their target see this and push them out. It’s a way to show your win that game allows u to doAnd survivors shouldn't do it and the killer shouldn't have to deal with it, there just isn't as easy a way to address it.
It works in both sides, but somehow applies to only oneBecause its an asym and each side is radically different.
When all the survivors are down, hooked, or dead, the chance of the survivors making any sort of comeback is microscopic.
There is not as easy a line to draw for the killers. Kills are still frequently achieved after the gens are powered, even kills after the doors are open is not at all unusual. Kills when the survivors are right by the exit itself are extremely rare, but its much harder to draw an exact line on where that should be and it would be very easy for people who want to BM to circumvent it.
A killer abandon when doors are powered would be a substantial increase in the abandon system. And some people are okay with an increase in the system, but it wouldn't at all be comparable to what the survivors currently have.
-
i wanna abondon during the animation, i wanna abondon when the killer goes for a 4k1: What's the point of staying around for something that has been seen before?
2: Why does the killer need them to stay around?
u only wanna abondon because u are losing and can't take the LWhy does the killer need them to be present? Can't a killer just take the win without rubbing it in?
but u take your sweeeet time tbagging at the gate or just standing there for reasons?u are not wasting time then right?Likely different groups of players. Every time I can recall the idea of tbagging at the exit gates coming up on forums people say 'don't do that'.
Implementing an abandon system when the exit gates are opened (without any other requirement) would have far more of a game impact than abandon when all survivors are downed/slugged/dead. That doesn't meant it shouldn't be done, but the two things aren't comparable.
i love how bhvr is slowly removing any satisfying aspect from killer but hey me watching the survivors bag at the door because i decided to play nicely so nobody dcs is fineAgain, why does the killer need the survivor to be present after the match has been decided for it to be enjoyable?
oh im sure u are saving precious seconds by abandoning , being toxic to the killer in end game chat and leaving because they are playing to wini love how they added a finisher mori and just removed why anyone would use it lolSo survivors abandoning because they don't want to watch the animation is bad because the killer gets no enjoyment out of the animation unless he knows the survivor is also seeing it? That makes it sound like killer also doesn't want to watch the animation, he just wants the survivor to have to be there for it.
i get it, slugging is boring, but im sorry letting the survivor leave the mili second they get downed?at least make it like 30 seconds or somethingIf its pointless after 30 seconds, it was almost certainly pointless for the 29 seconds before that.
what if i wanna give hatch?1: If this discourages a practice that throws off stats, good.
2: How is the killer player harmed by not getting to give hatch?
TL:DR let me feel like i actually won,TL:DR why the need for the survivor to be present? You say survivors don't want to take the L, you don't seem to want to take the W.
-
The first chase is incredibly important. That's just a core part of the game, especially for a killer like Ghostface. If the first survivor you target manages to outlast their stalk, the survivors are in a strong position, but likewise if you get a quick first down with the exposed the killer is in a strong position. That's just true on both sides, though I'm going to echo @AmpersandUnderscore that I'd like my chances of a comeback more in the killer's position off a bad start than the survivors.
To also say what some others already have, I never got the idea of the regression builds for comeback. Corrupt Intervention, absolutely, but the other perks require you to get hooks and Grim Embrace doesn't get much value if you don't spread hooks. If you aren't getting hooks it seems a really bad build to have.
-
@ThatRyanB said:
Dropping in here to share a little update. We have some Clown changes coming, but want to ensure they're tested in a PTB first before going straight to Live. As far as timing, we're aiming for these changes to be included in the next PTB, so stay tuned!
Unless there's another post I'm missing, I think saying 'nerf' as the title is not confirmed. Side grades are a common things were some things are weakened, others strengthened to try and adjust problematic issues without impacting the overall power.
It really isn't surprising as both survivors and clown players seem to hate the current version of Clown.
-
@HeroLives said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3983781#Comment_3983781
I think that’s cooler personally, what about you lot?
Its a good change. While I don't think the 'get gen progress for those around you' was unbalanced, it was just weird.
@HeroLives said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3983798#Comment_3983798
what would you want the boons to be able to do as a boon class?
Okay, if I had my way, each class would have some variability within it. I think the class system is great for allowing survivors an idea what each other is doing, but a little variability would be nice (an example being an escapist who can choose to take Lithe or Balanced Landing for themselves, though its always Sprint Burst for other survivors).
So in my ideal world, there would be variability to what the Boon class brings.
Presuming that can't happen and we aren't making new boon perks:
Probably Shadow Step and Exponential (which would need adjustments given that there is already a self pickup mechanism). Being one class is totally dedicated to healing I think CoH would just kind of step on that too much. This also makes boons more of a 'bring chase here' type of deal instead of 'come here to recover' practice.
Probably also give the boon class a boost after they complete a boon. Either like a blessing version of counterforce or overzealous (this could be there 'on first hook' ability).
Not sure what an ultimate would be though, but I think other than the Scout the ults are pretty meh (either in power or interest), so not a huge expectation there.
-
They shouldn't have an infinite charge and nerfing that was the way to go. BHVR didn't need to try and reinvent items, limited use was fine, people just wanted more options for what survivors could bring that would be useful.
If after that change they still overperform (or underperform) then additional changes would be fine to discuss.
-
1: Quite a few devs do play the game and have talked about it.
2: Some have streamed in the past, but they've given reasons for not doing it as a general practice.
3: There's a few issues with bugs that aren't really connected to how much they play.
A: Some bugs will only be found when lots of people play the game.
B: Bugs take time to fix. It has been talked about that they will release content already knowing what is going to be fixed in the next Hotfix. Sometimes a problem is just going to take a certain amount of hours to fix, and you don't have those hours.
C: BHVR seems to be working right up until they have to send the patch over to the console companies. This creates the possibility of introducing bugs at the last moment.
4: With balance issues, I don't think the state of balance is evidence they don't play. There are few things that the community, despite most players measuring their hours in the thousands, actually agree on so I don't see why the devs would just come to a certain conclusion if they played more.
—
BHVR, to their credit and as mentioned above, doesn't engage in crunch time. I think the culprit is much more likely to be that they are trying to squeeze too much into too little of a span of time meaning things just can't be fixed.
-
@ThatRyanB said:
Hey folks. I totally hear your concerns here, but also want to give some background. Balancing is an iterative process that takes time to find a sweet spot, and this is very much another step in that process. To quote one of my favourite fantasy series', "journey before destination".
We 100% want to hear your feedback once you get a chance to play a few Trials with this new change, so please let us know how it's feeling. We're here to grab that feedback and make sure the team is made aware.
It's hard to give feedback on whether balance has been hit in the right place when the adjustments aren't minor, but major changes to the item.
It's like if BHVR was a restaurant, the meal comes out and we (the customers) say it looks amazing but complain its a little too hot.
You take it back and when it comes back its frozen.
We complain, you take it back, and then when it comes out again the plate is literally on fire.
Fog Vials are a cool item. I think everyone gets the idea that they may take some time to balance (especially if BHVR gave stats, if the item is way overperforming we'd be more understanding), but radical changes just destroy the possibility of giving meaningful feedback.
Max charges is probably the way to go. Survivors aren't going to trade in the ability to heal themselves unless they get a good chance to actually lose the killer and every other survivor item functions off similar limitations.
-
why do people who only play soloq while constantly lamenting about it?I'm not sure this is absolutely true, I feel like a lot of people who lament soloq are either killer mains or SWF mains who have been dropped into soloq. There are definitely soloqers who complain about it, but that's true for everything in the game.
I'm one of the few who preferred the style before they added what other survivors were doing to the HUD (though it was a necessary change). I really enjoyed the feel of not being sure what was going on.
That said, there are some issues with soloq that can ruin the fun. Not all of them are under BHVR's ability to control, but some are. Getting into a game, a few minutes going by and then you see someone who is farming or just AFK. The feeling of getting stuck in a game while the killer is searching for a 4k while you lay slugged. Fighting another survivor to be the first to unhook because you both brought the same build. Having a mix of super sweats and casuals can ruin the experience for either group.
More specifically, why don't people send randoms that they liked playing with friend requests? Is it an anxiety thing? Are you afraid they'll reject you? Or that you'll have to perform?The last time I tried making random groupings in an online game was over 25 years ago and never really cared for it.
With DbD I feel like it would ruin the experience. If I had a friend who was interested in the game I'd definitely give it a try, but not really worth going in with someone I don't know.
-
@tes said:
Many people try to argument with “tryhards will be in casual anyway” but then I just want to ask why in other games rank modes exist and that's fine.
Because game designer completely reworked their rank and it is actually hard to be on top.
We already have mmr. And if looking at reality, majority of people on high MMR is still pretty casual players. I also consider myself pretty casual, even playing only on two killers and doing “hard” challenges (e.g one perk, no perks, no tunnel, win streaks, not dodging sfw gen rushers or bully sfws) and constantly see people with over 3k hours experience while having less then 1k myself. And that’s why u can get hard sfw being on absolutely weak killer or ultra hard try nurse with 100+ streak being in solo.
And that’s why when killer face with comp team in pubs, 95% of them would likely to lose. Despite probably having same MMR system.We need to increase mmr pull to make comfort zone in ranking. So someone like otzdarva, having 14k hours never face with 400 hours survivor who even didn't play a lot against killer he played in lobby. Even me was getting common accusation of cheats, because players doesn't know pyramidhead can flick. So it will be actually comfort zone, that less motivates for “mid try hards” to switch to casual mods.
We simply can make rank mode and casual mode completely different. Like for casual people can vote to ban certain perks/killers/items, so S tier killers or full sfw genrush physically can not use their max potential in casual mode. While in rank mode the way to count your MMR will depend on rules close to comp ones, e.g. limited perks depends on killer tier, being spawned on specific maps against specific killers, no anticamp system, limited aura perks and moreover.
And for actually motivating players to stay on rank mode, game should encourage for this. More bp modifiers, charms, leader boards. Actual reputation.
But this will require so much rework. And BHVR barely can normally release chapter without turning it to cheater DDoSing guest for advertising DLC. What we expect? They won’t do this. It will upset many casual players as well, or pseudo try hards, because they can not cheese anymore or blaming “unfair tunneling or sfws” to their constant loses. No one wants to admit skill issue. Majority of “high MMR” players even can’t admit they more likely casual ones. And while it’s hidden, they pretend they are soooo good actually and that’s why their opinion only valid one.
And few want to give a voice to really experienced and strong players. Because neither BHVR nor the majority will like their opinion about the game.
The only way to realise u are on top of MMR cap - when u see TTVs with more than 5k hours in this game,
Many people try to argument with “tryhards will be in casual anyway” but then I just want to ask why in other games rank modes exist and that's fine.Basic answer is the same as whenever people say 'if it works in X game, why doesn't it work in DbD?" DbD, as a grindy asym is radically different than other games.
Three reasons, some of which @TicTac have covered.
1: Conceptual - In most games your ideal world is having two teams of the same ranking hitting each other. Except comparisons in DbD are always going to be off because the best Blight in the world can never hit the 2nd best Blight in the world, they can only hit survivors, just as survivor teams can't hit each other, they only hit killers.
This means having a direct comparison is impossible because it will really come down to who hits who. Not to mention a system like this is open to trying to game it much more than you could in other games.
On top of that, BHVR would have to decide on more firm win conditions.
2: Asym problems - There's a bunch here, just to hit some of the highlights. In non-asym games the sides are doing the same thing, so players are improving at the same rate. In DbD survivors can form teams, start communicating, start planning strategies together, or not, this creates possibilities and challenges on one side that don't exist on the other.
Things like bans also don't work the same. When something gets banned in a normal game, its banned for both sides. Killers and survivors have totally different stuff so it would be very hard to balance how many bans each side gets. Not to mention, that a huge part of the game design is not knowing what perks the other side has: one of the reasons not to tunnel is the possibility of anti-tunnel perks, if the killer could wipe those out he would have a lot of power.
And if survivors could ban killers, well then some killers would just never get played.
Then you have the issue of matching people up. The best survivor teams are the 4 person SWF clock callouts, except there aren't very many of them and they don't play as much (as gets brought up a lot, its just harder to organize 4 players then 1). So high ranked killers might have extremely long queue times, meaning they just jump over to the other queue.
3: The game isn't designed to be balanced.
Items / Addons - DbD has the grind as a balance mechanism where some things are meant to be rare (this is largely dead for anything but new players, but BHVR still relies on it for design).
The thing that tends to upset people is when one side sweats and the other doesn't. Except if BHVR changed their mind and thought this was a bad design, they could just change it and get rid of the concept of rarities and balance everything.
Maps - Who the map favors can radically depend on the killer, this makes things like map selection easier for one side than the other (unless you are imagining a ranked system where the survivors know the killer, which undermines a lot more aspects of the game).
Killer tiers - You mention this going off things like the tiers lists comp already uses. Except this is an end run around the idea of actually balancing the killers, which is something BHVR doesn't want to do (a lot of requests for ranked are to put in rules for things I think players wishes BHVR would do, but they won't, so they try bringing up ranked as an end run around BHVR's objection).
—
Rank mode would probably take a fair amount of time for BHVR to set up, I doubt it would actually achieve anything, and there are lots of more important things to focus on. For those who really want the comp experience, leagues already exist.
-
There isn't a good mechanism to separate out the various groups other than what already exists beyond making MMR stricter. Lots of casual players would play ranked for the increased rewards, while many very skilled players would play casual for the easy victories as for these players shards/BP is completely irrelevant. You end up in the same spot you are now, except people are more toxic to others for being in the wrong queue.
-
@Linkdouken said:
The state of Dead By Daylight at the moment is pretty poor but most of all, how The Walking Dead licence has been disrespected. A character that wasn't even available in the PTB, voicelines with completely different VAs doing the grunts etc, a tile that counts as a map, perks that are either dreadful or bugged to be OP, and now a livestream disaster wasting the time of a celebrity endorsement.
With all this I'm really wondering if it'll scare away other licence holders as they will want their properties treated with a certain level of care and stability.
I really hope Behaviour can come up with some magic damage control.
With all this I'm really wondering if it'll scare away other licence holders as they will want their properties treated with a certain level of care and stability.Probably not. Licenses are still great for A) making money and B) bringing attention to the main product. Player count is the number that people will look to and being BHVR doesn't seem to seek 'exclusive' licenses, companies have very little to lose.
Even if deserved, I have a hard time seeing bugs / balance issues being anything but a minor factor. There's no blowback on TWD because of how bad the chapter is, the blowback is, deservedly, on BHVR. The things the license holders care about, appearance and/or lore don't get complaints (the audio issues is the closest). I'm just imagining trying to even explain what a buggy perk is to a PR rep for a company and just getting a glazed look in response.
-
@Rogue11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3981388#Comment_3981388
I wasn't actually aware of that. That's even worse. Right up there with the mythical "bm prevention" where you can't pump fake an unhook anymore. Thousands of hours and I never saw that outside of lightly trolling someone who was trying to go next on hook.
There were a few videos from the PTB actually, just went back and checked a thread about it from a few years ago. What I recall though is everyone in the videos talked about it in a generally positive way about finally having something good against camping and people were testing out the extremes (which is part of the PTB). Even with the hypothetical danger it posed, BHVR way over did it.
-
There's probably not going to be some 'this was the moment that caused me to leave'. I, generally, think they've made the game better since I first started playing and I'm somewhat hopeful it will keep in that direction.
I do tend to take breaks from the game, usually between events and if the game is ever particularly problematic I just walk away until its addressed. DbD will likely be just like other games I've played, at some I'll take a break, get into another game, and just kind of forget about DbD.
If there ever was going to be an event that killed DbD in short order I imagine it would be a game design decision or massive bug that made the game unplayable released right before a major holiday and they didn't come back to fix it, but I suspect the game could probably survive that as well
I used to believe the game would be reaching its maximum lifespan around 2027, but it can probably go into the 2030s pretty comfortably.
-
Kind of seems like the wrong way to buff him.
Trapper's traps are already extremely strong if survivors step on them. The issue is that as survivors climb in skill the chance of a trap getting stepped on goes down drastically. This feels like it would just boost him against new players, which is where he doesn't need a boost.
-
Only 15-20% of meta killer builds include hex perksGiven only 12.7% of killer perks are hex perks, that's pretty good.
Cross-platform analysis revealsBut there's no 'analysis'. We get lots of 'sciency' terms scattered throughout as if the post was a doctoral study. Some people have an opinion is not an analysis.
The Kill Switch system has been used for crisis management, but hasn't addressed structural hex perk issues.This is one of those AI sounding things. The Kill Switch, very obviously, has nothing to do with hexes. But its the type of thing an AI writing assistant throws in because its trying to fill its word count.
-
I'm just excited to hear that gens are back to 80 seconds, instead of 90 which is where they've been for years.
Repair time solo:80s per gen → in 50s, that’s ~62.5% progress per survivor. -
@AmpersandUnderscore said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3981085#Comment_3981085
Again, someone is bringing this, with heavy investment, instead of: anti tunneling perks, chase perks, or "gen rush". But the mindset is "let's nerf it and go back to complaining about those other 3 instead".
This is also pretty easily telegraphed that it's in play since it's the only self-pickup.
And yes, if there was a killer build that completely undid itself after 30 seconds and meant that killers had to bring an entire build that wasn't slowdown, or information, and only functioned in incredibly specific scenarios that relied on your opponent to play into them? Let's go. Let's see how meta that would be (spoiler: it wouldn't).
This is just the flavor of the month for people to complain about (and in this case, have a CC give them their opinion on so they don't have to think for themselves), before we go right back to "gens too fast".
I'm not arguing with otz, or hens. I'm arguing with you. The ideas stand or fall on their own, and right now your argument is flat on it's face (just like conviction after 30 seconds, coincidentally).
Again, someone is bringing this, with heavy investment, instead of: anti tunneling perks, chase perks, or "gen rush". But the mindset is "let's nerf it and go back to complaining about those other 3 instead".I think there's a huge 'out of sight, out of mind' issue. As much as everyone seems to be aware that gen rush, perhaps with a mix of quick heals, is the strongest survivor approach, the perks that contribute to it don't get nearly the anger of something like Conviction or, to go back a bit, old FTP+BU. I think because those combos occur in front of the killer they lead to much more of a reaction even if they aren't objectively as strong as some pretty boring perk options.
-
@HeroLives said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3980659#Comment_3980659
Thank you. This is what I was looking to go back and forth with. I totally agree. I too would take that risk.
I think a good way to circumvent the disparity between old and new mechanics would be if you’re using new mechanics you don’t get matched with people using old mechanics on both sides. if they build a system that allows growth and separates the power differentials into essentially separate queuing lobbies. Not only would this be a way for newer players to get the hang of basic mechanics while not being bombarded with a million things at once, but it also allows existing players looking for a more classic loops that option.
I know I bring up nioh a lot, but I think even as a baseline single player game a thing it does flawlessly is drop you off on the base level to understand fundamental game mechanics. You’re not over powered and neither are your enemies. As you progress through the game and get more mechanical abilities and resources to manage your enemies do too. While this is a single player game, I think theoretically it could work for a PvP game through lobby isolation and mechanical set ups ie no mix and match.
Killers can get insane power mashups and abilities, and survivors can get counter mechanics. Obviously gens under power creep should be monitored to create a fair environment.Idk I’m just thinking out loud. I saw someone post they wanted a pole vaulting distance closing and range killer, and it sounds cool but idk how that would work without giving survivors a dodge roll ability or something, and obviously that would break the game against other killers. Unless it’s something that just comes baked into their kit that survivors get when versing a killer like that. Maybe that’s the give and take that needs to be put into the game concerning power creep? Do I sound absolutely mad?
I think a good way to circumvent the disparity between old and new mechanics would be if you’re using new mechanics you don’t get matched with people using old mechanics on both sides.Aren't we just in the territory of new game modes then (I'll get to Nioh in a moment)? This is something I think a lot of people would like them to explore more, but once we start separating groups we're out of balance discussions and whether it is worth the time investment for new modes compared to focusing on the base game.
While this is a single player game, I think theoretically it could work for a PvP game through lobby isolation and mechanical set ups ie no mix and match.Well its just not a PvP game, its an asym PvP and balancing a single "level" of player experience is pretty tricky as is.
In a sense, they conceptually already have access to this in the game but they don't really commit to it and most people don't like the idea. You have killers like Wraith who are easy to pick up and play, but falter later on (arguably not as much as he should), while other killers like Dracula require more game experience before playing and have more powers, but more things to go wrong.
On the survivor side players move from basic info perks because they're just learning maps and gameplay elements to perks that provide higher values, Dead Hard being the best but far from the only example. There are also the perks that require learning teamwork and playing together.
I'd be fine if they actually leaned into this design more, but people tend to hate the idea of tiers and its one of the most common complaints.
a pole vaulting distance closing and range killer, and it sounds cool but idk how that would work without giving survivors a dodge roll ability or somethingWell this gets into a different discussion about game themes and to what level DbD should be an action game. To a degree I think they tried to explore things like this in Deathgarden, but, unfortunately in my opinion, it was a failure.
Unless it’s something that just comes baked into their kit that survivors get when versing a killer like that.We already have that with items and props that are specific to killers
Though again this opens up another possible balance issue. Alien is a good example putting a new mechanic into the game. The problem is that once the survivors really get used to it, the Alien really drops behind. That's the nature of asyms, the balance of power tends to shift as players gain experience (in my opinion, which I'm trying really hard to separate out here, I think this might be an inevitable part of asyms).
Maybe that’s the give and take that needs to be put into the game concerning power creep? Do I sound absolutely mad?Actually I think what you are discussing is in many ways what BHVR wanted, though there are also code limitations to some suggestions.
I think that BHVR really wanted killers to be in Tiers. You start with Wraith and Trapper, eventually you get to a point you can't progress anymore, move over to killers like Plague until you can't progress anymore, then go onto killers like Nurse and Blight. That's part of the reason I believe we used to have difficulty levels given to the killers.
Except people didn't like it and determining which mechanics are difficult or not has always been a struggle (i.e. Billy being slotted into a beginner level and I think OG Skull Merchant was listed as Hard).
-
My conclusion: I think modes/modifiers are the more practical way forward for this idea and I hope they increase the variety that they have. I don't think having differing levels of structured play is conceptually a bad idea as a hypothetical, as a reality I don't see how it could be coded in a practical manner or how the player base could be convinced of such a switch.
-
I'm not sure its really something that can feasibly happen, but let's jump into it as a hypothetical:
So there are new killers and survivor perks that are stronger than old ones, but we get new and fresh mechanics.
Cons
Feels pay to win
The level of old perks / killers that would just be 'junk' would feel extremely silly
The transition period could be messy
Inevitably there will be some people who don't like the new mechanics
Asyms have horrible histories of success and this feels like a serious risk of upsetting a delicate balance
Lots of players have not yet grown bored with the mechanics so a change might be off putting.
Pros
More fun is more fun
-
As a player, I'd take the risk, I can always play something else. Not sure why BHVR would take such a chance at this point though.
-
@Dipper said:
I mainly think they either would or could slow down with new killers. One day we'll have like 100 characters on each side and tht would be way too much.
Maybe they do keep going for a while but with 10 years I feel like a bigger change is inevitableOne day we'll have like 100 characters on each side and tht would be way too much.I feel like people used to say 'one day we'll have like 50 killers and that would be way too much'.
It's basically a given now we're going to get to that mark.
Surprisingly, to me at least, the game isn't slowing down. I expect they'll be keeping the release pattern they have for quite awhile longer.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3980562#Comment_3980562
1: With @Firellius you're talking about how important it is for survivors to always do gens. Even healing is a waste, just do gens.
Well these survivors aren't doing gens. 2 of them have got off gens to try and get the save. So are these good survivors for getting a save, or bad survivors for not prioritizing gens?
We're getting into Kettle Logic.
It’s not that hard to answer. The person on the hook — the one you’re not tunneling because “tunneling is bad,” right? — was just in a chase before. They know the map, they know the stronger structures, and they roughly know the direction the fresh hook chase is going. They can judge if it’s worth it timing-wise to cover the chase or if that would just lead to a quick down in a dead zone.
Basically, they pick the option that buys the most time overall.
If that player can get a DS or block from shack into jungle gym into main window and hold the killer for longer, then blocking is better than going straight to a gen.
If they can still do decent without blocking, then gen pressure is the better choice.
And if the player is gonna go down anyway, don´t block for sure, otherwise the killer gets 2 fast insta downs and double pressure.
In the end, the choice that buys the most time for the team is usually the right one (with risk assessment depending on the killer, of course, especially regarding snowball potential).
Ye, sometimes it’s worthusing DS or whatever in the next chase to block and force the killer’s "goodies" on them, sometimes not—it really depends on how long the chase lasts with or without.
2: A situation is not the game. It would be like a survivor complaining about not having counterplay because they are in a deadzone. How did they get to the deadzone, what has the killer given up to get there, was there a chase to the deadzone, how long?
The survivors have given up pressuring gens to pressure you (a good element of the game) so they've risked quite a bit to challenge this.
So to get to this point a lot of things could have happened. One of the survivors setting up for the rescue could have been seen getting you a free hit, the survivor could have gone down in a position where it was impossible to save, wasting their time, or in trying to ensure that he didn't go down somewhere the survivor could have given up other opportunities to potentially extend the loop.
Then if they set up, you have a couple of options. Being they are close you can shift pressure. You can target the conviction survivor when he gets back up, or if you think he has soul guard, you can see his entire build is based around this and target the rescuers. You can also try and bait in the rescue.
This is on top of the opportunity costs the survivors have had to expend, they could be doing a lot of different things with their builds. There's likely quite a few other possibilities as well.
Or you could have Lightborn. It is far from the only option you have in the situation, but when looking at the overall game balance of the situation it is something that needs to be considered.
i mean.. what do you even do in these situations? Do you just let everything happen to you?I was playing a Legion match during the anniversary where a SWF (2 certainly, 3 probably), was doing the Vigil + SB into pallet saves with the invitations. It took me too long to realize this and I got severely beat. It happens, but it would be weird to focus on just that game instead the others I played before it where I won.
I play to win, but feel its too easy too frequently as killer if I'm just using all available options, and I loathe an early 1v3. Lots of options in the game, more on the killer side but some on the survivor, feel like playing a game with a handicap which takes all of the merit out of winning.
A rescue is either coming with a near-mid timer or traded just before the phase shift. If it’s a critical hook in a critical zone (which isn’t as big a time investment as you might think), there’ll definitely be two people for sure. And if I focus on the rescuers… then what? Do I chase the rescuer down?
Well… then what? I end up with a fresh hook… maybe even another fresh hook… and right after that, it’s “tut tut, exit gates.” Fresh hooks aren’t what you need. They don’t bring you anything. Fresh hooks put almost no pressure on the team.
This sounds like hoping for the best and praying survivors suck or are inefficient. Hope they’re not good, y’know? Yup, that’s often how people win—because there are a lot of bad survivors out there. But this ain’t a damn luck game — I don’t want a dice roll. I don’t like gambling on "please let this team be bad.
It’s not that hard to answer.None of what you then type is an answer. If gen rushing is too strong, the survivors coming for you have given up pressure.
Your setup also doesn't make sense. You have three survivors in the area, not all of them can be a tunnel target and very few people who aren't trolling in end game chat consider it tunneling if you are pursuing another target and then a target with more hooks comes in for a save and gets targeted.
Basically, they pick the option that buys the most time overall.Great, which is the game. Heal, pressure gens, protect teammates, etc. survivors always have to weigh various factors in making a decision on what to do. It is usually, and should be, the same for killers.
That's the game and its a good game.
One of the best arguments against tunneling is that it takes all of those elements out. Find a target, eliminate them as quickly as you can. It's silly for how complex most of the game is there is a massively powerful strategy in the game that cuts through all of that.
-
@oecrophy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3980400#Comment_3980400
I never said they are too strong or what your opinion on them is. Its an example of something that once upon a time was too strong, got nerfed, but is still part of a game and that some players, not all, think should get more nerfed, but that doesn't mean they would be completely removed.
keh..
alright, if I read him wrong, fair play — my bad. Asked him already if in my Nurse game that’s straight-up tunnel camping, since one survivor was right near the hook with me and I had line of sight on it… 1 dude was farming the hook right in front of me. So, does that already count as camping + tunneling?
Like, if it’s legit for me to hang tight near the hook, deny the unhook, punish the guy trying to save right under my nose (and "tunnel" the unhooked?), and slug the everyone’s clearly in my sight — then y, can i in this situations keep my "goodies?"
I just don’t wanna lose them, you know? I’m not just gonna let everything happen right in front of me just ‘cause I’m “not allowed.”
A lot of SoloQ losses happen because they just get steamrolled — not just by the Killer, but also bad teammates or throwers. Hence their escape rate.
A lot of SWF losses happen because they get too cocky, too greedy, overcommit to saves, play overly aggressive.In SoloQ, the game is often decided early, 4–5 gens up.
In SWF, it’s often in late game where they all die to a NOED camp (just an example).SoloQ has more
frustration. SWF usually has thebettergame.
Solo players see stats like “top SWFs don’t escape more than me” and just think “so everything must be unfair.”But a good SWF plays very differently than typical SoloQ. Many don’t even care about escaping — they enjoy the aggressive style way more (because the efficiency meta is boring… early call, early run, early drop).
Where SoloQ ends up in an unwinnable position because of a missed callout, SWF avoids those spots — but gives Killers more openings for counter-pressure through their aggression.
So no, you can’t just go: “SWF and SoloQ have the same escape rate, therefore Killer OP.”
And since we’re on the topic of the “nothing I can do — insta-down” situations that impact
bothsides…Better, fairer maps for both sides would be a win for everyone
Y, but what’s the “right” play when someone goes down, two people instantly rush me with flashies, the guy on the ground has conviction + plot twirst, and while I hit one of the flashy players, I turn around and the downed person is already back up?
Yup… bring Lightborn, sure.was a good quickswitch at 6 seconds — as I do as surv. (so i wasn´t even mad) But if they had been downed in a pallet… I get it, survivors have their new toy. I’m fine with that. But I want to keep my toy too.
That situation was completely uncounterable for me no matter what I did. Picking up was impossible, slugging was impossible. I was just stuck. I want to keep the right to get my pressure back later in the match — maybe in a “cheap” way? Damn yes, it´s cheap.. But that Conviction into Plot Twist combo is no less cheap.
dvd at this point isn’t always a “skill game.” A lot of the time it’s about who brings the strongest stuff and stacks it high. And yeah, even so: you’re right, I hate the randomness. I don’t want to risk something like that happening mid-game after I’ve “gone soft” once. I take every bit of pressure I can get the moment it’s there.
i mean.. what do you even do in these situations? Do you just let everything happen to you? Or do you tell yourself, “Yohh… if that happens, I’ll punish it, but otherwise I’ll play soft”?
Okay, fair.. but: big BUT: what if you’re playing super soft and then something like that happens on the last two gens, and it flips the whole match? Does that “Yup, one or two kills are fine” mindset kick in? You can have that mentality, sure, but I play for the win. And for me, that means the whole team. Doesn’t mean I’ll always get it, but losing a match I felt like I had under control because of something like that… and losing the entire round just because I didn’t put on enough pressure early?
lot of things start happening the moment you give them “breathing room.” You need that constant pressure on the team.
This is getting kind of rambly so I'll do my best to focus it:
That situation was completely uncounterable for me no matter what I did.Two big points here
1: With @Firellius you're talking about how important it is for survivors to always do gens. Even healing is a waste, just do gens.
Well these survivors aren't doing gens. 2 of them have got off gens to try and get the save. So are these good survivors for getting a save, or bad survivors for not prioritizing gens?
We're getting into Kettle Logic.
2: A situation is not the game. It would be like a survivor complaining about not having counterplay because they are in a deadzone. How did they get to the deadzone, what has the killer given up to get there, was there a chase to the deadzone, how long?
The survivors have given up pressuring gens to pressure you (a good element of the game) so they've risked quite a bit to challenge this.
So to get to this point a lot of things could have happened. One of the survivors setting up for the rescue could have been seen getting you a free hit, the survivor could have gone down in a position where it was impossible to save, wasting their time, or in trying to ensure that he didn't go down somewhere the survivor could have given up other opportunities to potentially extend the loop.
Then if they set up, you have a couple of options. Being they are close you can shift pressure. You can target the conviction survivor when he gets back up, or if you think he has soul guard, you can see his entire build is based around this and target the rescuers. You can also try and bait in the rescue.
This is on top of the opportunity costs the survivors have had to expend, they could be doing a lot of different things with their builds. There's likely quite a few other possibilities as well.
Or you could have Lightborn. It is far from the only option you have in the situation, but when looking at the overall game balance of the situation it is something that needs to be considered.
i mean.. what do you even do in these situations? Do you just let everything happen to you?I was playing a Legion match during the anniversary where a SWF (2 certainly, 3 probably), was doing the Vigil + SB into pallet saves with the invitations. It took me too long to realize this and I got severely beat. It happens, but it would be weird to focus on just that game instead the others I played before it where I won.
I play to win, but feel its too easy too frequently as killer if I'm just using all available options, and I loathe an early 1v3. Lots of options in the game, more on the killer side but some on the survivor, feel like playing a game with a handicap which takes all of the merit out of winning.
Does that “Yup, one or two kills are fine” mindset kick in?Fine is a bad word. Improvement, sure. I understand its a silly framework to take into a game with 4 other people to expect 4k or bust as a reasonable path forward. Which actually gets back to the original topic of the thread, if the 'middle' outcomes were more frequent, and 4ks/4es were rare accomplishments, it would be a better game.
I'd compare it to the board game Diplomacy but this post has already gotten way too long.
-
It's not. It used to be more reliable because when BHVR released kill rates nightlight's numbers were usually pretty close, but now they are way off.
I still bring it up for things like game distributions because its the only thing we have that's data on that.