crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
@ForTheEntity said:
Sometimes I dont understand why I take the time to write posts. I even wrote in my very first post that I am not talking about the tunneling which is happening because the Killer would lose the game otherwise. I mean, aside from the fact that we should ignore Comp when it comes to public maches, what do you want me to say? I try, but if you ignore certain points, I dont know anymore. But, again: I am NOT talking about Killers tunneling because they are close to losing and have no other way to win. Survivors usually DONT complain about those. I know that some people twist it like that to have somewhat of an argument, but it is not the truth. I am talking about Killers who go into the game to tunnel and slug from the start.
The biggest problem with DbD is that it has never had the ability to tell the difference between unnecessary tunneling from the get go and necessary tunneling. We can see cases where it actually is necessary to tunnel from the get go, in comp. So where do they draw the line? How can they program the game to know the difference? These are questions with no easy answers. We can't just ignore comp because we can't say that comp style matches don't happen in public DbD matches. The game that ended Momo_Seventh's Blight streak is an example of a comp style public match.
As for your changes to Trapper, Ghostface and Pig… I apologize for asking. I think your killer changes are fine, but this isn't the thread for that discussion.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4109326#Comment_4109326
It's just an interesting idea. They could level the playing field by leveling the playing field. Addons like Iridescent Button throw a brutal wrinkle in the idea.
But I do think that having all maps enabled all the time generating the same way for all killers is kind of outdated now that we have so many maps and so many killers, none of which are actually well-balanced, especially now that map offerings have been dumpstered. Scratched Mirror Myers used to be one of my go to builds to play but I haven't even played him a single time since his rework because I know most of the time I'd load into a map where I'm not going to have fun.
You're right it would take a lot of work, work that BHVR most likely won't do.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4109329#Comment_4109329
I'm using the current state of the game versus some hazy imaginary new game state you haven't bothered to identify or quantify. All you said was "Focus on DS as a solution, rather than Endurance."
We can see cases where it actually is necessary to tunnel from the get go, in comp.Except this is a viable strategy in comp because the killer knows whether the survivors have anti-tunnel or not. When they do unrestricted match ups tunneling is usually not done because it becomes a much weaker strategy against strong survivors with unlimited perks.
-
@SpyUA said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4109427#Comment_4109427
Basically no one does that and I wouldn't count trying getting saves as a thing to lower the efficiency (getting a save wastes a lot of time on the killer side).
It's pretty common if the survivors are ahead, I've even seen CCs talk about it when a match is going really well.
It's just a lot rarer for survivors to be ahead than the killer. Its much more common in 2v8 because survivors being in a clearly winning position is much more regular.
As for unnecessary saves slowing down the killer - and a killer who doesn't tunnel to keep a fair match is still slowing down the survivors by pressuring them off of gens and forcing others to go for rescues. Both sides are engaging in less than optimal play in the interest of a more enjoyable match.
In OPs actually a lot more is being asked of survivors than of killers because a survivor cleansing a totem is contributing nothing and chests are pretty close to almost nothing, while a non-tunneling killer is still advancing their side.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4109401#Comment_4109401
I thought it was pretty well agreed upon at LEAST for the killer side that more than a 2k is a win, less than a 2k is a loss and 2k is a tie.
As others have said, that's a community understanding / concept.
BHVR has said wins are totally up to the players. Whether DbD is even something that can be 'won' is a player concept.
From an MMR 'win' standpoint, long term term kill rate / escape rate is what matters (with hatch making it much more confusing). How individual games break down is not important.
-
I never saw a survivor who said "Ah man we finished two generators within of 30 seconds, we should slow down a bit and do some totems and chests so the Killer can catch up".This is actually really common where the survivors are well ahead so they start doing chests, totems, trying for unnecessary saves, etc.
Like most complaints in the game, the idea that this is just one sided is silly.
-
That's not a buff, that's a rework of what the perk does.
A buff to Pebble would be something like a clearer targeting reticule or greatly increasing the amount of scratch marks it leaves.
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4108969#Comment_4108969
That’s their choice and I’d do the same if I wasn’t having fun in the game. I’m just saying that I still have plenty of fun playing both sides and I don’t know why some survivors get so bent out of shape when they don’t escape a majority of their matches.
I don’t know why some survivors get so bent out of shape when they don’t escape a majority of their matches.How many killers would be having fun if we flipped 60% KR to a 40% KR?
-
I'm so ######### tired of the constant downvotes whenever on the forum something is said that would nerf survivors in any way.Reducing the amounts of survivors who could be an escapist would be a pretty big survivor buff. 1 or 2 is pretty good, but 4? I hate being in a survivor lobby with that many escapists.
-
When I got involved in DbD more heavily 4ish years ago I thought the game was on its downswing and at the 10 year mark the game would be entering life support. I was obviously wrong on that.
The game could still be quite profitable with a lot less players than it has now, so 5 to 10 more years of the current release schedule is pretty easy to see.
The two caveats
1: The potential for a competitor. I think the genre is extremely hard to get right and its unlikely, but not impossible, for a competitor to take their place.
2: This presumes BHVR doesn't commit a horrible mistake. If the game was to ever see a sudden drop, I think it would be something like a patch that was broken/horrifically balanced that came out right before they all took a holiday break, and they couldn't recapture the player base afterward.
-
After last year I'm worried about anything BHVR announces until they give us details.
I really dislike the 'we're going to fix this down the line' - okay, how? If you don't have that worked out yet, don't hype us on it, if you do have it worked out, tell us so you can get feedback.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4108345#Comment_4108345
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4108345#Comment_4108345
Yeah a big part of the problem is how quickly things go south as survivor and how unfixable it is. And that knowledge comes with time. Once you have at least a couple thousand hours invested the trajectory pattern becomes very visible and you know when a survivor match is lost almost immediately. I'm just so tired of thinking about the hatch a minute into a match.
Meanwhile, on killer, I can lose three gens with one hook and still comeback. I don't go a single killer session without getting a win in end game after playing terrible. There's always hope as killer. But as survivor they want you to lose a lot and be fine with hopeless matches.
So if option one is lose a whole lot and feel bad a minute into a match, and option two is win more and feel more in control, why would you choose option one? I've seen more and more people feeling that way and I don't know how the game can sustain it.
Once you have at least a couple thousand hours invested the trajectory pattern becomes very visible and you know when a survivor match is lost almost immediately. I'm just so tired of thinking about the hatch a minute into a match.Agree on that this is one of the big issues on the survivor side. My complaint about being survivor is not per se the difficulty difference (though that's not great), its that the killer has 'won' and we're all still stuck in the game. I think that's why BHVR went kind of crazy with the abandon options as a way to try and make that less awful without having to address core issues in the game.
I don't think it takes that long to figure out though, which is one of the likely problems with longer term player retention. If anything, I think survivors learn this lesson quickly, and perhaps learn it too well, causing them to give up matches way too quickly.
I just thought that with the up coming survivor commands it would be funny if one of them was 'please don't give up, we still have a chance.'
I've seen more and more people feeling that way and I don't know how the game can sustain it.At the current rate of queue times, killers also being the survivor players would basically be a given.
I suppose its not out of the question that longer term survivors break into two pools - SWFs and soloq that is killers waiting for their next killer game.
-
because at this pace it’ll take 10 years to add the current and future original killers.So that sounds bad to us as players, but to BHVR it probably sounds great. Ten years of something 'new' to keep players coming back, that's exactly what live service is built around.
On a more practical level, I don't want BHVR to do a bunch of things at the same time like they did with 9.2s attempt last year and things running into each other and becoming a mess. I want more new stuff, but I care more about the quality of it coming in than the quantity.
Another crazy thing they could do which, has been suggested before, is just do away with the classes altogether (at least on the survivor end) and make a curated number of perks available. Build creation is a fundamental part of the survivor experience and 2v8 removes thatI think classes are actually really good, though having a few more would be helpful. The perk system in 1v4 is basically a crapshoot. Classes make it much easier to look at the other players and make decisions on how to play.
I do wish they'd explore a little more variety within the classes. So someone is a medic, they are always better at healing, but they have a few possibilities on exactly how. I don't think that is an approach they are going to take though.
-
We want this comms wheel to suit different players’ specific needs, so you’ll be able to customize which messages you take into your Trials from the Options menu.So this looks like a drop down menu of options for what to bring. Implying there is more than 8. Anyway we could just get a full list of all the planned commands now so we can provide feedback ahead of time on what might be missing instead of waiting until like a week before it comes out?
-
This is one of those evergreen topics that comes up every now and then.
Instead of having a win/loss binary (with draws thrown in sometimes) like other games, DbD gives you a series of different goals that you can evaluate however you want. Kills/escapes, escapes of other survivors, BP, pips - where you factor hatch into the whole equation. You can care about those as little or as much as you want.
As an example, I never look at the pip screen. It means nothing to me.
The design causes some problems, but it also allows for a greater range of 'meaning' to the game. Deathgarden (another, now defunct, BHVR game) was even more extreme in this design, but that game failed a few times and I think that was one of the key problems with the game (though it had many more).
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4107915#Comment_4107915
This is why I specifically said in my original post that I wanted to hear from people who play both sides. These kind of divisive comments that usually come from people who only play one side aren’t helpful at all and are purely to stir up “us vs them” tribalism.
I want to hear from people who have a balanced perspective from both sides to minimize bias and try to understand if my viewpoint is an outlier or if others feel the same way that the killer vs survivor balance really hasn’t changed much recently which is why it’s puzzling that the killer queue times have all of a sudden increased significantlyThis is why I specifically said in my original post that I wanted to hear from people who play both sides.So this is a bad starting premise. Most people play both sides. I don't know where the idea came from that they are rare, that's the norm.
Which leads us to -
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4107943#Comment_4107943
The comment about “play while you wait” doesn’t make sense to me. If the killer queues are long, play while you wait is only going to be taking people out of killer queues and putting them in the survivor queues, not the other way around. I don’t see how play while you wait would make the killer queue times worse - it should do the opposite.
If the killer queues are long, play while you wait is only going to be taking people out of killer queues and putting them in the survivor queues, not the other way around. I don’t see how play while you wait would make the killer queue times worse - it should do the opposite.So there's not just killer and survivor players logging on, there's DbD players. Now many players, prior to 'Play While You Wait' would frequently end up in survivor because they didn't want to wait the minute or so for killer. But you can select killer and still play survivor? Great, that's exactly what they wanted, the opportunity to play both sides.
-
1: Even if both sides were exactly equal in appeal, the 80/20 split requires substantially more survivors than killers.
Okay, that's always been true, what's changed?
2: Play while you wait allows a lot of players who are okay playing either side, or want to play killer but will play survivor if the wait is too long, to throw their hat in the killer queue. This substantially increases the amount of people on the killer side.
3: The above is compounded by 2v8, because the one saving grave of queue times is that SWFs in 1v4 can only play survivor. Now that duos, the most common form of SWF, can also queue into killer, you're getting a lot more people in the killer queue than normal.
4: This is again compounded on that survivor has less variety than killer, but people get to play it far more frequently than killer, making survivors burn out quicker.
Basically - survivor has to be much, much more appealing than killer to keep queue times reasonable. Play while you wait has (as some of us predicted), made it much worse because the huge reason most people played survivor, the wait time, doesn't exist anymore. You need a lot of people playing survivor, and only survivor, in comparison to those in the killer queue to keep times reasonable.
-
@Domicci said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4106931#Comment_4106931
You can body block off hook thats a tactic the problem is the survivors that do this then ######### and complain about being tunneled. They are causing the tunneling. Its not a skill issue to have a problem with people being crybabies when they put them self in that situation. Yoy just want to absolve survivors or all wrong doing and clearly have 0 reading comprehension. Okay so you dont like when killer make the game hard and you dont like when the killer makes the game easy what do you want. Maybe an ai bot would be better for player like you so it can be programmed to follow the stupid survivors rules the try to push on killers. Because at this point yall will never be happy and cry wolf about things you causes constantly.
You can body block off hook thats a tactic the problem is the survivors that do this then ######### and complain about being tunneled.So this thread is ~350 posts deep, and your real complaint is that survivors sometimes troll in end game chat?
There's trolls. There would be trolls no matter what changes they made to the game. But basing your posts off that for a discussion is skipping past the actual arguments.
@Dokta_Carter said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4106931#Comment_4106931
If I am to be honest on this. It is a tactic 100%, but some people still count this as tunneling even though most people say you do this, your putting yourself on a platter.
If you body block off hook, and the other survivor might be injured you might get the lucky hit and ignore, but in most cases you body blocking is seen as a throwing a glove at a killer for a duel.
It is a tactic 100%, but some people still count this as tunneling even though most people say you do this, your putting yourself on a platter.The most people is the far more relevant part. You will be able to find 'some' people who are opposed to pretty much anything in the game (and, just to add, that's completely normal, everyone is going to have their likes and dislikes).
If you body block off hook, and the other survivor might be injured you might get the lucky hit and ignore, but in most cases you body blocking is seen as a throwing a glove at a killer for a duel.Okay, no problem there.
Everytime this comes up most people, as you said, will say if the survivors invites chase we're no longer in tunneling territory.
-
The problem with elusive is the same problem with elusive off the hook - if the killer is right there it doesn't matter, if the killer is far away it doesn't matter. It's only addressing the situations where the killer is coming back, but not close enough to be right on top of the survivor.
I doubt BHVR would ever do it, but the idea comes up every now and then to allow slugs to do gens and/or hexes at a significantly reduced rate. That would put some pressure on the killer to do a pick up, but not so much pressure that they always have to do it.
@Xendritch said:
I don't really buy the "hooking is dead" arguments I've been seeing lately. Weaker than slugging sure but I think both options are still completely viable.
1. While survivors get a lot of their strongest perks from hooking so do killers. Pain Res, Turn Back the Clock, Pop, Friends till the End, DMS are all perceived to be some of the strongest killer perks in the game and all of them rely on hooking.
2. It's perceived to be not time efficient as time spent hooking is time spent where 3 other survivors can work on gens uninterrupted. But this logic has a couple problems.
- Many survivors do nothing but follow killers around with flashlights.
- It's only considering the time during the hooking process not after when you have a single survivor on hook, one have to go save and another you can chase so only one survivor can be on a gen so it evens out after. Now you can argue slugging gets similar results but consider you as killer get to decide where the survivor gets hooked and where survivors have to go to save (hint hint hook people in dead zones when possible) where as slugs can crawl wherever and you don't know where anybody is after the initial slugging.
3. Basement is a thing. I swear people have forgotten how strong basement is, stronger for some killers than others but it's never a weak option and you're pretty much guaranteed a couple of hook trades if you do it right.
4. Slugging only seems stronger because survivors expect hooking. If survivors actually expected slugging and brought WGLF, Unbreakable, Exponential, Conviction, Plot Twist, Made for This, For the People, Buckle Up or any of the other perks that makes slugging worse slugging would all of a sudden seem a lot weaker than hooking.
5. Most killers don't slug and do perfectly fine, we would be seeing far lower kill rates globally if hooking was actually "dead" or "unviable".
If we're being so for real this debate has been created by CCs playing at the top 5% of MMR because slugging made their kill rate go from 90% to 95%. It's incredibly goofy and if you tried to make this argument in any other competitive community for a game you'd get laughed out of the room while they went back to discussing if something with a 54% win rate was broken or not.
That's a real good post.
I will add that slugging is also one of those things that gets defended, even though its strongest against uncoordinated soloq. It still is usable against SWFs, but they have a much easier time adapting quickly to the killer strategy and/or having a single survivor with a perk to counter it.
-
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4107488#Comment_4107488
I at least want complaints that make sense. People were saying before that Legion was feeding Oni orbs. They got rid of Legion, so now its somehow a mix between his teammate giving him orbs in the small period that orbs CAN spawn and the Oni landing normal M1 hits. Im not sure the people complaining about the orbs know the requirements on orbs and just assumed the place mustve been swimming in them. If the Oni is getting power because theres so many survivors out of place… Thats not really an Oni issue anymore.
I at least want complaints that make sense. People were saying before that Legion was feeding Oni orbs.So this is an incorrect start on the history. Legion was a problem with multiple other killers, not just Oni. The issue was that his 'weakness', having to play M1 against injured survivors just disappeared. Legion could injure survivors very easily, and whoever the other killer was they could do the downs.
Legion was a problem with or without Oni in the game. This is likely going to be an ongoing issue in 2v8 that some killer designs likely synergize too well with having a teammate.
That takes us to Oni and the issues:
1: Having a partner, empowers him too easily. His weakness, like Legion's before, is his time as an M1 killer, but now he can have a partner who doesn't have to be an M1 killer.
2: 2v8 maps are crowded in comparison to 1v4. While there are a gazillion pallets, there's also survivors all over the place. Survivors can't just shift-W to pull Oni away because they are frequently going to run into other survivors or the other killer.
3: Survivors can't wait out his power like they can in 1v4. Even if we're talking an 8 man team on comms, rare enough as that would be, 2v8 is much more constant action than 1v4. There's always going to be at least one or two (and likely more) survivors in chase with the other killer, on hook, or downed.
-
Agree with the others on him needing additional changes to fit in 2v8. In power he's superior to Billy and the downside he'd normally have, the amount of time out of power, is almost non-existent.
-
@Arcturus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4107371#Comment_4107371
I think he was saying the other 10% would be waiting
In my post 10% refers to the overall player base, which I think is pretty obvious. He's correct though that it actually increases more than that as things get out of whack, or 12.5%.
-
Its the fact that asyms need the right ratio - in DbD's case 20% killers, 80% survivors. Everything else you mention does matter, but the ratio is what's unique about DbD.
You could have 100k or 1 million players playing, if 30% of them want to play killer, 10% are going to be waiting.
Game modes exacerbate this because now if either game mode has the wrong ratio, it pulls from the other mode. Given the game needs so many more survivors than killers, if either mode draws people to the killer role it can destabilize both (you could also have a scenario where killers have a long wait in one mode, survivors a long wait in the other mode, but I don't think that has happened yet). That's why whenever 2v8 comes out killer time skyrockets in both modes.
-
Hmmm, let me throw out what comes to mind.
'Lie in Wait' (which has double meaning on lie) - where if a survivor has been slugged for a certain period of time they stun the killer on pickup.
Problems - probably arguments that it would pair too well with DS (the lose-lose argument that I personally hate). Also that it would just encourage slugging.
'Blessed Boon' - killer is stunned when breaking a boon the survivor has put down. Alternative - this is an effect the survivor can apply to a boon that has already been blessed (whether by them or someone else), probably with some condition to charge.
-thought about doing something like a boon that stuns the killer when they enter the radius, but also extinguishes the boon, but not sure that could work out.
'Getting Dizzy' - if a certain number of vaults are executed by the survivor during the a chase (let's say 5), the killer is stunned next time they damage a survivor.
-potentially just a win harder perk were a survivor does really well in chase and then the killer is punished on top of that
'Survivor Basement' - probably something like an invocation, killer is stunned when they attempt to enter the basement.
'No, I Saved Them!' - within 60 seconds of an unhook and while uninjured, if the killer goes to pick up a survivor, the unhooking survivor has a pebble they can throw to stun the killer.
'No, I Healed Them! - within 15 seconds of healing a survivor, if that survivor is damaged by the killer, the killer is stunned.
'No Permit for Renovations' - We already can trap gens, pallets, and windows. A trap for breakables in the map.
-would need to be pretty strong given the frequency of breakables is map dependent
'Come and Get Me' (edit: different name, forgot this is already a perk which is in the shrine right now) - when the killer is in chase with another survivor within 16 meters who has more hook states then you, crouch to activate this ability. The killer is stunned, you are exposed and your aura is shown to the killer. Not usable after the generators have been completed.
'Static Charge' - when the survivor completes a gen it is trapped and stuns the killer if they walk near it.
'From the Depths of Hell I Stab at Thee' - for the long awaited DbD / Moby Dick crossover (or slightly different wording for The Wrath of Khan). the killer is stunned when they hook this survivor.
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4107181#Comment_4107181
Has anyone gotten in trouble for posting a YouTube video link? That doesn’t seem like “naming and shaming” to me, but I don’t make the rules here so it would probably be good to get clarification for a mod. It’s kind of difficult to have a discussion about this when nobody is showing 1) what claims the CCs are making and 2) what specific points in their game experience are backing up these claims
This is kind of a lose-lose for me on answering because its also against forum rules to discuss removed threads and bans. Its not posting the link itself, obviously that can happen, but posting something like 'here's streamer John Doe's most recent vid, and here's why it was wrong' is where the territory gets tricky.
Would it be okay if the discussion was in the most polite terms possible? Maybe, but usually people aren't super deferential when they are attacking ideas they consider bad.
Yes, it leads to unproductive discussions around CCs. If mod wants to clarify the exact specifics I'd be happy to hear them.
-
Is this feeling or based on facts?Feeling. As others have mentioned, the people who says this frequently have extremely high kill ratings.
My personal theory is that no one wants to win a game that is tilted in their favor, so people have to say its tilted in survivors favor, otherwise having a good kill rate isn't nearly as impressive.
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
I was playing last night around 9:00PM local time and I had instant killer queues. The killer queue times were much longer than normal when Jason came out, but have slowly started getting back to normal since then. Anyway, I don’t agree that killer side is in the “worst state ever”. Do you have links to any of the YouTube videos where CCs are saying this? That would at least let us see what arguments they are making to back up this claim
Do you have links to any of the YouTube videos where CCs are saying this? That would at least let us see what arguments they are making to back up this claimThe naming and shaming policy on this forum is pretty strict. Posting a CCs video on the forum and attacking it is walking on dangerous territory, so we're left talking about things generally unless someone starts the discussion with a positive post.
-
That's a lot. I'm going to focus on the concept.
There's a couple of big problems with different ways to win the game.
1: Soloq vs SWF - swfs have a much easier time switching off strategies. Now, this advantage is always going to be there, but at least with just gens/gates soloq doesn't need to communicate on what the overall focus is. A SWF could simply say 'let's all do basement', while soloq could be split up all over the place.
2: Perks and gameplay - there becomes an issue with counterplay. Inevitably if there was another escape method BHVR would eventually make perks for and against it. This leads to trials being decided by a guessing game in the lobby (which already exists, and I think too much of it, but something like this would make it worse).
Even outside perks, there's a gameplay element. You'd need to give just the right amount of feedback to the players. Otherwise you get possibilities where the survivors escape via the tunnel and the killer wasn't even aware it was happening (thus not feeling like a satisfying game), or situations where the killer is wasting time guarding a basement the survivors have no interest in. However, give too much and it just becomes something the survivors never try.
Not to mention this would probably need to be considered every time a new killer came out.
This is kind of like when killer could win by spreading pressure, or tunneling, or 3 genning, or slugging. It became an absolute guessing game on what would happen with SWFs having a noticeable advantage because they could change tactics in response.
3: I wasn't really playing at the time, but I think hatch used to have a function similar to what you are talking about.
-
@Domicci said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4106552#Comment_4106552
because survivors were using it aggresivly they said that in the stream and survuvor is gaining 10 seconds of elusive the strongest survivor effect after endurance so stop healing under hook and body blocking and you can easily get away
@Domicci said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4106618#Comment_4106618
If the killer is hanging around hook thats basicly 4 gens free. What it sounds like it your being saved infront of the killer basicly right away which im sorry is a skill issue. Tunneling is just a tactic like slugging and genrushing the way to fix it is actually make doing somthing else more beneficial.
Why are tunneling, slugging, and gen rushing tactics, but body blocking off hook isn't?
After all, the body blocker is making themselves an easy target. To use your own words, it sounds like a skill issue if that can't be dealt with.
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4106783#Comment_4106783
So your solution is that whenever killers try to tunnel/hookcamp survs simply ignore the normal gameplay loop and leave their team mates to die on hook, I'm sure that would make for extremely interesting games. One survivor gets camped out and everyone else just slams gens opens gates and gets a 3 out. No altruism or boldness points for survs, killer would get next to no points, game is over after maybe one or two chases. And this only really works when you have a full swf in vc to communicate what's happening, soloq have no way to counter or communicate that the killer is playing like this.
Idk about you but I play games for enjoyment, I get there's enjoyment in winning but falling back on boring, cheap easy win tactics such as hard tunning is tedious and unrewarding. When I play killer i start games by spreading my hooks and actively avoiding tunneling until I'm down to at least three, usually 2 gens. And I tend to do well in my games and have fun in them. I'd rather have an interesting game that's a 2k, than rely on boring unfun tactics for a 3 or 4k.
My argument would be the skill issue is with killers who feel they have to hard tunnel at the start of the game to achieve anything, because if they have to do this to secure kills then clearly their chase skills and macro gameplay skills are sorely lacking, and they'll never improves by spending 70% of their game staring at a hook getting free hits from unhook attempts. Killer is for sure the more frustrating role when you're losing, but the way I see some killer players play/talk on these forums they clearly expect to win every game.
We had this back before anti-face camp with Bubba's who'd stand in front of hook. Just do gens, leave - I hated those games with a fiery passion even though they were easy wins.
-
@AbsolutGrndZer0 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4106388#Comment_4106388
No, what you are doing is a strawman. Tactics, fun or not, allowed in a video game are not equivalent to real-life criminal behavior. Hence, by making that comparison, you're trying to say that I think bank robbery is okay because I think tunneling is okay.
What?
A strawman is an argument that the other side has never made that the person then attacks. I'm making a comparison to another situation. You might disagree with the comparison, but it certainly isn't a strawman.
Hence, by making that comparison, you're trying to say that I think bank robbery is okay because I think tunneling is okay.That's not how logical comparisons work.
I'm saying that the logic you are trying to use to make your point is wrong, I'm demonstrating that by showing if the same logic was applied to a different situation how obviously absurd it would be.
To be clear, I'm not saying you think bank robbery is okay. That's, again, obviously absurd. I'm explaining how your logic though leads to the same place. It's a fallacy in the reasoning.
I also gave a second comparison in there for you as well that didn't deal with a crime.
And if you wanted to avoid the comparison issue entirely, I gave you the name of what you are doing, false equivalence.
And just to sum up the argument again - 'just because some 'rules' that 'some' people have might be bad, is not evidence that 'all' possible rules are inherently bad.'
-
Importantly,don’t make it purely kills/escape, otherwise players could ignore the rest of the game.Why? The whole point of a ranked mode is who wins, and who loses. What's the point of rewarding doing totems (for example) if they didn't actually further the objective?
I’d also give Ranked some restrictions to keep matches competitive, such as limiting extreme map offerings or potentially having a separate competitive ruleset.I really don't think this will ever happen. I can't imagine BHVR being like 'we realize X is broken, and are removing it from ranked, but go ahead and use it whenever you want in casual!'
@GentlemanFridge said:
Strong suspicion that this was written by an AI.
But to engage with the topic, I have a question:
What’s stopping turbo-competitive gamers from queueing in the ‘regular’ queue, which supposedly makes for substantially easier games for them?
Strong suspicion that this was written by an AI.I agree on that, but I'm a sucker for arguing with even a computer.
-
@Nazzzak said:
I'd go with option 3. When they say it's working, they likely mean it's working in the way they intend. Obviously the feedback from the general playerbase is that we don't like how it currently works, so they've made the decision to adjust it.
If that's what ends up happening, great, but: I don't think BHVR would have announced it so far in advance / not been up front about the details. That just seems like a way to upset the players by saying something is going to be reworked and then we get something like an adjustment to how trial length affects MMR gain/loss.
Maybe I'm also jaded because we're coming up on the 9.2 anniversary when BHVR took a 'quality of life' change farther than I think even some of the most anti-tunnel survivors wanted, so I never expect minor from them if they actually announce something.
-
I hate to say this, but what makes you think the answers to those questions would be any different? I suspect the answer would be something like 'that's still in development and we'll have more info as we progress.'
-
@AbsolutGrndZer0 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4105034#Comment_4105034
Never said both sides didn't have rulebooks. That's my entire point. The Survivor Rulebook has no meaning, the Killer Rulebook has no meaning. Play how you want. You can't tell me not to tunnel just as I can't tell you not to gen rush. It's all absurd.
What you're doing is creating a false equivalence.
This would be like saying 'if a person can take money out of a bank when they have an account, why is it wrong for a person to take money out of a bank when they rob it. Either taking money out of the bank is always okay, or never okay'.
Or if you prefer something behavior based, just because some standards of politeness throughout human history are silly, that doesn't mean all rules of politeness are silly.
The fact that some 'rules' that people try to create are wrong, doesn't mean all 'rules' are wrong. If someone says people shouldn't hard tunnel, pointing to a bad rule doesn't actually relate.
And some of the killer rules are absolutely fine. If a 4 person SWF is experienced playing together and they bring the best possible gear, yeah, I don't think that's right. Bully squads who don't try and advance the game, yeah, bad. When unhookable builds were a thing, absolutely no survivor should have been running them.
-
@OnryosTapeRentals said:
It's come to be my favourite modifier.
I've had a lot of fun with it this time around. There's some rough edges and choices I don't agree with, but the concept is appealing enough to me that I can overlook it.
I understand it's not a fan favourite like 2v8, but I'm really hoping all the criticism doesn't lead to them axing it completely. Would it really be so bad if they brought it back just for one week each summer? It's not particularly destructive on queues or anything like so it can easily be skipped if it's not your cup of tea.
I understand it's not a fan favourite like 2v8, but I'm really hoping all the criticism doesn't lead to them axing it completely. Would it really be so bad if they brought it back just for one week each summer?That's going to be more a BHVR 'how many people are actually playing it' evaluation than any of our opinions. If people are playing, it doesn't really matter what we say.
-
@HexFelix said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4106083#Comment_4106083
Most of them arent even good. Coup, corrupt and noed are for example good perks on their own but have requirements like only start pf the game or when last gen pops, but you don’t want to tell me that insidious or distressing are viable? And hexes like ruin can be broken. 90% of these perks I never face because no one runs them except in nice builds or adept.
on surv side you have windows (free aura), vigil (free recovery), do no harm and botany (free heal speed for existing), Deja (free gen speed and aura), Sprintburst (wich will still be good after the next changes), Five moves ahead (similar to windows +faster drop), Self Preservation (I already why ist unhealthy), resilience (just be injured for free speeds) and more. If we compare this to your mentioned killer perks, it shows that survivors have more zero effort strong perks than killers, in fact most killer perks that are good have requirements, like pain ress and TBTC need hooks.Most of them arent even good.You've gone from talking about the number of perks, to the value of perks. It's a moving the goalposts kind of deal, but let's chase.
Coup, corrupt and noed are for example good perks on their own but have requirements like only start pf the game or when last gen pops, but you don’t want to tell me that insidious or distressing are viable?The only way the killer doesn't get 'free' value from coup and noed is if they beat the survivors before the perks have a chance to trigger.
That's like saying old Fast Track was fine, because what if the killer never gets a hook?
Corrupt runs out, sure, but lots of perks do that on both sides.
on surv side you have windows (free aura), vigil (free recovery), do no harm and botany (free heal speed for existing), Deja (free gen speed and aura), Sprintburst (wich will still be good after the next changes), Five moves ahead (similar to windows +faster drop), Self Preservation (I already why ist unhealthy), resilience (just be injured for free speeds) and more. If we compare this to your mentioned killer perks, it shows that survivors have more zero effort strong perks than killers, in fact most killer perks that are good have requirements, like pain ress and TBTC need hooks.It's interesting what you label as free. Botany has no value if you are the survivor being chased, windows has no value if you are the survivor trying to rescue others. They have the same requirement as Pain Res - something that's a frequent part of the game, now you just have to adjust your play around it. Pop, Pain Res, Nowhere to Hide, etc. all fall into the same category as what you listed - strong perks that give free value to actions the killer was already going to do.
Also throwing resilience in there - the survivor has to take a huge requirement of being injured. It's a massive ask of the survivors skill to get that 'free' value when it could result in the killer getting a very quick down.
Basically you are greatly exaggerating the definition of free on the survivor side while restricting it heavily on the killer side.
-
As a few others have mentioned, this idea comes up every now and then. I used to be really opposed, but would now love it to at least get a trial run.
The benefits seem pretty clear - survivors don't want to be tunneled, killers don't want survivors to body block with anti-tunneling protections - both sides improve on the gameplay.
I used to think the reason this didn't exist is that BHVR thought survivors suddenly 'disappearing' would just seem silly, but given elements that have been added over the years that doesn't seem likely anymore. Now, my best guess is they think it would be make the game to 'on rails' about what the players should do (or they don't want to rework a bunch of perks).
Personally, I'd prefer a trial run of just the 'hide unhook notifications' idea, likely with some form of broken off hooks to prevent guaranteed safe heals under hooks, but think incorporeal status would also be a great way to get there.
-
Yes and no.
On the no side - we've had people take the challenge before and it rarely does anything. It doesn't change any opinions and you just get responses of - 'That game's just an outlier', 'you were playing/against [certain killer]/[certain perks] and that's an exception', 'you cherry picked that game' or, the classic 'that's clearly not high MMR'.
On the yes side - on the truly absurd takes, I'd like to see it. Like 'I went five straight games without getting more than two hooks', okay, I want to see what is going on.
-
DbD suffers from balance change problems for a number of reasons.
1: Different metas and different opinions on how the game should be play and what is or is not strong.
2: Whether balance changes should only be done to keep the game in balance, or just done to shake up the game.
3: That some perks are designed to be niche and not actually that frequently used, but provide a 'what is going on' kind of moment.
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4105999#Comment_4105999
So Lightborn is a wasted slot even though you can see the lobby and decide to put it on, potentially shutting down whole builds and playstyles, but SP is unhealthy cause one or two people might counter one of your perks when they could have just dont so with a locker anyway? I honestly don't know how anyone defends Lightborn. It's can stay, I don't care, but it's the most unfair perk in the game.
I mean, just remember saying that. Because we had quite the chorus of angry people complaining Fast Track and Cross Examination into obliteration and many of them also like to complain about the stale meta. I myself complained about SB and Vigil and I'm also not happy to see survivor meta being nerfed while killer meta is (so-far) going untouched, aside from NtH.
I played with and against FT plenty and it made no difference in my matches. It's too situational. The skill checks are random, it could max out before you could use it, and if people are getting hooked that much you're probably cooked anyway. Full teams running it were very rare too. Good on paper isn’t necessarily OP in execution. I highly doubt it was overperforming.
Good on paper isn’t necessarily OP in execution. I highly doubt it was overperforming.I think that's a really good point. We get lots of 'this could be powerful if X occurs', but how frequently does it actually happen like that?
It's also sad because BHVR could eliminate these arguments easily if they accompanied nerfs / buffs with how the perk had been performing (even if they want to break it down by MMR) to give an indication as the reason for the change.
-
@Rulebreaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4105335#Comment_4105335
Its not ego they just want the kill its that simple is it ego that survivors want to 4 out.
See...that sounds exactly like double standards if I ever heard it…
It's not ego to want the 4k...but it's ego to want the 4e...like most at least try to hide the double standards they have mate…
Also survivors get a big ego about getting hatch so slugging for the 4k stops that toxicity.
Ignoring the fact of you lumping all survivors together: If they were going to be toxic about getting the hatch, they were going to be toxic regardless. I've had surviors boast random things, infact durring the banquet event one of those groups were harping about how bad i was…despite the fact i got enough downs to kill them all twice over. Slugging for the 4k is not going to fix it, it instead brings a different ego AND makes innocents miserable.
If they were going to be toxic about getting the hatch, they were going to be toxicregardless.I think this is a good point. Toxic players are going to be toxic - they don't need a reason because they'll make anything into their reason.
-
this would be like calling getting headshots in an fps game toxic.There's lots of things in FPS games that have been called toxic. Spawn camping, hiding in corners, broken weapons, sniping from nearly impossible to hit positions, 'lag grenades', etc.
Now, probably because FPS games have actual competition, the most egregious of these issues were actually fixed back in the late 90s through the 2000s. However, they were all toxic behaviors because they ruined what actually made the games engaging and enjoyable.
-
1: BHVR probably does want to keep games 'fast'. They continue to introduce perks that can synergize to make escapes even faster and haven't touched toolboxes despite hitting so many other things. I suspect, especially ever since the days of killers stalling out the game, they've concluded that the player base enjoys games on the quicker side.
2: That said, bringing in game modes as evidence is a poor argument. The game modes are designed to have different experiences.
3: The idea that this is 'whiny survs' is absurdly wrong. It wasn't survivors who asked for so many other possible things they could do to be nerfed. That was killers. Every strategy survivors have had to be off gens has been nerfed or outright destroyed, generally by killers saying 'but high MMR survivors are too good!'. The current state of gen rush is very much a bed that killer complaints led to.
-
@Elan said:
The Shoulder The Burden is a hot take. While it's similiar to duty of care when it grows being fundamentaly broken in coordinated team running it on every suvivors in most games it won't do much and has higher risk than reward.
The only good way to use the perk is to use it on someone who has been hooked twice while you haven't been hooked yet. Meaning that it has the deliverence syndrome where if you get hooked first the perk is unusable, in this case you shouln't use it at all. If the killer is smart, he will go after the shoulder player to get him death hook instead of the tunneled guy. While I see that perk rarely on both sides I don't think that it's problematic full potential affects more than 0.01 % of the games. The issue I have is that it's very strong effect, distributing hooks for 40s exposed while treacherous crows and weaving spiders cause permanent broken. While For the people cause 60s broken, deliverence cause 120s broken. The expose itself doesn't seem enough risk on it's own, it's the fact that the shoulder player put big target on themselves and tbh most casual players and solo players won't risk their games for random player. The change I would like to see to shoulder the burden are conditions to use it.
→ Perk can be only used once per hooked survivor
The side effect of shoulder the burden is a way to troll to get out of the games faster where you can literally die in 1min to cheese the go next prevention.
The issue I have is that it's very strong effect, distributing hooks for 40s exposed while treacherous crows and weaving spiders cause permanent broken.Treacherous crows and weaving spiders are broadly considered some of the worst designed perks in the game, so not a great subject for comparison.
→ Perk can be only used once per hooked survivorI don't get why this would be a good idea.
StB exists to allow survivors to help out the team when the killer repeatedly goes for the same target. Whether that is 1, 2, or 3 other survivors that the killer is not pursuing, the perk should still have its affect. If the killer just keeps tunnel vision on a single target and it costs them the match because they refuse to adapt, and the survivors risked bringing multiple instances of this perk to counter just such a killer, that seems like the right trade off.
-
@AbsolutGrndZer0 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4103741#Comment_4103741
No, I am asking to keep the gameplay perfectly balanced. 5 Gens, two escapes, two kills. That's a perfect 50/50 balance. You're asking Killers not to play to win. Why can survivors do everything in their power to try to get that 4-man out, but if the killer goes for one kill in a way that isn't approved by the Survivor Council, well that just won't do?
No, I am asking to keep the gameplay perfectly balanced. 5 Gens, two escapes, two kills. That's a perfect 50/50 balance.Why? Based on what? This just seems like an absurd non-sequitur to the discussion that is trying to make some type of 'the other side is hypocritical' argument, but just comes off as nonsense.
You're asking Killers not to play to win. Why can survivors do everything in their power to try to get that 4-man out, but if the killer goes for one kill in a way that isn't approved by the Survivor Council, well that just won't do?Don't play in a SWF. Don't gen rush. Don't shift W. Don't always run to shack. Don't stealth out corrupt. Don't bring resurgence and heal under hook. Don't body block with unbreakable. Don't body block with basekit BT. Don't bring hyperfocus. Don't use StB against a non-tunneling killer. Don't stealth for hatch. Never, ever, teabag.
I'd add things like: don't bring unhookable builds, don't bring syringes to heal, don't run FTP+BU, don't run infinites, don't run MFT, don't go to CoH to self heal, don't run four luck offerings to self unhook, don't bodyblock with OTR - except all those got changed.
The idea that only one side has a 'rulebook' is, and has been, absurd.
-
The fact that a survivor can be hooked FIVE times and still not die feels outrageously absurd.Why?
For this to happen that means there would have to be two people running StB and you to hook neither of them (or else they are just trading who is on death hook and taking exposed, which isn't actually helpful).
In my last 10 or so matches, I've seen this happen at least 4 times, and it's one of the least enjoyable parts I've had since returning.You've had two uses of StB against you in 40% of your matches? That kind of sounds like it's doing exactly what it is designed for then.
We already have perks like DS and Off The Record, both of which are specifically intended to discourage tunneling while still allowing killers to secure kills through good decision making.What is 'good decision making' that this perk prevents?
DS has noticeable problems at stopping tunneling and OTR was nerfed.
The biggest issue is that it completely changes the hook economy. The fact that survivors can effectively create "extra" hook states is super frustrating.No extra hook states are created, they are traded around, and come with a risk of being exposed for an easy down.
It is basically taking one of the very few things killers can control in the game and throwing it out the window by giving it to survivors.Both sides have plenty of things that they control, StB doesn't save that anymore than DMS changes survivors ability to control what gens they do.
And let's be honest, while it is true that some killers tunnel at the very first chance they get, most only do it when 1) survivors are toxic (e.g. teabag, flashlight click, etc.) or 2) they feel as though gens are flying by way too fast and they need to get someone out of the game to regain pressure, both of which are legitimate reasons.How do you define a 'legitimate reason'? Because number 2 sounds like the classic 'I don't want to tunnel, and won't, as long as I'm winning'. The fact that sometimes the killer 'feels' like the survivors are winning seems like something that should happen in a game.
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4104303#Comment_4104303
Oh sweet cheers for that. Is there a date it started from? My hours on there seem low
The hours track only time in trials, while other sources like Steam track how long the game is running. So time in queues, lobbies, bloodweb, etc. are not counted - which was a pretty shocking realization how much time we spend in all of those and not actually playing the game.
I think there is also an issue with how it tracks game modifiers/event modes compared to regular 1v4 on your time played.
-
For cheaters, your opponent is not just those you are facing in the match itself, its the game. Just as most of us want to defeat our opponents, they want to defeat the game. That they're ruining the experience for others for some is probably irrelevant, for others its a benefit.
-
Because BHVR doesn't want to give the game a clear win/loss binary.
If you are a survivor and die but the other three escape, you can consider that a win, a loss, or somewhere between. You can care only about yourself, only about the others, or a mixture of both. Likewise as killer you can treat the game as win/lose draw, or you can adjust based on the total performance.
This isn't even getting into points/pips and factoring those into whether you won or lost. I'm not a huge fan of BHVR's system, but it used to be more extreme.
-
I think they should change the chest offering and just increase the base number of chests in the game. As BHVR has been recently on a 'make things easier to balance' with diminishing returns, another way they could handle this is making chests static amounts. That would make it easier to balance chest perks on both the survivor and killer side.
-
@AbsolutGrndZer0 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4100620#Comment_4100620
Sure. If you don't waste time searching for them again later. Oh look, they all 4 got out. What it boils down to is this. The Survivor Rulebook nor in fact the Killer Rulebook have any meaning. As others have jokingly said, why is it that survivors are okay to 'genrush' but if a killer 'tunnels' to get at least one kill, they're the bad guy? OH wait, they ARE THE BAD GUY BECAUSE THEY ARE THE KILLER.
The survivors primary objective is to finish generators and escape. The Killer's primary objective is to stop the survivors from escaping and kill them. If you are going to make rules of how the killer has to do their primary objective to be "fair" then the same goes for survivors. No more genrushing, if you finish a generator before the killer has at least 2 hooks, stop and let them get those 2 hooks. It's only fair. 2 hooks per generator. Those are the new rules, and in return we promise not to tunnel.No more genrushing, if you finish a generator before the killer has at least 2 hooks, stop and let them get those 2 hooks. It's only fair. 2 hooks per generator. Those are the new rules, and in return we promise not to tunnel.Except you're asking the survivors to stop doing their objective entirely. Killers aren't asked to stop hunting survivors, they're asked not to engage in a very boring and over powered, simplistic strategy. I'd rather BHVR addressed it, but they seem terrified of touching it again.
And survivors do frequently let up on gen rush, but killers also get annoyed when they do that, because they start going for bodyblocks, pallet saves, etc. Survivors aren't telling killers to just wait in a corner, go chase other survivors, engage in the game.
-
@dangersmymidd1ename said:
I have not seen enough matches on the Asian servers to comment in detail, but in countries like Japan where society places importance on social and moral norms and values, I can imagine that playing DbD according to the intended mechanics is a high priority. So perhaps the lower Jason KR could indicate that hard tunnelling and holding M2 with a spear pointed at the hook, are not considered sportsmanlike or polite.
There's a multitude of theories on why Asia has different experiences, from killer being harder on console than survivor is, to less giving up/trolling on the survivor side, to a better meta (the self heal idea), to killers having a worse meta (protecting gens before tunneling as the better strategy), to just having better ping so there aren't as many cheap hits, or of course some combination of the above.
Sportsmanship though, they don't really have the concept of a rulebook. There is much more of a norm that both sides play to win.
-
@Mandy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4103634#Comment_4103634
removing Jason from June stats would then be incorrect though - because he was the top naturally during that month - its unfortunate timing on the release, but if we'd removed him we'd have an equal amount of outcry that we "cherrypicked" the data.
Nothing prevents BHVR from releasing more stats. It's your choice to release them in dribs and drabs. This 'our hands were tied' argument doesn't make sense because you all get to set the terms of what is released.
You could very easily have reported Jason KR as the new killer, while releasing the top KR for killers who were available for the entire period.
Or just every killers' KR if you wanted.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4103441#Comment_4103441
Then the correct step would be to nerf those Killers instead of keep nerfing things on Survivor, if the things that get nerfed, dont affect the strong Killers in a meaningful way.
But honestly, I dont care too much about it. I will just expect the "Nerf Lithe"-Posts in a few months, because then Lithe is the reason Killer Mains are losing games.
It's going the be hilarious if the next round isn't lithe, but Drama, and the argument being 'now that Sprint Burst is nerfed everyone's just running Drama instead!'