crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864657#Comment_3864657
- I hook survivor A
- Survivor B uses the perk on survivor A
- I hook survivor B
- Survivor C uses the perk on survivor B
- I hook survivor C
- Survivor D uses the perk on survivor C
In the above scenario, I haven't tunneled at all, and the survivors still used the perk 3 times to spread the hook states. This means the perk doesn't actually discourage tunneling, because tunneling and not tunneling leads to the same result.
Others have covered issues here, but I want to lay out the details
If StB didn't exist, you'd have three hooks states spread between survivors, A, B, and C
With StB you'd have three hook states, spread between survivors B, C, and D.
Your scenario here doesn't make sense, the survivors have three wasted perk sluts to move a a hook state from A to D. Presuming you got even a single down due to the exposed, you as killer have benefited substantially.
-
@Slan said:
Thus week I've been playing my usual killer matches. KIlled some people, watched others escape, moonwalked a bit as Myers,… Everything normal it would seem.
Except for a few instances in which I faced teams of survivors that DCd almost immediatly after seeing which killer was I using. The first case was when I decided to play Skull Merchant, which currently should be dead easy for survivors to face as she got butchered and transformed into this killer that has an useless power.
The next noticeable case was when I was using Twins. I mean, knowing SM's history I can get to understand that some may DC but Twins? They are buggy as hell, inconsistent and trust me, using Vic is not that easy considering that the lil fella can be kicked as soon as you mess up.
One of these cases that struck my attention was a 3-people DC in Midwich when I was using Scratch Mirror Myers, leaving one guy and 3 bots for me to scare. And I wasn't even going for the kills here.
The next instances when this happened was when I decided to play first Unknown and then Vecna against groups with 4 objects using Franklin's and Weave Attunement.
Funnily enough, when I decided to play the better killers (blight, nurse, Albert) and despite knowing the many complaints the community has regarding them, noone disconnected in those matches. (All of them with 2 slowdown perks, except nurse, which had 1 slowdown and 3 aura reading perks).
What is this? Does this mean that survivors have gotten used to playing against some things and are not willing to think out of that box? They believe that certain things are "unfun"? Is it just a mere coincidence that this happened these amount of times?
They believe that certain things are "unfun"?It's basically this, with a fair mix of coincidence / random chance. Lots of people might be playing on limited time, only have 30 minutes to an hour to play some DbD. It's a video game, people are playing for enjoyment, if the situation becomes not fun it isn't a surprise they leave and either eat the DC penalty or go play something else.
It's not right, I think people have a commitment to play out the game they signed into, but its human nature. It happens in all video games, but in DbD so much of the game is based around the killer in the match that it has an outsized impact.
-
I've never heard a dev mention anything about that, but there is lot about MMR they haven't talked about.
But, why would they put a separate MMR for every category? Why would you design it so that every player's account would need 5 (I think) different MMRs? It would add so much more complexity to the system instead of just having a single MMR.
-
We have so many perks that come out where Content Creators talk about strong it is going to be, and then they drop it as well after the first few weeks.
I think the bigger requirement for StB, far more than being in a SWF, is the player running it being an extremely skilled looper. Because if you take a hook state and then just go down pretty quickly, you haven't delayed the killer's elimination very much (and much less than other anti-tunnel perks you could be running). But if you are an amazing looper and you aren't worried about drawing the killer to you, then it can help.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864283#Comment_3864283
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864312#Comment_3864312
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864316#Comment_3864316
Aye, fair...
Though as I've thought about it more, doesn't this start to add more problems? What if a player doesn't want to quit? Giving up when the 3rd player is downed is not an universal decision for all players. What about the scenario where 2 players are left, one is distracting as the other is opening the gate and goes down under a pallet nearby. You just force them to die?
Doesn't the instart mori on 3rd downed survivor guarantee its impossible to save or attempt to escape? No flashlights or flashbang attempts? No stall for Unbreakable? What if they've got Flip Flop and Power Struggle? WGLF and Made For This? What if I've used Breakdown and successfully made a Deadzone?
What if the 3rd survivor still has hook stages and the 4th has the gate 99d and wants to wait for the hook to try and exchange because they have said perks?
What about the same 2 man scenario but the chased player gets downed near the line? No heal tech? No body block to help them escape? They just die? What if a player wants to crawl away with Tenacity and try for a hatch escape?
What about killer perks to fairly play for the hatch? I can't use BBQ and Chilli or Friends to the End to find the 4th? Or get at least a head start while they hide from it?
This change always forces the killer to play hatch, which is the goal, but what aboit Adepts? You might not care about achievements, but plenty of people do, and this just makes killer adepts even harder…
Not to mention with your proposed version you have this weird scenario where the Mori isn't in the killers control... What if I as killer have a player DC cause they're a whiner and decide I want to play out my hook stages, kill anyone who wants to quit, but let anyone who doesn't also quit go for sticking it out? Once a second player SoHs, I can't get hook stages anymore and have to stop completely, can't give any flashlight or pallet saves since these players got screwed over by a dirt bag teammate? Soon as I down someone they just die?
What if I'm Huntress and get an orbital? What if they drop on the floor from failing to mend? Or use Plot Twist? Does the Entity just kill them remotely? Seems a bit weird.
Unless you want to impose a rule to only allow when the gates aren't powered, or an optional accept mori option, but at this point the rule is starting to become complex and confusing, because it doesn't really make sense anymore if we start throwing on a load of restrictions to account for many scenarios.
This doesn't sound like a very clean solution, and makes the whole interaction of third down messy and confusing...
No solution will be perfect, and any proposed solution will incur some new issues. The goal is whether the new idea will improve over the existing problems. That's true for problem solving for basically any type of issue, not just video games.
I should also note that my favored solution would be a rapidly increased bleedout for both thematic and balance reasons, but looking through your list of issues:
What if a player doesn't want to quit?There's lots of situations where I don't want to die or lose, that's part of a game.
What about the scenario where 2 players are left, one is distracting as the other is opening the gate and goes down under a pallet nearby. You just force them to die? Doesn't the instart mori on 3rd downed survivor guarantee its impossible to save or attempt to escape? No flashlights or flashbang attempts? No stall for Unbreakable? What if they've got Flip Flop and Power Struggle? WGLF and Made For This? What if I've used Breakdown and successfully made a Deadzone?I'd be fine with that. In this scenario you have a standoff situation. One survivor is under a pallet, the other can rescue, but if the survivor crawls out from under the pallet the killer picks them up.
Basically the survivors are now hoping to out boredom the killer. I'm fine with that situation disappearing as well (or basically any situation in DbD that can be described as a standoff).
I was in a situation like this as killer. Playing on Ormond, doors open, survivor is downed under a pallet, too far to make it to the door, and I know the other remaining survivor has background player. If I pick up, they get the stun, if not the survivor bleedouts. We're just waiting to see whether one of us grows bored first. I'm not sure why anyone would want that situation in a game.
What if the 3rd survivor still has hook stages and the 4th has the gate 99d and wants to wait for the hook to try and exchange because they have said perks?What about the same 2 man scenario but the chased player gets downed near the line? No heal tech? No body block to help them escape? They just die?Sure. We've moved the line that a survivor needs to get to to escape a few meters.
What if a player wants to crawl away with Tenacity and try for a hatch escape?Such a rare occurrence that I'd be fine with giving that up as a trade off.
What about killer perks to fairly play for the hatch? I can't use BBQ and Chilli or Friends to the End to find the 4th? Or get at least a head start while they hide from it?Yeah, those perks would be ever so slightly weaker.
This change always forces the killer to play hatch, which is the goal, but what aboit Adepts? You might not care about achievements, but plenty of people do, and this just makes killer adepts even harder…What percentage of total killer games ever played are for adepts? Probably well less than 1%.
Not to mention with your proposed version you have this weird scenario where the Mori isn't in the killers control... What if I as killer have a player DC cause they're a whiner and decide I want to play out my hook stages, kill anyone who wants to quit, but let anyone who doesn't also quit go for sticking it out?Killers letting survivors go is its own whole issue (something I do in the situation you describe). It allows MMR to be manipulated and throws off the stats that BHVR balances the game around. If that is common enough to worry about and this change would address that, its an overall positive.
What if I'm Huntress and get an orbital? What if they drop on the floor from failing to mend? Or use Plot Twist? Does the Entity just kill them remotely? Seems a bit weird.I think this is actually the biggest thing, how weird it would feel and break the game flow. I think that's a far bigger concern than most of the issues discussed.
Though most of these could be fixed by adding a 'when the third survivor is downed and the killer is or becomes within 8m' requirement.
Unless you want to impose a rule to only allow when the gates aren't powered, or an optional accept mori option, but at this point the rule is starting to become complex and confusing, because it doesn't really make sense anymore if we start throwing on a load of restrictions to account for many scenarios.I think the only relevant situation is gates being powered, and we already treat other things differently when gates are powered like AFC mechanic.
This doesn't sound like a very clean solution, and makes the whole interaction of third down messy and confusing...So as I mentioned above, my preferred solution would be rapidly increased bleedout, say 5 to 7 times the current rate, so a full health survivor has 34 to 48 seconds (and I'd put the rapidly increase to start when all survivors but 1 are down).
That said, I don't think it is really messy, you're just preferring the status quo design. Imagine that moring the 3rd downed survivor had always been in the game. Would we be having threads posted about how a survivor thought they could have gotten value out of Tenacity or killers wishing they could get value out of BBQ? Maybe on very rare occasions, but nothing like the rate at which people complain about slugging.
On the other hand, if we did instant third moris, I pretty confident there would be new players confused about why the Huntress auto teleports to a downed survivor.
I think a lot of mechanics are like that: such as hook grabs. I have a hard time remembering they ever existed (and when I do I remember it's how dull it felt), if hook grabs had never existed (which is true for anyone new coming into the game) I don't think anyone would feel like something is missing.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3864283#Comment_3864283
Fair point 😅
Though we are getting a little slim on usable offerings the longer the game goes on 😁
I wouldn't mind a total reworking of the idea of how Offerings work, but being that is unlikely to happen -you could just delay the time it takes for the hatch to spawn if there was an instant mori on the third survivor.
-
@Tsunami said:
I have been playing this game for a while now, and I have seen it evolve ( or devolve ) through various stages. However, out of all the subjects I could discuss, I want to focus on their perk execution. To put it simply, its mostly boring and unoriginal.
Of course, Im not saying that all the perks are boring there are plenty of perks for different playstyles, and some choices feel genuinely satisfying for both sides. For example, perks like Deception, Chemical Trap, Bloodwarden and Trail of Torment are interesting and rewarding when they work. However what I mean is that, it feels like Behaviour just keeps reusing the same flavors over and over again. Finding an interesting new perk is the exception, not the norm.
Most of the new perks for both survivors and killers follow familiar patterns: another aura reading perk, another way to apply existing status effects, or generic perks for generators that feel underwhelming because generators themselves are boring in this game.
What I really want to see is new forms of gameplay, new status effects, and perks that are fresh and exciting. I don’t want yet another aura reading perk that activates after I havent seen any auras for a while.
I realize that the game itself, after many years, is still a bit of a mess ( much more than a bit xD but im being nice), and positive changes tend to happen slowly. I also realize there are more important issues than perks. However, I wish the developers would experiment more instead of reheating the same ideas we have already seen.
Here is my few ideas that shoudlnt be hard to implement as example:
In terms of new mechanic:
For survivors, a wisp mechanic could be interesting. After a survivor dies, a wisp appears on the map, carrying one of the deceased survivors perks. If another survivor interacts with the wisp, they gain a fifth perk. To prevent abuse, if the deceased survivor had only one perk, there would be a 75% chance that the wisp carries nothing (since it reflects one of the four perk slots).
Killers could have a new blocking mechanic. After breaking a pallet or wall, the killer can stand near the broken object and press an ability button to block it for survivors. The killer remains unaffected. A more aggressive version could include damaging spikes, causing survivors to lose a health state or enter deep wound if they attempt to cross affected area.
Quick bunch of ideas for status effect from perks:
Tracked: Survivors always leave scratch marks, even when walking or crouching. While similar to aura reading mechanics, this perk focuses on tracking survivors nearby, as opposed to perks like BBQ and Chili, which reveal survivors at a long distance. This trade off allows for more precise tracking but with less overall range potential.
Guarded: When a killer injures you within a 2-meter radius, they become blinded for 3.7 seconds. (This doesnt work if the killer is carrying another survivor, to prevent abuse.) It wouldnt need to be extremely strong, just confusing. The 3.7 seconds timer was choosen because the killer is staggered for 2.7 seconds after succesfull hit.
Infested: Survivors are infested with an Entity parasite in dorment state. If they are more than 32 meters away from the killer and not interacting with objects or other survivors, the parasite awakens and triggers a mini game. The mini game could be something like “Simon Says” or a series of skill checks. The specific mechanics could vary, but the idea is to force survivors to engage in extra action. The parasite immediatly comes back to dorment state when a killer is in 32 meter radius.
I know I know that some of those ideas may sound simply awful to you but its just few of many options to show you that Behaviour could put tons of ideas in the game not matter how good or stale to spice things up instead of keep giving you something that just work slighly diffrent.
Slowly finishing this thought.
It also feels like Behaviour has abandoned or ignored some of the status effects they have already introduced, such as Deafness. Additionally, the Incapacitated status effect was removed from perks entirely, which seems like a wasted opportunity.
Here are some ideas to make Incapacitated more viable for perks:
Leave it as strong as it is but limit its duration. Another option is to restrict specific actions (like generators, healing, or totems) rather than blocking everything. This could create two versions of that status effect: one that blocks all actions for killer powers like Twins or Pinhead, and another for perks.
Behaviour seems hesitant to take risks with perks and mechanics, and while I understand the challenges of balancing, I believe experimenting with fresh ideas could make the game much more engaging and interesting overall.
Im eager to hear your opinions and thanks for reading! ( Somebody read it right? )
A huge problem is that the game is already overwhelming for new comers. I'll hear people say 'the game starts to get stale around X thousands of hours'. That's a pretty amazing result for a video game and they are likely worried about the impact adding more mechanics would have on new players coming into the game.
Also, asyms are notoriously hard to get to work right. Adding new mechanics really risks upsetting what fragile balance already exists.
But, on to the ideas.
Wisp mechanic - One of the more common ideas is something to lessen the impact of a survivor dying. I think it undermines a core concept of an elimination game. On top of that, I suspect it would be tricky to code. I'm not sure how the game would deal with things that have charges / single use activations / etc.
It could also be a detriment to soloq where the survivors start running to grab the wisp.
Blocking Mechanic - Sounds like a killer power.
Tracked - It takes out the counterplay element and the stealth game, especially if you did it for walking and crouching. Also combing it and aura reading would still be something a killer could do.
Also - Spirit.
Guarded - Needs something more to it. Make the blind longer, but require some condition to it. Perks that cause direct interaction between the killer and survivor need more than just a straight impact.
Infested - Sounds like a killer power.
It also feels like Behaviour has abandoned or ignored some of the status effects they have already introduced, such as Deafness.This is true, but I think its because certain status effects just aren't that healthy for the game.
-
Overall: On perks, killers have powers which is where their uniqueness comes from. This was one of the problems with Ultimate Weapon's original design, you basically got to be a mini-Doctor. It's not that the Doctor's power is a problem, it was that now any killer could have a version of it plus their power. If a Killer perk is broken on any killer, even if just 1 killer, its broken (like I mentioned above, Tracked would overwhelming on Spirit).
Totally new mechanics are tricky because people enjoy the overall game design. I hope that we'll be getting changes for the most commonly complained about issues (first hook kobes, slugging for bleedout, 2 survivors hiding out) before worrying about new mechanics.
Finally, new, radical ideas seem to be what they are using the new modes for. If you're bored of the base game you have totally different modes of play they are trying (some of which failed, which indicates lots of people are quite happy with the base).
-
I think we had one reply on topic? Pretty good for a FNaF thread.
About what this thread has become - to me horror (especially the slasher subgenre) has always been somewhat directed at children. I think the first horror movie I watched was in 3rd grade or so at a sleep over birthday party (this would have been 1990 or so to date myself - though I also was allowed to watch a compilation of horror movies when I went to a Haunted House as a Kindrergaterner). I remember kids having Jason and Freddy costumes for Halloween. If someone had put a horror movie on when I was in my mid-teens at a party I think I would have found it silly unless it was a Halloween party, but when I was 10 it was exciting and pushing the boundaries.
Now there were always people who had a problem with it, but there's always been some pushing of slasher content from a teen audience to a tween audience. But if FNaF's has gotten campier as it has aged, I think that is pretty normal compared to the rest of the genre.
-
BHVR has talked about it a couple of times. With how their teams work, they would have multiple groups with nothing to do. So it wouldn't really fix any more bugs than they normally do, it would just be a contentless chapter.
A ground up recode would probably be the best way to deal with all of the bugs, but license issues would prevent it from being DbD2, and a full recode of the game wouldn't make financial sense (not at this point at least).
@kommandantlocke said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863707#Comment_3863707
but if we all as community yell for it maybe we can change why do we have to let it just happen? why let this game get buggier every month? look at destiny bugs and content is all they do
but if we all as community yell for it maybe we can change why do we have to let it just happen?While I am always quite pleased when a BHVR dev actually responds to me, its important to remember that this 'community' is a tiny sliver of the DbD playerbase. Even someone like Otz is really only interacting with a small portion of the players.
And the realistic thing is that the player count is quite healthy and that the thing that tends to drop it is when there is a gap in new content. That's just how a live service game works, there needs to keep being 'new' stuff.
I suspect the FNaF release will get a lot more attention then most of their content as it will likely bring in new players and they'll want it to have minimal problems.
-
I like to cycle through games. What makes DbD unusual to me is that I keep coming back to it.
-
@UknownShredder said:
I made a post previously about disconnecting issues and i got some suggestions to make.
With my current internet i am 4 times rank 1 world of warcraft player. I am Mythical immortal on mobile legend. And while i do get lagspikes in those games at times even cutouts somehow their games are more forgiving. They give you the chance to be able to reconnect and does not DC you from the game right away. In Mobile legend that has 230 milloin players you can rejoin even at competitve level if you somehow manage to close your application and continue.
Why cant Dead by daylight do this ? I mean you are unlucky one day and you end up with a longer punishment than you do beating up your wife where you get 6hour remand.
Another option is because i see how you say you ruin the game for others and we cannot make a difference between rage quit and pulling the plug is to introduce a ladder where you got MMR and rating not only would it improve everyones gameplay as everyone is playing for prestige but noone under any circumstances would quit a game because they dont like the map if they are publicly seen as a loser.
Now i took DBD as a more casual game than the games i have listed above when it come to "pvp" however the bans is not very casual and being unlucky one day because some outside factor that some telecom company has problems or DBD servers are crashing resulting in that you are afraid to Q up as you might just ruin the whole blood feast that is going on right now and that you love to play the game.
And in all honesty. do you feel someone deserve a 72 hour ban because they made you have to get in Q again for 2minute every once in a while ? like how important are you ?
Now i am not there yet i am on 15 minute and hopefully tomorrow on 5 minute as i changed internet but people shouldnt be afraid to Q up as if they are competing in starcraft torunament for money because they getting punished so severely. A punishment that doesnt seem to go away unless you stop playing the game completely.
Survivors kills themselves on hooks to escape their fate a killer gets punished a lot more. Why not just let the killer not gain any bloodpoints for the next 2-3 games if they DC (with no time penalty that they can wait out ) So that there is an incentive to play which they must to get rid of the punishment and hence not making people quit the game.
best regards.They give you the chance to be able to reconnect and does not DC you from the game right away.Ideally, sure, but different games use different servers and coding. BHVR's coding gets questioned a lot of times, but I think if it was that simple of a change it would have happened.
I mean you are unlucky one day and you end up with a longer punishment than you do beating up your wife where you get 6hour remand.Um, okay then.
Now i took DBD as a more casual game than the gamesIt's casual in the sense that a lot more is up in the air, its intense though in the sense that people are extremely into the trial and the outcome, far more than any other game I've ever played.
And in all honesty. do you feel someone deserve a 72 hour ban because they made you have to get in Q again for 2minute every once in a while ? like how important are you ?How important are you? Are you more important than the experience of the four other people the DC impacted?
Arguments like this go both ways.
Survivors kills themselves on hooks to escape their fate a killer gets punished a lot more.And BHVR really should address that.
Why not just let the killer not gain any bloodpoints for the next 2-3 games if they DC (with no time penalty that they can wait out )Lots of players don't care about BP at all.
-
@Gardhome said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3863005#Comment_3863005
Replace broken with exposed is actually would be a huge buff for the perk. Cause you can no longer one-hit against strong and decent killers (whos mostly m2) like Blight, Nurse, Wesker, Alien, Chucky, Nemesis
Sure, that doesn't relate to overall issues though. You're still increasing the timer by 30 seconds and lots of times you're still going to be facing killers exposed is just as good for (and for some, like Wesker, its not a huge change).
The problem with the perk isn't just the trade off, though that's a substantial issue, its that the other survivors have to play a 3v1 without you or the killer finds you in the basement. Both situations weaken the perk when at most you get a moderate time benefit on the gens.
And that's part of the problem with Invocations. They are really, really bad.
-
They both require you to be healthy. The upside of Drama is the on demand nature (as long as you are healthy), with the downside that you might get exposed / less sprint time. Combine that with Finesse and it takes a lot of danger out of it.
On the other hand, if you were using another exhaustion perk you might have made it to the window without ever needing to engage in the dangerous close call.
-
@Gardhome said:
Invocation time should reflect the effect it did to the match. For example Treacherous Crows not worth 60 second you spend in the basement, and Weaving Spiders is overbuffed, cause 60 seconds is to little for such huge effect. So i suggest changing them like this:
- Treacherous Crows: buff: Reduce the duration of the Invocation process from 60 seconds to 45 seconds. rework: replace permanent broken status with permanent oblivious
- Weaving Spiders: nerf: Increase the duration of the Invocation process from 60 seconds to 90 seconds. rework: replace permanent broken status with permanent exposed
So let's start with the concept before we get into individual suggestions:
Invocation time should reflect the effect it did to the match.I don't know what BHVR's impression of invocations is. I think with the general disinterest we might get a larger overhaul to them at some point.
Presuming that doesn't happen, then yes, each invocation being balanced on its own would be my preference.
Treacherous Crows: buff: Reduce the duration of the Invocation process from 60 seconds to 45 seconds. rework: replace permanent broken status with permanent obliviousIt would be in the right direction and would take it out of the realm of worst survivor perk.
For example Treacherous Crows not worth 60 second you spend in the basement, and Weaving Spiders is overbuffed, cause 60 seconds is to little for such huge effect.I don't think Weaving Spiders is even close to being worth running at 60 seconds. Even if we switch from permanent broken to exposed, going to 90 seconds would make it an absolute killer to your fellow survivors.
I'd far rather have them reduce the time in basement, even if that necessitated lowering the benefit. A minute spent in the basement, much less 90 seconds, isn't fun game play and if it gets interrupted late in the invocation its basically cost the match on that decision alone.
-
@Spare_Them_Mori_Me said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3862227#Comment_3862227
How does doing those two make map pressure? I literally ignore those two, and makes the game chill and pretty easy. What am I missing? Ty!
I think you are misreading the comment. I think he's saying by doing those gens the survivors lose map pressure (it's just in the structure of putting map pressure on the killer).
That said, while I hate doing the edge gens first, it does create a zone that you can run to at the end of the game for resets / to draw the killer away. It's not my preferred strategy, but taking the outer gens first means the survivors can hit and run on the central gens in groups and 'stick' the killer in the middle.
But trying that in soloq is a huge ask.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3861870#Comment_3861870
I invoked the comparison because they're both decisions that are made from a desire to flaunt one's own ego ("I'm so good that only a 4k will do and these peon survivors will have to waste their own time for my sake or hand it to me on a silver platter" in the former, "This loser baby killer didn't stand a chance against my greatness" in the latter)
alright, let's compare technical aspects of getting a 4k that have no connection with ego flaunting to exit gate tbagging ones.
Slugging for 4k
- securing a double pip;
- securing an adept;
- higher MMR gain.
Staying/tbagging at the gate:
- resetting teammates for a potentional endgame save (which is the worst decision for an endgame save since killer could just force you out at the gate and completely secure that kill)
Btw, you will notice quite often that survivors who are slugged for 4k willi intentionally try to deny you 4k by hook and force their own bleedout. No, they won't try crawling to the nearest possible hatch spawnpoint, they will crawl to the random spot so that they can be sure killer will waste time trying to find them before them bleeding out. So, why does a survivor slugged for 4k that wants to avoid their time being wasted decide to further waste time by doing this? Ego is the nasty thing.
There's a couple of things you're overlooking
Going for adepts make up a very small portion of the game. If we're going to throw that in, we need to throw in things like survivors going for archives.
Higher MMR gain also applies on the survivor side.
Pipping also can apply to the survivor side, if the killer doesn't chase them out they can go back into the match and get altruism points.
Staying around to eat a body block / distraction also grants points.
-
He would be a tough killer to do. Being able to destroy walls would fit, but I think BHVR has said they had a killer like that once planned and the coding wasn't possible (and now there are a lot more maps). A lot of the things he might have basekit, like shorter stuns, are already covered by perks.
People bring up teleporting, but I never liked that idea. In Slashers the villains can move really quickly to build tension, suspense, and jump scares. Within reason it also covers the fear of the survivors that they've lost track of time and location. But I think just giving a killer a power that doesn't actually follow what they can do would feel like a cop out.
I think the most accurate, though not necessarily fun, idea would be to just make him the ultimate M1 killer. Faster move speeds, faster blood lust, go ahead and let him even take more perk slots. You could then put chests / spawnables around the map that the survivors could use to lower his extreme levels of power.
Alternative to that, some combination of Oni and Myers that powers up over the course of the trial, though link it more to injuries than stalking.
-
Love the theming of it. Always takes me back to playing RE2 as a kid.
Balance wise it is pretty killer dependent, but that is generally true for a lot of maps.
-
@Langweilig said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3861976#Comment_3861976
Yes, but overcharge got three positive things while call of brine is better at nothing.
Call of brine only got the regression, which was only + 15 seconds and the information, which is not good and can be better by overcharge.
Overcharge got more regression than 15 seconds, can affect more generators than one, has better information if survivors miss skill checks, which also regresses the generator.
Sure the combination should have been nerfed, but call of brine wasn’t even that good at 200% and now does barely anything. It increases the regression to 18.75 seconds, which is 3,75 seconds more than the basekit.
Sure the combination should have been nerfedBHVR though doesn't want to seem to nerf combinations. Exhaustion seems to be one of the rare mechanics they introduced to keep perks from being combined.
And while we have the gen kick limit now, we no longer have gen tapping which was one of the ways to counter a heavy gen regression build.
The main thing, beyond balance, was that the games just weren't very fun.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3861749#Comment_3861749
They have to do something to avoid crows, not much but if they tab out and don't move at all they will get crows. I could technically not move... I don't even need to patrol gens with tinkerer because when it gets to 70% I will know where they are. Just have it running in the background while I have some food or something while they are on the other side of the map avoiding crows.
I pose the same statement to you, if survivors are fine waiting out the hour for a hatch that may never appear then you would think at some point time investment would outweigh that, especially as they don't get the win at the end. Works both ways.
I pose the same statement to you, if survivors are fine waiting out the hour for a hatch that may never appear then you would think at some point time investment would outweigh that, especially as they don't get the win at the end. Works both ways.That was my point about the chicken and egg scenario. You had said:
With this sort of attitude is there really any wonder why people slug and don't care if it's wasting survivors time?If killers slug because survivors are going to hide, then survivors hide because killers are going to slug. Both sides are sacrificing a lot of time for a minute improvement and/or to annoy the other side.
It happens on both sides. I don't understand why as I will either get on a gen as survivor or patrol the map as killer, but it happens for both.
-
I agree with @Saiph that the idea of not having any item / addons problems since the first 100 hours, though I feel like that might even be an exaggeration.
My example: when I first started playing I played Claudette and thought I was suppossed to just put all my BP into one character. She's prestige 30 and I haven't actually used her in a long time. She has 79 syringes and 116 BNPs.
To the OP's post: I get having the BP as some kind of background goal, but am surprised with the posts that come out that min-max BP gains. But being so many people are thrilled with BP, no real need to do a different incentive structure.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3861414#Comment_3861414
That doesn't make sense, because the key difference is the killer slugs for 4min to achieve 4k while these survivors that hide for a lot longer "to be annoying" knowing it's certain death if the killer waits it out. Regardless of who started it, not slugging and waiting it out seems to work fine. They can hide as long as they like and not be slugged. Still check mate because killer will get 4k in the end if they really want it.
But we're talking about rationales here on human behavior. You can wait the survivors out if you want, though if you're patrolling gens and they are just on the other side of the map they're probably also doing something else on their phone or alt tabbing while they wait.
If you're fine waiting the hour for the 4k sure, but at some point I'd think time investment would outweigh that.
-
@jmwjmw27 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3861393#Comment_3861393
If you're referring to the DBDLeague AHL tournament, that one had a special rule where the team who picks a killer also picks the map, so they were picking maps the other team wouldn't have practice on (and iirc, dracula was played on rotten, Mastermind was on Rancid). Not necessarily correlated to how balanced the map is.
Also, would you say the map in question detailed above contains outplay potential in all areas? Specifically the top left area? I find the new jungle gyms and the weaker filler by shack lacking in much meaningful outplay potential against good players without simply holding W, same with the harvester and main building aside from the pallet.
If you're referring to the DBDLeague AHL tournamentYou beat me to pointing this out. One of the big purposes of the tournament was to play on maps that they don't play as much and it being a surprise.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
Well to be honest I think people are wishing I just slugged them for the 4k now lol when 2 go into hiding I just wait it out and they eventually come out of hiding or they both die when server ends. Problem solved, they don't get slugged and I get my 4k even if it it takes longer than it should. Compare that to 4min bleed out... I know what I would prefer as a survivor.
1 match there was a 2 person swf left, they both were saying they knew they couldn't win so wanted to hide until server ends "to be annoying". With this sort of attitude is there really any wonder why people slug and don't care if it's wasting survivors time? 🤷♂️ Not annoying to me because I had full intentions of waiting it out anyway and I got my 4k.
With this sort of attitude is there really any wonder why people slug and don't care if it's wasting survivors time?This is just a chicken and egg scenario on what came first. You can say that you are slugging because otherwise they hide out, and the survivors can say they hide out because the killer is going to slug.
-
@sockposs said:
What if we just let survivors that have maxed out their self mend press their active ability button to get up at the cost of a hook state and taking the incapacitated status effect for a while to prevent them from immediately picking up other survivors (or anything to prevent them from picking others up), also functioning as a bleed out button when survivors are at 2 hooks. This would make slugging all survivors significantly less powerful since it is no longer a win condition while remaining easy to understand and not completely killing off slugging as a situational strategy (for example when you know someone is about to go for a save) or taking away too much of a killers reward for snowballing and getting multiple downs in a row (up to 4 hooks as a reward, spread throughout the team)
(also some form of basekit deerstalker because I absolutely hate losing slugs)I do think the idea has merit. The problem with basekit unbreakable as a concept is that there is no trade off, its a substantial change to the game that also would require working a large number of perks.
Going through your suggestions:
Trade off a hook state for a free up - I think this could work and there is now decisions to be made on both sides. The killer still gains the benefits they normally would from a slug (not having to carry, not risk of a pickup), while survivors now face a danger. If they stand back up they get a hook state/die, meaning the killer got the benefits of a hook without ever having to hook, but they get back in the game. It also requires a decision on the survivors part on whether it is worth it to stand back up or if another survivor is coming and might get them up without the hook state.
Be incapacitated - I think this goes too far. Being able to pick up other survivors is one of the only reasons a survivor might want to be able to stand up. An incapacitated status effect along with a hook state would make this a buff to killers in the vast majority of games where survivors would stand back up just because they were bored.
Bleed out button - this is really its own suggestion and I'm surprised BHVR is so reluctant to put something like this in.
-
Getting around to that: how to deal with survivors trying to kobe on first hook that they talked about on a livestream a long while back.
-
@WolfyWood said:
Would this ever happen? Is the original code for the old game lost?
This is one of the few games where watching old content actually makes me wish I could've played back then.
The original code still exists certainly. There are people who have through mods and their own servers played on prior patch versions, but its a fair amount of work. I think some content creators made videos on it a while back.
-
@CursedPerson said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3860598#Comment_3860598
Idk with good game sense you should generally have an idea where survivors are. Id like to see an example of one of your games thats somehow a daily occurrence
I've been thinking about this as well reading over the thread. Not just because being unable to find hiding survivors for 20+ minutes is really rare, but the situation of one of them getting saved, then hiding out seems borderline impossible.
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3860412#Comment_3860412
The double standard is that the list of "bad things that killers do" often helps raise their win rate. Pretty much every killer strategy that helps the killers raise their kill rate, is labeled and demonized as a problem.
Meanwhile, the list of "bad things that survivors do", often involve survivors just doing things purely out of spite.
The double standard is that the list of "bad things that killers do" often helps raise their win rate. Pretty much every killer strategy that helps the killers raise their kill rate, is labeled and demonized as a problem.Don't bring BMPs that auto-finish four gens.
Don't run infinites.
Don't sabotage all the hooks.
Be in a SWF
Except the first three got patched out because they were obviously problematic, and the final one gets complained about all the time. Then you have complaints against other strategies, some of which have also been removed, FTP+Buckle Up, background player / flashbang, hook saboing, etc. Really the only thing survivors can do to hold the killer in the game that the survivors have won is stay at the exit gate, and most people agree that is a jerk move (which, unlike slugging, the killer at least has some power to end).
-
@bjorksnas said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3860066#Comment_3860066
Yeah I forgot it too until a few months ago when I was looking into it for why people were reaching p100 and it was becoming less of an "accomplishment" but its interesting that it all came about in a burst back to back rather than all at once because it probably ended up as "this is a good idea" "this is a good follow up" "this is a good follow up but we don't have the dev time for this patch" they really did bang it out over the course of those 3 months though once the changes started flowing
I might be misreading you, but coming out over 3 months counts as 'all at once' for DbD / Live Service.
To my understanding of how it usually works - changes and patches are planned well in advance. So the 6.2 bloodweb decrease was likely planned before the 6.1 patch, they might have just been thinking over the exact number and/or just slow rolling things.
-
Bring a map instead of small game to help find the totems.
Part of the problem though is, by design, 1 survivor is not meant to be able to counter the killer on their own. If you're running around the entire map doing totems, that's putting the other survivors in a situation where they need to handle all the other survivor things (gens, unhooks, heals, chases).
If you're playing to do the totems, and everyone else is playing to ignore the totems, it will be inefficient. Ideally you want each survivor to worry about the totems in their area of the map so no survivor is wasting time just doing map exploration.
Not to prove @Spare_Them_Mori_Me right immediately, but its part of the reason rushing gens is considered the stronger strategy because without communication its always the safest play.
-
Game concept: Perks that just put a penalty on the other side from the start just don't feel right if there isn't some action that it necessitates in response.
'I'm slowed down off the start of the match how do I change my playstyle' - 'Just keep playing normally' doesn't feel right.
Balance: As written, the perk would give substantial early game slowdown. That is the most important time of slowdown in the game for the killer so it would be a really powerful perk.
Conflict: What if the killer ran this and Thana? You're basically just giving permanent slowdown with no counter.
If you made it a hex perk, maybe. Then survivors could elect to try and either cleanse the perk or play injured.
Your could also transition it to an idea to penalize a survivor when they heal, but we already have this in Gift of Pain.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859453#Comment_3859453
When you play a fighting game competitively, you generally focus on mains. People tend to have "pocket" characters to deal with bad matchups, but it is not uncommon for even grand finals matches to have a 6/4 or worse matchup. The winner of the most recent SF3 Evo used a low tier character and stomped in matches that were heavily against him statistically. This also happens in many other games where people win finals with off-meta or straight up terrible matchups.
The point is that seeing a 60/40 doesn't mean you already lost, or that you will lose 60% of your matches. It means that statistically you are at a relative disadvantage, but it gets blown out of proportion constantly in this community that anything less than 50/50 = "there is no chance might as well go next" defeatist mentality. Which of course also dooms the other survivors who do continue to try, and ironically often alters their chances to be a lot lower than 40%
This also happens in many other games where people win finals with off-meta or straight up terrible matchups.Sure, and that exists in DbD regardless of the larger balance concepts. Off meta perks or specializing in weaker killers still exists. Whatever the overall kill rate was, that would remain true.
The point is that seeing a 60/40 doesn't mean you already lost, or that youwilllose 60% of your matches.Again, sure, that's true, but I don't know how you have a balance discussion without factoring those numbers in. At an extreme it sounds like 'let's just not worry about balancing at all because some players get different results'. And while I think worrying about balancing too much is a problem and is not even close to the be all, end all, of game design, its absolutely something that should come up.
-
Didn't expect this thread to be revied.
@AlexXHunter44 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3847219#Comment_3847219
#1 and #2 are redundant. #2 is already how it works and limiting how many you can bring makes no sense, #2 alreasy covers that possibility while giving the -option- for more if the survivor wants.
Personally I think they should pop simultaneously but additional negative effects are stacked for each.
Example: 1 and you are broken, 2 and another temporary effect happens, 3 another, 4 one more.
2-4 should be temporary downsides and perks should be balanced around all popping.
#1 and #2 are redundant.I'm not sure what you mean here because they definitely aren't redundant as they are two very different options.
#2 is already how it worksYep, I say that in my post.
limiting how many you can bring makes no senseWhy doesn't it makes sense? As I said, and Perrin mentioned as well, it would make it much easier to balance as a game factor. There are reasons why it might not be the best option, but there are also strong advantages in its favor.
Personally I think they should pop simultaneously but additional negative effects are stacked for each.That would be a possibility, but it strikes me as incredibly hard to balance as a concept. Especially if as you say:
perks should be balanced around all popping.then creating a series of cascading effects seems like an unnecessary complication when BHVR could just design Invocations like they do boons.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859023#Comment_3859023
And yet T.Hawk players in SF4 fully accepted matchups vs Blanka and Sagat, which were 70/30 at best
I don't get this comparison. Is there some necessity that they play that character? Because in DbD the players have to be split between two sides.
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859122#Comment_3859122
Pointing things sarcastically out is not any sort of argument.
I'm trying to explain that yes, there are reasons a killer might slug for the 4k outside of them just being mean, namely not wanting to get BM'd by a sore winner or, more importantly, survivors taking the game hostage for an extended period by hiding for the hatch.
Note the poster above you. People are literally justifying taking the match hostage until the server closes in this situation because the killer, rather than slug for the 4k, risked hooking and got sabo'd. So clearly this is something that survivor players will do.
It's a lose/lose. And better to inconvenience someone for 4 minutes than have your time wasted for 20.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3859089#Comment_3859089
Ah. So I can either risk having 20 minutes wasted…or I can slug for the 4k.
Thanks for proving my exact point I guess?
Every killer loses survivors sometimes, because there are perks (and also latency) which futz with tracking, some maps are very dark and/or cluttered etc. So if you're really justifying taking the game hostage for an extended period as some sort of…punishment for this, then yeah. Case closed.
It's a lose/lose. And better to inconvenience someone for 4 minutes than have your time wasted for 20.How many times has this situation ever happened to you? Because I can't think of a single time its ever happened to me where there was
1: save at 2 survivors
2: they both got away
3: they managed to hide out for 20 minutes
Even if there is a slight chance of it, you are also wasting your own time. You'll have far more of those 4 minute situations than you will the 20. Even if you have no qualms about wasting other player's time, you're doing it to yourself as well.
-
@baharuto48 said:
- Slugging is connected to a perk the killer has to take otherwise survivors get base kit unbreakable when the killer is more than 10 to 20 meters away
- Slugging is a power the killer has unlocked once the gen count reaches three
- Someone else got an idea?
1: This is one of those changes that if the game had been designed around it from the beginning could have worked, but can't really go back on it.
2: I'm not sure of the specifics, but something like this could work, I'm just not sure how much impact it would have. Most of the complaints about slugging are the 'slug for the 4k' type suggestions.
3: Depends on what you want to fix. Rapidly accelerated bleedouts when all survivors but one are downed I think fixes a lot of problems.
-
@EternalRique said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3857886#Comment_3857886
This is why I feel they hate skill based match making; I've heard many cries of "it'll put me against good survivors!" and I'm like… if you're playing good/pub stomping then you need to go against survivors who are within your skill range/bracket, they (for the most part) don't want that.
My favorite version of this is: I won but it was really hard!
-
Double post error, please delete.
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858733#Comment_3858733
- I'll generally hook right away unless I suspect there's a save incoming. Then I'll either give hatch or gate if I find hatch first. Thing is - maybe half the time the survivor will still sit in the gate teabagging until I chase them out which is frustrating. If it's been an annoying day that'll often be enough to make me unlikely to give the next group much mercy.
- I cannot stand hiders. I'd rather face the sweatiest, most BM looper in the entire game than someone who wastes my time to that degree.
However, here's the problem.
Scenario 3.
3. I down survivor 1. I can try for a pickup, but let's say survivor 2 has BGP and a flashlight, or 1 goes down on a pallet. Now I cannot help but slug or…well, see the sentence after next. So I can camp a slug or go hunting for the last one. I choose the latter, survivor 1 sneaks around, gets survivor 2 up and then I have 2 people hiding because now both want hatch. And this can go on until server closes.
Isn't it better for all involved not to chance it?
maybe half the time the survivor will still sit in the gate teabagging until I chase them out which is frustrating.I've never seen quite the level of BM that some other people seem to experience, either when playing survivor or killer, but when I encounter BM it seems to come about the same from both sides. It's never right, but as others have covered its a both sides things.
I down survivor 1. I can try for a pickup, but let's say survivor 2 has BGP and a flashlight, or 1 goes down on a pallet.I don't think this is really the scenario people mean when they discuss slugging for the 4k. If you take a moment to check for the other survivor I highly doubt anyone, who is not trolling, would consider that inappropriate.
then I have 2 people hiding because now both want hatch. And this can go on until server closes.We need a lot of things to happen. First, if both survivors want the hatch, why is one survivor even rescuing the other? I'm sure it has happened, but it seems unlikely.
But if it happens, the rescued survivor is injured, so they would need something like iron will to have a chance of escaping, but even then they are leaving a trail of blood behind them meaning they are likely to be found.
It seems such an unlikely situation to waste time over, when the more likely scenario is the other survivor is just hiding somewhere waiting for the bleedout to finish (and then might be looking for a key on top of it, potentially sticking you in the game even longer).
-
@Equinox_One said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3858542#Comment_3858542
Why not just give up and concede the game though? You know the killer is going to keep looking for you and all you're doing is wasting everyone's time.
Why not just give up and concede the game though? You know the killer is going to keep looking for you and all you're doing is wasting everyone's time.I'll take a different tact here then a lot of responders. So our scenario is we have two survivors, one slugged, one up, and a killer who want to find the one up, why more emphasis on the killer:
1: Best case scenario, even if the up survivor just starts spamming noise to indicate their location, its still going to be a longer wait for the slugged survivor then if they were just hooked. I pretty much always just give myself up if the killer wants to slug as I hate the thought of making that slugged survivor just sit for 4 minutes, but even then it can be awhile for them to get to me, down me, and then potentially walk back to the slug, hook them first, come back to me, mori or hook me, when they could have just hooked the slug at the start. Someone is still stuck in the game longer than if there was just a hook and then a hatch play.
2: Just on an enjoyment / psychology front: we all agree the slugged survivor isn't having fun, but hiding out as the survivor can be enjoyable. You're camped out in a bush or locker, watching the killer searching around, hoping you don't get found as the meter ticks down, anticipating that mad race towards the hatch. It still has the DbD elements for that player. I've met a few killers who claim to enjoy that search, but usually people think it is boring and pointless.
So the slugged survivor thinks, 'Why are we doing this?', the killer thinks 'Why are we doing this?', while the up survivor thinks 'I know what I'm going for.' It just doesn't make sense for the Killer to engage in an action that they themselves find unenjoyable.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
This might seem like an obvious thing as it has generally been considered a win for survivor is escape. Hatch is draw death is loss. Killers win is 3/4k. 2k being a draw and 0/1k being a loss.
However I think many people are slowly realising that these "win" criterias are only wins based on MMR. People can't see MMR and some believe it's all fabrication anyway because MMR system is so broken. So people are not actually caring about MMR or the win criteria associated to it. It seems to me that a win for survivor is escape via gate or hatch. Win for killer is 1 to 4 kills but the scale of the win increases with each kill.
Some people have different win critereas such as BP scores, 3k, loop the killers successfully for a certain amount of time so others can do gens. The point I'm making is your win/loss might not be the same as others win/loss so when people say about killer has already won at 3k, not everyone considers that a win. It's all very subjective and it's intentionally kept that way. That's why there is never a "you win" or "you lose" after the match. It's just simple "you escaped" and killer gets varied messages such as "the entity is displeased"
I think is generally true and is the way BHVR designs games (Deathgarden felt even stranger).
The one thing I'd add is that from an MMR perspective the game really cares about degree of victory. 4k / 4k / 4k / 2k /1k compared to 3k / 3k / 3k / 2k / 0k - look like the same win / loss / tie ration (3, 1, and 1), but from an MMR perspective have a much different result (a 75% MMR increase rate vs a 55%, presuming no hatch). The game thinks the former is outperforming the latter, even if the community 'generally' gives them the same win rate.
@Nazzzak said:
MMR exists, we know because all the info has been data-mined. Whether it works efficiently is really the question, and most would probably say no. But yes, most people base their win conditions on the way SBMM functions. Per SBMM, hatch is null and void (does not affect MMR at all), while killers increase their MMR with both 3k and 4k. A survivor will increase upon leaving an exit gate. Other factors, such as your opponents own personal MMR or whether you were part of a swf, will affect how much you increase or decrease by. This is all data-mined but has also been mentioned previously by Peanits. People absolutely have their own win conditions but you'll find other players are unlikely to care about personal goals.
Also I know it matters little in terms of the point you made, but I'm pretty sure "entity is displeased" was retired awhile ago because it made people feel bad. I think it's more to keep in line with the lore, hence why we don't see a "you win/lose" message
whether you were part of a swf, will affect how much you increase or decrease by. This is all data-mined but has also been mentioned previously by Peanits.On the SWF part, what's the source for that? Not saying you're wrong by any means, I've seen others mention it before, though it disagrees with what I thought Peanits had said. I thought the MMR impact on survivors from whether other survivors escaped or not was always true, not just related to SWFs.
-
@theonryo123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3857772#Comment_3857772
so basically it would work like if it was more or devour you hit them since they tried taking a hit their already exposed and put into the dying state
There's a couple of problems with this. More to do to 'fun' and 'feel' than balance.
1: Just having an uncounterable perk in the game that removes an element of gameplay is a bad idea. Protection hits are something survivors are meant to be able to do. If this was a hex perk or it had some kind of other condition, maybe, but it doesn't seem strong enough to be a hex perk.
Lightborn is the only thing I can think of on a similar level, and that is meant to be a counter the killer can take if he sees multiple flashlights.
2: The protection hit system is not the most accurate thing in the world. Survivors could get downed when they weren't really protecting, and the killer could lose downs because it didn't register.
You could have more perks to punish protection hits than exist. Being broken for a period of time, a gen repair penalty, etc. are all possibilities, but a straight down I don't think works.
-
@theonryo123 said:
Wicked Pursuit
“Your focus is unstoppable, and interference only seals their fate.”•Effect:
If you are in a chase with an injured survivor and another survivor takes a protection hit within 8 meters, the healthy survivor becomes Exposed for 10/12/14 seconds.Cooldown: 40 seconds.
Purpose:This perk makes taking a body block protection hit very risky. Survivors will think twice before interfering with your chase because they’ll be vulnerable to a one-hit down.
Who is the healthy survivor here? The one who was hit I take it? Why does it matter if they become exposed while injured?
-
@SensualShamus said:
Ok so I posted I think in August or something last year praising the devs for the game mode, and subsequently lamenting it being removed and promising to return when the mode comes back. A friend told me it was back recently and I only recently remembered, so I've checked in today and found out the mode was out only briefly in November and now its gone again.
I'm a bit disappointed as I thought it would at some point become a permanent mode in DBD. So sure, you wanna work on it, try new ideas and release it again. Why can't you do that and leave it up and running like you do with the rest of your content? Does anyone else share this sentiment? Like, for me I played the heck out of the game for about 6-7 years but the current 1v4 format just doesn't hit for me anymore. Back into exile I must go 😅 but first lemme hear your thoughts?
Does anyone else share this sentiment?Yes, though some people don't, but I've gone from being 'eh, its okay' to really loving the mode, so I'm hopeful for a more permanent fixture.
So sure, you wanna work on it, try new ideas and release it again. Why can't you do that and leave it up and running like you do with the rest of your content?A few reasons for this.
1: The mode is really causing havoc on the queues for killers in both 1v4 and 2v8. They still need to find a way to shift more people to wanting to play the survivor role to make it viable.
2: The changes are still pretty radical. It's much more of a beta mode than a full on, ready to play game. Taking the game down to test their new set of ideas, instead of putting them in and breaking the game makes sense.
3: There are still other new modes that they are working (I'm hoping for the 5v5 mode myself but there has been almost no word about it). Having the 1v4, an ongoing 2v8 mode that is still in a beta stage, and another new mode is tough on the development cycle.
4: Total suspicion on my part, they are still trying to figure out how to connect it to the 'grind' of the game as the bloodweb and pips are completely irrelevant to 2v8 (which is one of the many reasons some people love it).
-
@Sandt1985 said:
The Twins "rework" and the outright murder of The Skull Merchant set a disgusting precedent that Behavior seems to be running with at full speed. If they personally don't like something in the game, the new balancing philosophy seems to be "intentionally break it to the point of uselessness and fix it some time in the next 12-18 months".
Now with Chucky being outright gutted, and the Houndmaster's Knotted Rope addon losing 96% of its effectiveness in the span of two weeks, Behavior is more or less telling the community that this will be the norm going forward. Make it useless now, fix it in the very distant future maybe.
@Mandy , can we, the community, get some kind of official confirmation that the balance team is DONE doing this and it will NEVER happen again? I don't know if you guys have noticed this, but the community is kinda angry, and rightfully soIf they personally don't like something in the gameKind of crazy that they design the game but then later personally decide they don't like something.
Argue about balance changes all you want, but where is the personally coming from?
-
Gen rush is an option, which has been covered.
If you're going to run overzealous, once a totem is down, focus on gens. Don't run around the map, tackle totems that are nearby. It might also be worth it to drop inner healing and small game, you want perks to avoid the killer to keep that overzealous gen speed bonus.
If you're going to just be totem hunting, drop overzealous. You're avoiding the killer, so bring a support / heal style perk because you might also be the ideal player to heal people back up.
Map > Small Game.
So take counterforce and inner healing and pair it with some combo of We're Gonna to Live Forever, We'll Make It, Botany, Bond, Shoulder the Burden, Kindred, etc.
Or just gen rush.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3855823#Comment_3855823
That is true. Its just as much of an issue here as it is in fighting games requiring you to purchase characters to be able to train as or against them. Ideally every killer would be selectable like how addons and such work, but I can understand BHVR not wanting to allow that level of freedom for free. Closest you can get unfortunately is having a friend who owns the killer and doing 1v1 customs vs them to practice common scenarios and interactions. Sadly its either that or watch a lot of gameplay videos with that specific killer.
Edit: This post just reminded me of the splinter system, and how poorly it was designed. I wonder if they could find a way to incorporate something similar into customs instead? Maybe have tokens that could refill each month and be used to temporarily choose killers you don't own?
Its just as much of an issue here as it is in fighting games requiring you to purchase characters to be able to train as or against them.The difference here, to go back to the OP's post, is that in DbD this is a one sided requirement. If in a fighting game you don't want to carefully study every character in the game, and the MMR / group you play with doesn't either, there's no inherent disadvantage. And if you do study every character and climb in the ranks, the new players you face have to undertake the same task.
I'm going to date myself here because the last time I really played fighting games seriously the SNES was the height of technological innovation - but it would be like if in Street Fighter 2 players were divided between choosing Guile or anyone but Guile. The players in group A would have to learn to fight every other character, while in group B they would only have to learn to fight against the one move set. Group B would have a much easier time advancing in their skills than Group A which creates a massive issue for game balancing (which might be an inevitable element of DbD, but its a unique problem).
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3855626#Comment_3855626
yes it literally is, in most cases it literally is in the best interests of both you and your teammates to keep you on hook (as long as you don't fall into another hook state/die on hook).
How many matches do we need to lose, how many complaints about unbalanced game and killers being OP will we have to issue until we realize our own macro mistakes?
Advantages of greeding a survivor on hook:
- denying an eventual tunneling attempt for the killer because hook progress of a hooked survivor can't be sped up (unless killer has Monstrous Shrine, but who uses that?);
- fighting off a camper;
- more time for gens while forcing killer that isn't camping to waste more time trying to patrol gens and potentially engaging into a very beneficial chase for your team when at least one teammate remains on a gen and one goes for the unhook soon because they are aware killer is chasing another survivor so they have time for unhook and reset;
- 0 info for the killer about location of two survivors on the map for the duration of almost whole one hook state.
These are literally basics of macro gameplay knowledge, if you really still keep talking about balance while missing on these out, just don't take part in balance discussions
These are literally basics of macro gameplay knowledge, if you really still keep talking about balance while missing on these out, just don't take part in balance discussionsYour structure seems to presume that killers are having some massive difficulty in finding survivors. Not only are there multiple perks that make this easy, the macro gameplay knowledge you think seems to be missing should give the killer a pretty clear indication of where the survivors are located.
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3855653#Comment_3855653
I already mentioned campers, and you are technically correct that under absolutely ideal circumstances, a tunneller can be delayed by an absolute maximum of 20 seconds, but points 3 and 4 are mentioned as positives but turn out to be negatives when you compare them to a normally timed rescue.
No, you don't get more gen time, you get less. 3 survivors working on gens > 2 survivors working on gens. Leaving one person hanging on the hook doesn't make gens go faster, it makes them go slower. They'd get up to 20 charges of gen progress if they let the survivor hang for those ten seconds, or anywhere over 30 charges if they don't.
Similarly, unless the killer returns to the hook in time to catch the scratch marks, a rescued survivor goes dark too, meaning the killer loses access to info on 3 survivors, instead of 2. Additionally, to claim that the killer has 0 info about the location of two other survivors while the third is on the hook is not an accurate representation of practice: The killer can safely assume that one of the two is en route for the rescue and knows roughly where they'll be in the next few seconds.
This is also disregarding the threat of a snowball if the killer gets an early down. Two on hook and one in chase is an extremely dangerous situation for survivors to be in, especially if they were already trying to exploit those extra ten seconds, because it means the killer gets a free extra hook.
These are literally basics of macro gameplay knowledge
There aren't the basics of macro gameplay, these are your bias causing you to omit everything that doesn't suit your argument.
This is also disregarding the threat of a snowball if the killer gets an early down.This is true. Two survivors downed is nightmare for survivors.
Additionally - if you greed the hook timer, the killer has no reason not to return. If I'm playing killer and its been 50 seconds without an unhook, I can basically guarantee myself a free hook state by returning to the hook and either forcing a trade or getting the survivor to the next hook state.
-
@Boons123 said:
This argument assumes that all those who play the role of the survivor have a unified mind and do not have different mentalities, and this is what is called “generalization”, So they have one decision and one mind.
Let me tell you this is one of the worst arguments I have ever seen, however this is not the fault of the person saying this or the fault of the survivors this is the fault of the developers in designing the killer.
First, we have more than 30 killers in the game, and each killer plays in a different way, so do you think any new player or normal player would know how to deal with each killer individually? Don't think that everyone plays more than 2 hours in this game.
Take the twins for example, you rarely see them in the match, yet they will kill all the survivors with ease, not because the survivors don't want to learn how to play against them, but on the contrary, they haven't seen this killer and thus don't know how their powers work.
Then we have the very complex killers to play against.
For example, we have the plague, the game tells the survivor that you must cure the disease as quickly as possible, otherwise you will not be able to heal yourself and it will be easier for the killer to find you.
But the game will not tell the survivor that this action will make the killer more powerful and your team will have a very hard time, nor will the game tell the survivor that stunning the killer will remove this power.
This is why she has a high kill rate and this is also why many players believe she is the strongest killer in the game.
Not because they don't want to learn how to play against her, but because the game itself teaches them the very wrong way to play against her.
Another example is the skull merchant.
When you read any post about this killer you will always see the argument (survivors don't want to learn to play against her).
Unfortunately for them this is not the case, in what part of the world does a player not want to learn how to play a game they paid for?
Skull Merchant is one of the most complex killers to play against.
Nothing is clear to players against this killer, nothing tells you that the drone is used for surveillance, nothing tells you that one touch of the laser means the killer knows your exact location for 12 seconds, nothing tells you that she will move faster the more survivors she has on her radar, nothing tells you that after being hit by three laser scans you will receive a claw trap, nothing tells you that one scan from the drone while you have a claw trap means you will move 10% slower for 6 seconds and she will receive killer instinct, nothing is clear what the white and orange laser beam means, nothing tells you that when she throwing a drone see will get undetectable for 8 seconds.
I could go on but I think that's enough.
The only ways to find out how this killer works and play against it are to either watch a content creator or visit the wiki, so is it the survivors' fault? Because they don't understand this killer? Or are you going to make the lazy argument that "all" not some "all" all the survivors don't want to learn to play against her!!
This is a huge mistake by the developers, this was supposed to be an easy killer to understand and play against and at the same time this killer focuses on chasing survivors and not on defending 3 generators forever.
This shows you how flawed this killer is in design.
The developers need to make sure that the killer is easy to understand and play against in every future killers or else their kill rate will be very high.
I think this is an excellent post. One thing I'd add:
Games can be complex and still have large player bases that are casual if the players are evenly matched up. The difficulty for DbD, which is just increasing, is that one side has the much harder burden with all the killers.
When you read any post about this killer you will always see the argument (survivors don't want to learn to play against her).Unfortunately for them this is not the case, in what part of the world does a player not want to learn how to play a game they paid for?I agree, I always find these arguments strange. As if there are two separate pools of players who are in the game, and that one side just cares far less than the other side.
-
@TheSubstitute said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3854179#Comment_3854179
@Reinami 's suggestion is really good but I don't know if it could be coded in.
Another possibility is having a repair debuff on gens while all survivors are alive and have it replaced by a gen repair buff when a survivor dies (and have it scale in speed depending on how many survivors are alive). That would slow down the early game and give more time to spread hooks while also making it so a survivor dying doesn't mean it becomes nearly impossible to do the gens. Theoretically the best chance for a 4K under this system would be to put everyone on death hook before starting to sacrifice survivors.
Another option that doesn't change mechanics is buffing gen defense perks but having them deactivate on survivor death. Pain Res could go back to 25% each hook but stop working when a survivor dies and Ruin could go to 200% again but once again deactivate. This doesn't provide a disincentive to not tunnel though which I think is also important.
Another option suggested was having group hook states. That wasn't my preference but it would work as well. It would probably need gen repair speed adjustments based off my gut feeling. I could be wrong though.
Another option would be cages sort of like how they do it in 2v8. The Killer saves time by not walking to hook and, in return, the Survivor is hard to find making it more difficult to tunnel.
Anyway, that's a summary of suggestions I remember seeing. It's perfectly possible to get rid of tunnelling (or decrease it substantially) if BHVR would test a solution and code it in.
I don't think its a coding issue, I think there are two other problems at play when we discuss fundamental game changes:
1: The level of perk redesigns that would be necessary to accomplish it.
2: Going against the core of the game. DbD is an elimination game. A huge part of the tension is the knowledge that you could get eliminated even if the game is going well and things can turn from good to bad really quickly. Survivors are supposed to care about whether they personally survive (and, broadly, I think they do). This is in contrast to a game like a hero shooter where if I die to take an objective, but we take the objective, that was the goal.
And this all comes up against the fact that even if many players express frustration with certain elements of DbD, the player counts are very healthy, especially given the game's age. If I was in BHVR's shoes I'd see no reason to change the core philosophy of the game.
But if we're just talking hypothetically
Another possibility is having a repair debuff on gens while all survivors are alive and have it replaced by a gen repair buff when a survivor dies (and have it scale in speed depending on how many survivors are alive).It would be hard to balance and get right. Conceptually, survivors should never benefit from a survivor dying. Sometimes it is a worthwhile trade, but you get into the dangerous hypothetical of 'killer is punished for doing their objective' style discussions.
I did once post the following idea when I tried to think of a way to redesign it:
All survivors have 75% gen repair speed of what it is currently. Whenever a survivor is downed, all other survivors have their gen speed increased by 15%. If the survivor is picked up/not hooked, the 15% is reset.
However, anytime a survivor is hooked, their gen repair speed returns to 75% no matter what it was at.
Example game play: Killer downs and hooks survivor A, then B, then C, the B again. Survivor A would have gen repair 120%, B 75%, C 90%, and D 135%. B is the tunnel out, but the killer has incentive to really find survivors A or D because their gens are flying.
The idea was to slow down early game, encourage hook spreading, make the benefit occur with slugging but not be punishing if the survivors pull off a save. Lore wise, this would be survivors working harder as they see others injured, but slowed down when they are hooked.
Even though I posted it, not sure if the right spot could ever be found where it would not radically tilt the game in the direction of the survivors or killer.
Another option would be cages sort of like how they do it in 2v8I think if they were remaking DbD, there are a number of things that they would probably take from 2v8 for 1v4. The class system, survivors getting stronger as they get hooked, basekit catch up mechanics, and, of course, the cage mechanic, would probably all be better starting points. But going to cages now would require massive rebalancing.