crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
No.
Not only are there lots of player created challenges based around pips and grades, they still serve as a nice little bonus/goal to the game. They would also have to rewrite so many archive challenges.
The only thing you mention as a problem is the possibility of confusing new players, which I guess is a possible issue, but its usually corrected pretty easily when it comes up and could be solved by a tooltip.
I've said this in a few other threads, but 400% BP is not a long term solution. People played it because it was unique. If the BP level was always high it wouldn't really have any value to it.
-
@WashYourHands said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3773044#Comment_3773044
equipping 1 perk slot for something you cannot predict is stupid. keeping LOS on a player with BP isn't guaranteed
equipping 1 perk slot for something you cannot predict is stupid.That's a fine position, but you're going to need to expand your argument a lot more. Don't like slugging? Unbreakable. Don't like tunneling? OTR and DS. Don't like Spirit? Iron Will and Lightfooted.
-
Search some chests, maybe try vaulting something on the other side of the map see if the killer will move away.
Add me to the camp of people who have managed to have one instance of going looking for chests, finding a key, and then finding the hatch.
-
@Jim_Tonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3777848#Comment_3777848
[quote=crogers271]Copy the portion of the message you want (or type it out I guess) and then highlight it. 5 icons should appear, at least they do for me on chrome, bold, italics,
strikethrough,inline code, and link.[/Quote]
Ok it seems to be my browser not working with this forum then, i dont have options after highlighting. Same reason probably why i cant edit my posts. however i'll try code, dont wonder if it looks weird, as i said i cant edit after ive posted XD[quote=crogers271]Again this might not be what you meant, but whether you bought the game this morning, or six years ago with constant play, BHVR should be equally concerned about you.[/Quote]
Correct. And i think rn its not entirely fair to long time players. Imo. While it does a good job for new players and should keep doing that totally. As they are the ones keeping this experience monetized, aside from cosmetic nuts like me i guess but i think majority of players dont bother with cosmetics. i might be wrong on that.[quote=crogers271]Punish is a weird word in the sense that all it is doing is trying to match players with people of equal skill level.
The last time I was playing sports it was in pickup badminton where we formed teams on the fly. Skilled players tried to match with skilled players, novices with novices, etc. I don't know how anyone would have fun if we were just matching players randomly.
Additionally, survivors need to be matched with players of roughly equal skill. Killers can easily cut out a weak link in the team.[/Quote]
I mean this is true normally for PvP games, you want a challenge, otherwise you would go and play some PVE or a story game and set the dificulty to easy or something. So i get that. But this game doesnt really have an equal playing field, perks, randomness, maps, diversity in strength between the diffrent killers itself, like there is so much RNG involved its hard to see this as a comp game, usually comp games make sure anyone has equal chances no matter the situation, the ones i know at least. But just imagine you load in as trickster and huntress on any cornfield map, you'll have alot of free sight to try shots. Maybe with trickster not so mutch as with huntress. Now picture the same killers on Gideon or hawkins. Instantly you know from the start it will be a hard time. Same goes for when you have a build and a survivor happens to bring a perk entirely countering one of yours. Or lightborn against flashlights, your item is basicly useless. Yes a slot is traded, but that doesnt have anything to do with comp really, its just RNG.
So i dont see a reason for a very strict matchmaking after the low mmr pool, because with that mutch rng involved its still never equally fair even though you see people of the same skill level. But you are right about the even skilled players, in that sense mmr does a good job as my average sacrifice count is 2 and a half (however the half survivor is possible lol, probably has to do with math which is my very personal cryptonite) But generally its a 2k draw, sometimes i "win" with a 3k, i cant remember when i had less than a 2k, has been long ago, so im not really complaining but the matches are sweaty af still, with no puffer zone as relieve.. because every match is just as sweaty as the other one. Which doesnt bother me in other pvp games because the reason is actual skill of the other players and not just "oh you play huntress on Gideon meatplant? Lmao you #########" you know what i mean? XD not to say my opponents dont have skill when they can have lady luck on their side sometimes, i also got carried by my perks once, where i faced a sabo squad and was running forced hesitation and the plague perk that lets everybody scream..
Sorry this one is a bit ranty, its hard to find the correct words. Only thing i will say lastly is about the counter argument of yours when i said sacrifices and escapes dont tell the full story.
Because i have to disagree with you there, i have according to nightlight the highest killrate on Legion and second highest on Skull merchant. While i used to main legion in the past, im fairly new to playing skull merchant. But people love to just give up against those killers, giving me free sacrifices. I bet if people wouldnt give up as mutch my highest scoring killer would be someone like wesker or nemesis.
I think the game should reward hook states and actions spend on the survivor side, again i can hide all game and let my mates do the job, that way i could also climb the mmr but im going to end up in a bracket where i dont belong eventually.As they are the ones keeping this experience monetized, aside from cosmetic nuts like me i guess but i think majority of players dont bother with cosmetics. i might be wrong on that.I doubt money paid on the game necessarily connects to hours played. Streamers buy all the cosmetics, but whether you do that or not otherwise is a personal call. I've paid about $20 for the game and DLC and that's probably about all they are ever going to get from me. The amount of hours I put into it doesn't really translate into cosmetics, that's totally a question of whether they interest you or not.
But this game doesnt really have an equal playing field, perks, randomness, maps, diversity in strength between the diffrent killers itself, like there is so much RNG involved its hard to see this as a comp game, usually comp games make sure anyone has equal chances no matter the situation, the ones i know at least.So DbD does have, by design, far more randomness then other games. On your examples though, it balances out. Sometimes the other side just has the exact right builds, sometimes you do. Whether randomness makes a more enjoyable game is a different question, I think it does (broadly speaking), many disagree.
But randomness and balance are different things. If the game creates a mismatch between survivors and killer that is going to override the game's randomness. You could give a elite killer the worst map in the game, but throw a low tier survivor in there and the killer has the advantage. Same situation if a mid tier killer get every advantage, but runs into high MMR survivors.
So i dont see a reason for a very strict matchmaking after the low mmr pool,But the game doesn't have strict matchmaking. They tried that and lots of players didn't like the increased wait times. The MMR is relatively loose and it works better depending on the hours you play.
While i used to main legion in the past, im fairly new to playing skull merchant.So someone like Skull Merchant probably will have their MMR inflated from players quitting against her. BHVR does have a check against that (short matches, less MMR impact), but yeah, for Skull Merchant, and maybe Legion, there's probably enough quitting to inflate the MMR.
I think the game should reward hook states and actions spend on the survivor side, again i can hide all game and let my mates do the job, that way i could also climb the mmr but im going to end up in a bracket where i dont belong eventually.On hook states: I don't know how it changes anything. You're still going to have killers who survivors quit against, making it easier to get hook states. Tunneling would still be an effective strategy to maximize hook states.
On hiding all game: Letting the other survivors do the work is not going to work very well. It takes four survivors to beat a good killer. Hiding out all game might get you hatch, but most of the time you'll be losing MMR.
It's why Distortion is usually a trap perk (barring running it with something like Deliverance or a Hyperfocus gen rush type build). Sure, you are less likely to be found, but if the survivors don't work together, they're in deep trouble.
-
Not to be a bummer on a dramatic title, but I think what you're writing is pretty obvious. Of course BHVR wants licenses. Even if you took Iri shards out of the equation, licenses would do better. Lara Croft will bring in more people than 'athletic archeologist' and Bubba has more of a connection than Billy.
The Iri Shards are just a layer on top of that.
-
@Jim_Tonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3777290#Comment_3777290
First off, how can you quote only specific parts? i want to have this power too XD
And no, wanting it pay to win was not at all what i meant, thats the reason why they give nurse for free, which is good. I meant to have some respect towards veteran players when considering matchmaking, which MMR does not have. And this is not only about DBD or BHVR. MMR has proofen to be very faulty system in general as it punishes players for being good.
I heard alot of people say the old system pre MMR was better, but i wasnt around back then. I just noticed a HUGE gap between my low mmr hours and the moment i was getting out of the "play pen" so to say. It was highly frustrating experience and only later i learned about mmr and all that. In a perfect world there would be a more layered mmr which does not only divide new players from everyone else but also average players (like me) from pro players. Which currently is not the case either due to the game being very niche and not having enough players for more MMR layers.. Or its because the system is faulty in itself. Either way, people have more hard/frustrating games than enjoyable ones. And that shouldnt be.
I guess what im trying to say is; it doesnt have to be either or. Keep the safe space for new players thats important for the growth of the game. But have some more actual skill based measurements for players mmr after they left low mmr pool. Sacrifices and escapes dont tell a huge story. One can hide all match and do nothing and still get away, also people can hookicide which they tend to do more on certain killers, which also bloats the killers mmr in that moment.First off, how can you quote only specific parts? i want to have this power too XDCopy the portion of the message you want (or type it out I guess) and then highlight it. 5 icons should appear, at least they do for me on chrome, bold, italics,
strikethrough,inline code, and link.I've heard others mention that some codes (html style perhaps) can also be used, but I've never tried that.
I meant to have some respect towards veteran players when considering matchmaking, which MMR does not have.Again this might not be what you meant, but whether you bought the game this morning, or six years ago with constant play, BHVR should be equally concerned about you.
MMR has proofen to be very faulty system in general as it punishes players for being good.Punish is a weird word in the sense that all it is doing is trying to match players with people of equal skill level.
The last time I was playing sports it was in pickup badminton where we formed teams on the fly. Skilled players tried to match with skilled players, novices with novices, etc. I don't know how anyone would have fun if we were just matching players randomly.
Additionally, survivors need to be matched with players of roughly equal skill. Killers can easily cut out a weak link in the team.
else but also average players (like me) from pro players.The chance of hitting a pro level team, even if you were super top MMR, is extremely small.
But the point people miss is that every player should feel like they are hitting hard players if MMR is working. Whether you are bad, average, good, great, etc. if you are hitting players that seem challenging, MMR is doing exactly what it is supposed to. Unless you were playing a bunch of custom matches against players of a known skill level and then comparing that to the people MMR gives you, its really hard to tell.
The game also has tons of random elements and luck that are usually out of player view that can make it hard to decipher why a game went the way it did.
Sacrifices and escapes dont tell a huge story.This is something I think lots of posters on the forum get wrong.
Can you have a game where you play absolutely amazing and still die? Of course. However that is true for all the players in the pool. Across 100s, 1000s, of games those exceptions become irrelevant to the overall number. It's not a perfect system, but it doesn't need to be perfect, it's just trying to find a general place for people to be matched.
-
@Jim_Tonic said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776634#Comment_3776634
Oh but tight mmr definitly does lead to stressful matches, maybe not for new players but for the majority of the playerbase, the part of it that has been paying customers for years for example.
The hard border (softcap) also does not help, most players when they are new and actually stay in the game to gain a couple of hours are in for a very frustrating experience when they got beyond the low mmr pool. Because then suddendly they actually do face people way above their skill level and more often than not, until they learn all the micro gameplay the hard way.. Or leave dbd out of frustration.
MMR basicly is punishing for winning, as you will eventually face oponents that are tougher than you are, which is nothing bad if it happens now and then. But there is litteral loosing streaks before a player learns the same amount of in depth skills that all others in their mmr pool have. But thats not a DBD issiue in itself, MMR is generally a bad concept. Especcially when the playerbase is too small for it to properly work on top of that. Yes it divides brand new out of the whomb players from the rest.
But there are more layers, some people play for 6 years while others have around 1000 hours. Both kinds of players end up in the same lobby, how is that for a fair chance?the part of it that has been paying customers for years for example.This almost sounds like you want the game to be pay to win.
most players when they are new and actually stay in the game to gain a couple of hours are in for a very frustrating experience when they got beyond the low mmr pool.What other situation could help this? Looser MMR or no MMR is just going to unsure a less experienced/skilled player is going to run into matches where they are out their depth.
But there are more layers, some people play for 6 years while others have around 1000 hours. Both kinds of players end up in the same lobby, how is that for a fair chance?The six year player might not be that good, or the 1000 hour player might be great.
Also not sure how it's better if a 6 year player ends up with a 8 hour player.
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776634#Comment_3776634
Not being able to see MMR causes its own issues.
If there are generators left, there is only one survivor alive, and the killer closes hatch… we don’t know if the killer will lose MMR (and the survivor will gain MMR) if the survivor escapes through a gate. This means that if the gates are too far apart and the killer can’t defend them both, then the killer should never want to close hatch, and the survivor should never want to jump in hatch.
And since we don’t know if a 3k and 4k is a big MMR difference or small MMR difference, killers should always slug for the 4k, because they don’t know how badly their MMR is being affected by letting the 4th person have a chance at hatch.
And since we don’t know if a 3k and 4k is a big MMR difference or small MMR difference, killers should always slug for the 4k, because they don’t know how badly their MMR is being affected by letting the 4th person have a chance at hatch.But why do they care? No one can see MMR, there's no reason to try and min max it. If we had public MMR people would definitely try and max out the number for bragging rights. Right now you can just play the game however you want in that situation.
-
@NerfDHalready said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3777108#Comment_3777108
It's not that hard to touch a gen and then stealth.
they can just make it require a big enough amount of progress to avoid crows so a single tap wouldn't work, and that progress would be shared across all alive survivors.
Maybe there is a perfect amount of time for touching a gen, but it seems like if it is too small its pointless, if its too long the survivors feel stuck on the gens and there's no point.
On the second part, why share it across all survivors? That just becomes a game of chicken where first survivor to do a gen loses.
-
@Glaive said:
I must have severe bad luck, but I have not escaped even once in the past 20 or so games, I haven’t even come close, my soloQ team just gets rocked again and again no matter what killer we are playing against , it’s rare for more then 2 gens to get completed, I’m no stranger to soloQ with 6000 hours played but it’s never been this bad ? When I play killer myself I get really good efficient survivors, when I play survivor the games feel unwinnable it’s really demotivating knowing I can’t win.
When I play killer myself I get really good efficient survivors, when I play survivor the games feel unwinnable it’s really demotivating knowing I can’t win.I see comments like this a lot where people talk about how their teammates on survivor are awful, but on killer survivors seem amazing.
It's not like you are specifically being targeted, it's how human memory and perception work. As killer we remember the tough matches more than we do the ones where survivors are bad, and on survivor its easy to remember the ones where we feel like others let us down. We remember things that frustrate/anger us more.
The perception part is as killer you don't know what the survivors are doing. Imagine a match that is close, four gens are finished, you've got a good number of hooks - if one of those survivors went AFK in the corner or ran around a useless part of the map or started opening chests, how would you know? You'd just be thankful you found the survivors working on gens and won the match.
Likewise, when you have a quick chase as killer, you credit yourself as a good killer, when you as a survivor see another go down quickly its easy to presume they are just bad.
But yeah, those long runs of survivor where the game seems impossible are brutal. Given your extensive number of hours, eventually you were going to have a particularly bad run of luck.
-
Well I doubt the engine would ever be able to handle it in a way that didn't look silly. But for the sake of argument, let's presume it could.
Let's also throw out the theme of what it would look like with a survivor running around the map holding a pallet.
So the perk doesn't need the penalty of a missed swing because you already have plenty of penalties for carrying the pallet.
It would already be a trap perk for survivors. Many survivors would take the perk for the novelty and then otherwise be useless as they moved like a turtle around the map at 1 m/s.
The benefit of stunning the killer for twice as long wouldn't really be worth it.
-
If I was to rebuild the idea: I'd have it require a survivor spend X amount of seconds to turn a dropped pallet into a bat/club (potentially even multiple pallets) that they can use to swing at the killer. However, the game isn't designed for survivors to attack the killer and it would really change a lot of factors and probably not be worth it.
-
In order of importance:
More killers
More roles
More maps
2v8 felt like a fun little diversion. I enjoyed it, but it never really felt like DbD, kind of a mini-DbD.
I'd be happy with it coming back every couple of months with additions, but they need to figure out something to do about the que times and get more people to play survivor. Long que times for killers, and trying to bribe survivors to play with BP that are only relevant for the 1v4 mode (and even there, barely), are not long term solutions. If it becomes a permanent mode, I think that will decrease the survivor pool even further as it loses the mystique of being time limited.
-
I've always thought one of the main problems with DbD is that when the game heavily turns in the killer's favor it gets very boring and can also take a long time. Solutions however are more difficult.
I feel like idle crows would be fine, but not necessarily solve things. It's not that hard to touch a gen and then stealth. I've also been in situations where I haven't touched a gen for awhile in a 2v1 and it doesn't have anything to do with hiding: I and the other survivor (soloq) looking for each other to heal up so one of us can take chase and the other to work on the gen.
I go back and forth on whether a 'mercy' rule would be good for the game. That would be if the killer gets far enough ahead, the game just ends. It would feel wrong given the game's theme, and there inevitably would be situations where the killer gets a win where the survivors still felt like they could come back, but it would definitely speed up pointless games.
It's kind of like your auto mori in a 2v1 scenario after a down. 90, 95% of games where that happens I suspect the auto-mori improves the game. But the other games you probably have complaints 'we just about had a gen finished, the downed survivor had deliverance and unbreakable, we still could have gotten a two man out!'
You also have two other scenarios: newer players might not understand why the killer gets an 'advantage' and it just feels lopsided, and there may be killer players who prefer to play it out (which baffles me greatly, but I have encountered players who want that before).
Agree with you that it's a problem. If I was developing the game just for myself, I put in a mercy mechanic where after a survivor is killed the game looks at total gen progress and if it is below a certain number, the killer wins and the game ends. But that would just be for me, not sure how popular that would be with the overall game community.
Edit to add: Looking back at the title wanted to add this doesn't seem to be any more frequent. It's not a common occurrence, but does happen enough that it does hamper enjoyment of the game.
-
In addition to Aven's question, you could try installing the minimum required instead of doing the auto updater.
But DbD had to update to a more recent version of the unreal engine. It requires directx 11 which it looks like a radeon r7 should be able to run, but not sure on your version.
-
@Dreamnomad said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776262#Comment_3776262
Ahh, I didn't know FNAF made an announcement of an upcoming announcement. That does tend to support your theory. But if all that is true then I have to seriously call into question BHVR's marketing strategy and leadership. That seems to be a horrible choice.
That does tend to support your theory. But if all that is true then I have to seriously call into question BHVR's marketing strategy and leadership.Well, there are a couple of possibilities.
Most likely to me is that's just what FNaF's wanted. Getting the license for BHVR was far more important than that. Even if FNaF wasn't demanding it, keeping license partners happy is generally good strategy.
A 2nd point is no one knows where the game will be in 2025. It'll be a nine year old game at that point. Any hype to keep the game going to that point could be helpful. I'm not one of those who is like 'DbD is going to die!', I think the game has 5 to 10 years left even without radical overhauls, but I wouldn't say its out of the question the player counts could dim and then the announcement wouldn't excite anyone.
A 3rd possibility, and this is completely conjecture, is maybe their other license announcements for the rest of the year are really underwhelming. This allows them to keep hype through those periods.
I will say a leak is something to consider. It would be difficult to keep something like this underwraps for seven to nine months. Better to do it when you can be attached to something then have it leaked at some random point of the year.
The final possibility is maybe they made a mistake. It happens.
-
@Dreamnomad said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776239#Comment_3776239
So you think FNaF creator made the post with or without BHVR's consent?
It was probably more like
BHVR: "Great, glad we finally have a deal in place."
FNAF: "Cool, we want to announce it during our 10th anniversary."
BHVR: "Sure, that's fine."
I think you're way overthinking this. As much as you can say the hype will override Castlevania, this also has a lot of eyeballs looking at DbD who can say 'and, guess what we have coming up right now!'
And sure, the possibility that this could be leaked might be an influence, but I highly doubt that they learned a leak was going to happen and that perfectly lined up with the FNAF anniversary. FNAF announced at the end of July there was going to be a collab announcement on August 5th.
-
@Bearded_Nea said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776147#Comment_3776147
It's flawed because survivors will just play 1v4 if they want far and away more BP. It would only be comparable it the maximum amount of BP achievable for both modes is the same and it is not because of BP offerings in 1v4 and their absence in 2v8.
But you have two sets of data to compare. Survivors where still playing 1v4 even with no bonus, and I assume some survivors would play 2v8 even if they got 0 bloodpoints. You don't need perfect equal scenarios, you can get a good idea of the importance of the BP boost via tracking as people move.
Probably the thing that will more mar the data is that its just the last days of 2v8 and survivors might want to give it a final go.
-
@Nun_So_Vile said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3775585#Comment_3775585
I don't think you'll ever really be able to get the full picture on the forums, reddit, steams, etc…
I'm just commenting much wider in general across the board it seems that issues around social responsibility are on the forefront of consumer's minds more. But maybe that's just my Millennial dementia.
I think people have always said they wanted a company that was socially conscious (or in past times - cool, hip, with it, forward thinking), but it doesn't override getting a product they like. Hogwarts: Legacy, Chik-fil-A, and even the FNaF series show this where sales have continued despite movements against those companies/products.
If anything, it's older generations whose boycotts have been more effective in recent years (Bud Light).
-
There probably isn't a way to make it easier in the same way they have for killer without overall harming the game. Better tutorials, and the ability to earn more bloodpoints via tutorials to give players a start, would probably be helpful.
-
@The_Krapper said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3776026#Comment_3776026
You can say it's not fair to compare what was done to the franchise but that's the very reason we didn't get the creeper from jeepers creepers in this game and at that time was a chapter alot of people really wanted, while I personally don't care if fnaf is in the game or not, I do know that there's an equal amount of people that oppose it being in the game but it is what it is, hopefully it's a fun chapter for all
I do know that there's an equal amount of people that oppose it being in the game but it is what it isIt's the 'equal amount' that seems like wishcasting. It feels like Hogwarts: Legacy where online people convinced themselves there was a massive movement against the game, then it made a gazillion dollars.
-
@Bearded_Nea said:
So 1v4 is hands down the best for BP then because we can still stack the hundreds of cobblers we have and get +150%. This will provide a poor data comparison if that was their goal.
But that's exactly the data comparison they wanted, are survivors only playing 2v8 because of the BP bonus or are they playing because they enjoy the mode.
-
@LatexT said:
I made these a long time ago, and I'm still proud of them. Your opinion is always appreciated.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/88F6B0TK0SAC/screenshot-1.png
I don't know enough to comment on the theme, but I'll go with the perk descriptions.
Pit of Hell: Like the idea, other than increasing exposed duration perks. I think you could remove the obsessed requirement and just make it anytime the survivors do a certain action (finish an altruistic heal for example).
Foul Odor: I'd make this a hook state, but make the aura read longer.
Pulled Apart: I don't think this works. Make the time too long and its too powerful, too little and its just pointless. Haste perks can be problematic. Maybe have it build up like Spirit Fury before activating, but then it has a longer usage.
-
@Cryptikk said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3775045#Comment_3775045
this is basically why i want BHVR to answer my question, and address this.
There's a 100% chance he gets money from this. I can't imagine a scenario where he doesn't.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3774370#Comment_3774370
You say it wouldn't be fun... Is the 2 man stand off where they hide for 20min because they both want hatch but refuse to do gens fun? That's my issue with it. The count down timer would end the stalemate, finish the match and allow people to move on to the next one. Maybe 5min timer when there are 2 left? Should be enough time to get the remaining gens done if they are able to but not enough time to take the piss and hide for an undetermined amount of time. Doesn't cause stalemate doesn't give the survivors the win for holding out the match.
I see what your trying to say about the killer having something similar but in order to get that secure kill the killers has to get them on the hook first. A survivor can find the hatch with keys/maps well in advance. The closest thing a killer has to getting a free kill is noed but if there are no totems then it becomes pointless.
You say it wouldn't be fun... Is the 2 man stand off where they hide for 20min because they both want hatch but refuse to do gens fun? That's my issue with it.I'd say the number of times an interesting hatch game occurs justifies those long games, but you might hit it more frequently. It never happens to me as survivor because I won't hide that long. I've definitely had it happen as killer, but not nearly on the level I've had fun hatch chases.
The count down timer would end the stalemate, finish the match and allow people to move on to the next one.It just kind of makes the game into a farce. A mercy rule.
I doubt I'd have any problem with the rule, nor anyone who measures their numbers in the four+ digits, but I feel like anyone else it would really suck. 'That's it, it's just over?' doesn't really have the feel DbD is going for.
I also think there are other ways to address it. X amount of time without touching a gen, aura gets shown for example.
-
@Prometheus1092 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3774042#Comment_3774042
I understand perfectly what the hatch is about lol like you said it's to end the game in a reasonable time but your failing to see my point. You can achieve the same result by having a count down timer instead of a hatch. As others have said, if by that point the gens are not done then the survivors have already lost so why give them a hatch to escape from? It's a free pass. You don't see the same system for killers, all gens done, gates open 4 survivors remaining where is the free kill for the killer? As it stands the hatch system can and does get abused by survivors that effectively hold the game hostage by not doing gens, hiding out of sight. In this situation the killer can't do anything to end the game they have clearly won and that is holding the game hostage, it only ends when the survivors say it ends.
By removing the hatch and replacing it with a timer of some sort it eliminates the need to slug for a start. It also would help stop survivors abusing the system by deliberately hiding for 20min hoping the other would die as there would be no free pass so no incentive to hide. It also gives the killer the win they clearly had.
Like I said I don't mind too much because if I find 2 people trying to hold the game hostage I slug them to prove a point effectively eliminating the hatch option and creating my own timer via bleed out. What's best standard count down where survivors can move and do things or a count down where they are slugged?
You can achieve the same result by having a count down timer instead of a hatch. As others have said, if by that point the gens are not done then the survivors have already lost so why give them a hatch to escape from?If I understand your suggestion correctly, the problem is that it wouldn't be fun.
DbD pushes tension, the heavy heart beating in the chest, trying to match the excitement, if not the horror, of the horror trope. Running for a hatch is exciting, it creates drama for both sides. The tension of the search which turns to relief when you hear the hatch sound is a very good mini-game.
A count down timer is the game just kind of ends.
You don't see the same system for killers, all gens done, gates open 4 survivors remaining where is the free kill for the killer?Killers have there own version. It's much easier to secure that last hook then it was the others. Is it guaranteed? No, but neither is hatch.
Also, once the gens are done and gates open, the survivors should be leaving. There should be a mechanism to force them out in such situations, but the game is over.
-
@k3ijus said:
I somewhat play both sides and i just dont really get it, most hook suicides are when theres a teammate dead or 5+ hooks at 5 generators… at that point the best the surviviors can aim for is a 1-man escape—which is provided by hatch
Literally if a killer is stomping on a survivior match to the point where its utter hopelessness in public games can you really blame surviviors for just wanting to hit next? Not everyone has 1k hours (which ironically is considered medicore)
Also im not advocating for surviviors who just give up when they go down or face a certain killer, which is why i said MOST hook suicides. People who do that ruin the experience for ALL the players.
I think most people missed the point of this as you are talking about mid to late game give ups.
@mustdogen said:
i mean…. let's change the view.
If you are a survivor.
Would you feel mad if killer dc with hopelessness when you guys complete 4 gens with killer only got 1-2 hooks?
Would you feel mad if killer dc with hopelessness when you guys break the hex in first 10 secs of the match?
Ｗould you feel mad if killer dc with hopelessness when you guys do a flash save after a 2 minutes chasing?
If you would , then that's right, it is a nature feeling to feel unhappy when a winning game suddenly get shut down.
Would you feel mad if killer dc with hopelessness when you guys complete 4 gens with killer only got 1-2 hooks?I'd need a little more info on this if the killer has created lots of deadzones they still have a chance.
Would you feel mad if killer dc with hopelessness when you guys break the hex in first 10 secs of the match?Nah, I'd understand that. I'd never quit in that circumstance as killer, but I certainly wouldn't be mad.
Ｗould you feel mad if killer dc with hopelessness when you guys do a flash save after a 2 minutes chasing?Yeah, because that's a rage quit. I'm mad when survivors rage quit after they lose a chase as well.
-
To give a different example, if gens are done and the killer opens the gates, I'm never mad about that. I just leave.
Also, OP isn't talking about DCing. He's discussing when players stop trying. In your first scenario if the killer just stood in the corner and let us finish the gens and leave, no problem. It's not what I would do, but I'm not mad about it. Same with the survivor who runs up to the killer once it's down to two survivors left.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3774315#Comment_3774315
yes one issue with dbd survivor is that dbd is too hard for beginner survivor. the skill-floor for survivor is too big. for this reason, i think dbd has a problem with new player retention for survivor.
It is too difficult for survivors to get into the game. a survivor player essentially need accept that they'll lose 100 games in a row before they win. It is not figuratively losing 100 games in a row but it is like losing 15 games in a row and winning one. Something like 10% win-rate. winning so few times frustrates the player so they preemptively leave.
I think only way you'd fix this is by adding dynamic difficulty. Something like generator start at 70 seconds, great skill-check are 4%. Skill-check zones are bigger than usual. This gradually increases to 80 second gens than 90 second. The problem with a system like this is that killer player who is new would feel like they're "weaker" for being worse at killer and a system like this would reveal the player's MMR.
yes one issue with dbd survivor is that dbd is too hard for beginner survivor.This is true, but not quite what I meant.
After 8 years there just aren't going to be that many active gamers who haven't touched DbD. The possible pool of new players is very small. Anytime I bring this game up with other video game players, they already have an opinion on the game. Even my wife, who hasn't played a video game other than the Sims in a long time, knew what DbD was when I really started playing it.
Basically, if DbD is the type of game that appeals to you, you're already playing it, have decided you don't like it, and/or burnt out on it.
So your new player pool is limited to gamers who are just growing into the game, maybe players outside the main geographic gaming regions, or talking players who gave it a try and didn't like it to give it another go. You'll always have new players, but the possibilities for growth is much smaller than most games, meaning the new players don't have that many other new players to go against.
That is on top of what you mention on how hard it is to get into the game in the current state. I got into the game two years ago (after giving it a try a few weeks after it first released), and if it wasn't because I got in via youtube videos I would have almost certainly quit immediately.
-
@bleep275 said:
so either there are alot of people intentionally losing matches to abuse less skilled players. Or MMR is. A total joke in this.
For example I have two people who I convinced to get the game for the 2v8 mode. They both tried regular while I watched. Both, despite being first time players and not even in a swf were versing p100 killers that absolutely dominated them.
The same happens when I play. I SUCK as survivor. I’m a killer main. I’m garbage. I never survive. But I regularly get insanely skilled p100 killers.
Now on the flip side they tried killer as well. And the same thing happened. Not even a level 10 killer yet. And they’re paired with p100 survivors that bully them the entire time. They’re not always p100 but still high leveled and there’s is an obvious skill gap between the two.
So what do y’all think? Is mmr a joke? Should mmr be done away with? Or is there just a lot of smurfs?
MMR is real. I think hardcore survivor series show pretty good evidence when people start fresh accounts and you can see the level of players they are hitting gradually improve as they keep winning.
BHVR will note whenever this comes up that if you play outside prime hours the quality of it goes down quite a bit.
The MMR for 2v8 is a bad thing to base it off of being that the time it took to match up really extended the MMR brackets to the point that it didn't matter.
There are also pool issues I suspect. There is a giant pool of experienced players, not that many people who are new. So if you're new, there probably aren't that many people to match you with.
-
BHVR doesn't police things that happen outside their platform.
Reports don't have much weight if they don't have evidence. So if you report someone for something said in chat, BHVR has a log of the chat that they can check.
-
If anyone from RE should get a mark of negation, it would be Ada.
-
@Marioneo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3773579#Comment_3773579
Still 50+ Mins wait time it is getting WORSE no improving
If its 50/50 you failed your job its supposed to be 40/60
Others beat me to this, but I'll that 40/60 is a goal for that BHVR has set for 1v4. Their goal for 2v8 could something entirely different.
-
One of my favorite types of posts are the 'change this behavior or I'll try to ruin your game via playing by a ruleset that you allow to be in the game!' I'm sure they are worried about one killer's actions in the millions of games that get played each week.
As for the suggestions
Camera control: no, horrible idea
Flashlights lose more power on a successful save: I'd be fine with this, but if we're going full battery depletion it should come with a longer stun.
Punished for doing your objective: You're no more being punished then a survivor is if the killer kicks their gens. Survivors and killers both have perks and playstyles to progress their objective along with hindering the other sides objective.
-
@Beaburd said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3773598#Comment_3773598
Yeah if your experiences are after the free weekend, I wouldn't be surprised if you noticed more mid-level survivor escapes and less extremes than I recorded. I think the fact I was dealing more with new killers and new survivors could have played a large part in the extreme end game results I experienced. Could be interesting to try this again one day without free weekend and seeing how it differs (although I don't know if I have it in me to do another 100 runs right now lol).
In regards to the hatch question, I differentiate hatch vs gate escapes for my personal stats at all times, but not for team stats. For team stats, I just assume if 3 or more people escape, they all got gate; otherwise, if 2 or less escaped, they just got hatch. I thought that was sufficient given hatch spawn conditions. Is your concern that hatch escapes when less than 8 generators are repaired is may skew the data for average generators completed? If so, no worries, I recorded the # of generators done before hatches spawned or were closed.
Okay my treatment of Nurse stats was not great, thank you for bringing this up in particular.
I should have clarified that although survivors have the highest win rate against Nurse + Wraith, I do NOT think that means she's weak. In fact, the second worst win rate survivors have is against Nurse + Huntress with a 38% win rate for survivors there, and I remember being DOMINATED in those games. It really should be highlighted, and is kind of reflected by the stats, that Nurse can either be extremely weak (implied with Nurse + Wraith) or extremely strong (implied with Nurse + Huntress) depending on who wields her.
It's interesting to me that guide has highest win rate. Kind of makes sense though. Finishing gens is how to win.
Yeah, Guide stats shocked me a bit, but I agree do make sense.
What's kind of interesting is that all games that had 0 Guides (though it was only 3 games) were losses. Out of the 24 potential people that could have escaped in those 3 games, only 3 people escaped as well. That means all compositions without a Guide in this data sample had a 0% win rate and 12.5% escape rate.
Now the sample size is low to the point I would take these findings with (even more than) just a grain of salt, but I still think it's an decent reminder on how important it is to have people doing generators, and to have a class dedicated to both doing them and reminding others to do them.
Is your concern that hatch escapes when less than 8 generators are repaired is may skew the data for average generators completed?It's more of a conceptual concern in that for some players, me included, a hatch escape is different from a normal escape when tracking escapes. To me a hatch escape is still a 4k/8k for the killer(s), the survivors just won a mini-game that exists in that scenario.
Okay my treatment of Nurse stats was not great, thank you for bringing this up in particular.It's not the stats so much what the Nurse is. I'm having trouble delineating exact numbers from the percentages, but it looks like you faced between 15 and 20 Nurses. A beginner Nurse is radically different than a skilled Nurse. So imagine one of the skilled Nurses you faced was switched to a beginner Nurse, we're looking at one of the 8ks potentially switching to a 0k off that one change.
100 games is good baseline to draw some general views, but I think the Nurse data set in particular has a higher chance of not being reflective given the variability.
-
That's interesting data.
I haven't played as much (probably 50 to 75 games), and mostly post free weekend, but this tends to track. I play medic usually because I try to play what the other survivors are not and I think its a little stronger than people think, but I also enter the game with a strategy for the role.
On the feast or famine - I feel like I've had a lot more games with a middle result than you did, but more importantly I think is the average number of gens completed. It's not unusual to have a 4k in the 1v4 mode with multiple gens remaining. I find that to be extremely rare in 2v8 and the gen count pretty much always gets knocked out.
You're counting hatch escapes the same as door escapes, correct? If they are hatch escapes without the gens getting completed they should be a different stat.
Nurse stats - this really varies based off the level of nurses you hit. I matched against some who barely needed their partner, and some who looked to be learning the role and were basically an auto loss.
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3773092#Comment_3773092
I mean by saying math isn't relevant you acknowledge you aren't logically attached to your position, but emotionally attached. I can't logic someone out of an emotional belief, and logic is my only tool to persuade.
I would argue against the sabo point, but as stated above, my tools are math and logic, and you aren't swayed by those. Although I do agree 32 is way out of line when they needlessly nerfed Alex from 24 to 18. Alex should be returned to 24.
The two of you aren't arguing over the math, you're arguing over what the definition of what 'butchered' means in the context of the game.
-
It's a buff, absolutely, even if its returning to a prior state, but until we see it in the PTB kind of hard to talk about. It can be anything from a minor adjustment to game altering.
-
It's not holding the game hostage. It's silly on the part of many people, and in the game in general is something that shouldn't be possible (i.e. the devs should address it), but players are allowed to go for max kills and they're allowed to hide for hatch.
-
@I_Cant_Loop said:
When you create a thread like this, you need to remember that there is a huge % of the total player base who 1) has never even attempted to play killer; or 2) maybe tried playing as killer a few times and probably got destroyed, then went back to playing exclusively survivor.
This is why you get so many comments about how "killers can easily win without ever camping or tunneling" or "it's a skill issue". 95% of these comments are from people who never, ever play killer. They have no idea how difficult it is to beat a skilled team (even if they aren't 4-man SWF), nor do they care to ever try to put themselves in your shoes.
I always offer a challenge to anyone claiming how easy it is to win consistently without ever camping or tunneling to post some of their gameplay video to show us all how it's done (or better yet, link to stream so we can see their unedited gameplay), and not a single commenter has ever done so. Shocking, right?
I always offer a challenge to anyone claiming how easy it is to win consistently without ever camping or tunneling to post some of their gameplay video to show us all how it's done (or better yet, link to stream so we can see their unedited gameplay), and not a single commenter has ever done so. Shocking, right?I'm still waiting for the posters who say their killer matches are elite 4 person SWF one after the other to post their videos, but that doesn't get done either.
-
@Leonardo1ita said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3771920#Comment_3771920
Let's suppose the killer just goes for chases. As you said, 1 survivor is doing gens.
What do they get for hooking all 4 survivors? Apart from perks? Nothing.
What do they get for hooking all of them again, with none dying? Nothing, no kills again.
How much time has passed? Supposing a chase is very short, like 45 seconds, that's 45*8, which is enough to complete all gens.
Btw, if with mid tier killers, in 1v1s good chases on average last 2 minutes, if not even more, there's a reason: either maps are unbalanced, or you have to buff mid tier killers in chase to make them A tier.
What do they get for hooking all of them again, with none dying? Nothing, no kills again.But you're changing the argument from 'the killer should put pressure on other survivors' to 'killers should go for 8 hooks'.
Btw, if with mid tier killers, in 1v1s good chases on average last 2 minutes, if not even more, there's a reason: either maps are unbalanced, or you have to buff mid tier killers in chase to make them A tier.But in a 1v1 you burn through all of the pallets, you get to start at the shack, the survivor doesn't have to worry about running into anyone else, the survivor gets to scout out the map (more of an advantage than the killer scouting), and killer perks and powers are extremely limited while survivors still get to run things like Lithe and Resilience.
-
@StalkingYou said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772404#Comment_3772404
I may have to as well if the devs are catering towards players who unironically think that waddling around the map as Freddy to go for fresh survivors is a viable strategy against decent teams.
If you're going to make the discussion about killers like Freddy against a top tier SWF, that's the reverse of trying to make the discussion just about a cracked Nurse lobby dodging until they hit a group of weak survivors.
Talking about the outliers doesn't really correspond to the overall game.
-
@StalkingYou said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772350#Comment_3772350
spreading hooks is a bad strategy, which is why I mentioned that every time my swf goes against a killer doing it they lose.
so what can the killer do? well they can tunnel and camp instead
except oh wait we're making that even more difficult. there is the problem
spreading hooks is a bad strategy, which is why I mentioned that every time my swf goes against a killer doing it they lose.And if they outright camp they should lose as well. As a SWF if they camp the hook you all should be prepared with not just a Reassurance, but just to sit on your gens.
The best teams I hit when playing killer, I have to spread pressure. I have to try and snowball. If I try to tunnel they just stay on gens, FTP, bodyblock, etc.
-
But what does that have to do with this change?
If a killer is spreading hooks it doesn't matter whether the hook timer is 60 seconds or 70.
-
@StalkingYou said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772278#Comment_3772278
I actually agree with Scott. His point in that video is that there are situations where camping and tunneling are necessary and some times where they are not.
There are times where you should not tunnel and times where you should. You shouldn't just be following a manual which says "TUNNEL EVERYONE".
I'm saying that tunneling is the best overall/smart strategy. In fact Scott agrees with that in the video.
Tunneling and camping are tools. In my opinion they are necessary tools. However just like any tool you cannot rely on it to do everything. This is where people get my point wrong. They think I am saying you need to turbo tunnel and camp every survivor.
My point is that survivors have been given enough tools to counteract tunneling and camping, and people think that's fine because they believe that killers should just be spreading hooks rather than camping/tunneling from time to time and that's just not the case. In many games you NEED to get someone out as quickly as possible. It is the smartest thing to do (Scott agrees with me on that too). Spreading hooks is not effective enough to justify nerfing the best killer strategy. BHVR needs to stop beating tunneling/camping killers with a stick and start giving them the carrot by implementing a system which rewards them for spreading hooks.
BHVR needs to stop beating tunneling/camping killers with a stick and start giving them the carrot by implementing a system which rewards them for spreading hooks.But as gets pointed out every time this comes up, to incentive anything to the level of getting a survivor out of the game is nearly impossible. 40 seconds of grim embrace apparently wasn't enough to do it.
This would be like a gen rush SWF saying the problem isn't a full gen rush build, its that boons should be 5 times as strong and then they'd actually run them.
The game can be broken on both sides and create impossible/unfun situations. Boosting other options isn't the right idea, making the thing you want to get rid of harder is the way to approach it.
-
If BHVR had been willing to do a substantial change from the get go, piece meal actions would not have been needed. There have been lots of changes, but BHVR has been cautious requiring multiple actions.
Reassurance and kinship are perks, perks should give value. You need to give up something to take them.
@StalkingYou said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772253#Comment_3772253
Except for the fact that the game is built around kills and not going around the map spreading hooks?
I don't know how else to put it when I say that spreading hooks is a free loss against decent teams and it has nothing to do with skill. If you hook one guy, then go for a fresh survivor, then another, then repeat the cycle then the game will be a 1v4 for the majority of the match meaning gens will just fly.
If they want to make the game balanced around spreading hooks then they need to make spreading hooks an actual effective strategy because it just isn't. There's a reason why the best strategy in top level play is to just tunnel tunnel tunnel.
Against bad/weaker teams you can do it but it doesn't hold up against teams who don't go down in 20 seconds and are actually efficient on generators.
This is not fault of the player and anyone who says so either doesn't have enough time on the game or is just a survivor main.
Your comment that people against this change don't understand the basics of pressure is funny because if you ask any player with above 7k hours what the best strategy is against decent teams they will tell you what I am saying. Waddling around the map (especially if you are playing low tier killer) looking for fresh people will result in a loss against decent teams. It has nothing to do with how good you are.
It's a bell curve. Beginner players think that camping camping tunneling tunneling is best. Intermediate players think that going around the map for many chases is viable against good teams (because they rarely actually go against good teams) and experienced players know that getting someone out ASAP is the best strategy.
Your comment that people against this change don't understand the basics of pressure is funny because if you ask any player with above 7k hours what the best strategy is against decent teams they will tell you what I am saying.Scott Jund has at least one video on the idea that tunneling is the default best/only strategy is wrong. Many people thing its the best tactic, but far from unanimous.
Also, the Asian top level meta disagrees with you as spreading pressure is a much more common tactic.
-
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772261#Comment_3772261
None came with nerfs all buffs
Chemical trap and mirrored illusion.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772154#Comment_3772154
I mean, sure, but the thing that puts you on the back foot is you failing to play well in your next chase, not the fact that you left the hook. Leaving the hook is the default expectation and a requirement to play killer well, it's not a risk.
default expectation. why is it default expectation for killer to play for the fun of survivors? the dev should be rewarding killer to leave on their own accord to acquire hook-states. right now they're punishing the killer.
Camping also does not give you the same rewards as playing aggressively. Remember, camping gives you practically nothing if survivors just all make the simple decision to stick on separate generators instead of running into you. Playing aggressively doesn't require your opponents to make a boneheadedly stupid move, it just gives you that value as a reward for your gameplay.
it gives you the ability to pressure hook regression. In other words, regressing hook is more likely. your conclusion is missing component is killer gameplay.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/BVO6XDCPWBQA/image.png
the reason why they are doing this change according to the post is to combat camping but increase time to generator is related to killer's generator defence perks being nerfed. we nerfed generator defence perks and traded additional time to generators. this means that either generator defence perks now need to be buffed or camping should the stay the same. Pop goes weasel should go to 15% max generator progression per kick and Pain res should be usable an unlimited amount times for total of 14%. alternatively, the perks stay weaker and killer gets advantage through camping.
default expectation. why is it default expectation for killer to play for the fun of survivors? the dev should be rewarding killer to leave on their own accord to acquire hook-states. right now they're punishing the killer.@jesterkind talked about most of the rest but I wanted to point out two things on this.
1: It's weird to use the word punish. I could say that the timer should always have been 70 seconds and that survivors have been punished for years with the 60 second timer. I could say 70 isn't sufficient and survivors are still being punished.
Game mechanics are arbitrary numbers, there's no inherent reason the place they are set at is correct.
2: Killers don't have to care about survivors fun, but devs need to. If a certain killer playstyle results in unfun games they need to address it. That's just how game development works. It's why we can't sabotage all the hooks or auto finish a gen with a BMP (or more recently not destroying hooks when a survivor dies).
-
@jesterkind said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772148#Comment_3772148
I mean, sure, but the thing that puts you on the back foot is you failing to play well in your next chase, not the fact that you left the hook. Leaving the hook is the default expectation and a requirement to play killer well, it's not a risk.
Camping also does not give you the same rewards as playing aggressively. Remember, camping gives you practically nothing if survivors just all make the simple decision to stick on separate generators instead of running into you. Playing aggressively doesn't require your opponents to make a boneheadedly stupid move, it just gives you that value as a reward for your gameplay.
Remember, again, the PRESSURE from a hook comes from occupying MULTIPLE survivors. Camping your first hook gives you ZERO pressure if the survivors all just stick on their generators. Conversely, leaving the hook and starting a new chase at LEAST gives you the pressure of an extra survivor occupied.
What's being described here is not "brute force", it's extremely basic killer gameplay strategy. You don't need gen defence if you're actually playing the macro game decently well, and the gen defence that does exist in the game is more than enough if you understand it's supposed to enhance your basekit slowdown, not replace it.
Finally, I'd like to address your last comment, and mostly I just want to point out that this is one of the biggest flaws in logic I see pop up in a lot of game communities. There's this temptation to consider a buff "the thing you do if something's too weak" and a nerf "the thing you do if something's too strong", while also strictly defining every single change that happens as necessarily one of those two things, but that's a very narrow and unhelpful way of viewing game balance.
Game balance, for all games not just DBD, is about improving the quality of the game and the experience of its players. Sometimes that's about things being too strong or too weak, sure, but sometimes it's about flaws in the game that aren't strictly about strength. Like, for example, a dull tactic that a player can choose to subject the rest of the match to that may not win them the game but does remove a huge amount of interaction and a majority of the game's depth. Camping is one of those tactics. For another example, the last two survivors excessively hiding is one of those tactics too.
Where possible, it's appropriate to fix those things even though they aren't too strong, and sometimes that's going to include nerfs. As long as it doesn't affect anything else - which this example doesn't - there's no reason to be against that.
Game balance, for all games not just DBD, is about improving the quality of the game and the experience of its players. Sometimes that's about things being too strong or too weak, sure, but sometimes it's about flaws in the game that aren't strictly about strength.This is extremely well said.
-
@steezo_de said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3772068#Comment_3772068
2v8 has its shortcomings, but still, you can do very well with little effort, even in solo queue. Besides, the bp bonus is very attractive to a lot of people.
The first though is a pro/con, the lack of effort can make survivor feel unrewarding, and the BP bonus cannot be a long term solution.
-
@Science_Guy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3771775#Comment_3771775
Let's count again.
[CHANGE] Increased movement speed while charging Reign of Darkness to 3.8m/s (was 3.68m/s).
[CHANGE] Increased teleport speed outside of Nightfall to 19m/s (was 12m/s).
[CHANGE] Reduced teleport cooldown outside of Nightfall to 10 seconds (was 12 seconds).
[CHANGE] Decreased time to break out of a locked locker to 2.25 seconds (was 3 seconds).
[CHANGE] Increased charge rate of the Nightfall meter to 1 charge per second per injured Survivor (was 0.75).
[CHANGE] Reduced volume of The Dredge’s sound effects to make it harder to detect.
[CHANGE] Adjusted several Add-On
[NEW] Reduced Static Blast’s cooldown to 30 seconds if no Survivors are in range.
[CHANGE] Reduced Static Blast’s cooldown to 45 seconds if a Survivor is in range.
[CHANGE] Increased movement speed while charging Static Blast to 2.99m/s (was 1.16m/s).
[CHANGE] Adjusted Static Blast cooldown Add-Ons accordingly.
[CHANGE] Requirement for reaching Mutation Rate 2 has been reduced to 5 Contamination Points (was 6).
[CHANGE] Increased Hindered penalty duration when infecting a Survivor to 2 seconds (was 0.25 seconds).
[CHANGE] Adjusted Licker Tongue and Marvin’s Blood Add-Ons.
[CHANGE] Improved Scratch Mark visibility.
My bad, looks like there were actually 15 killer buffs. Killer-sided patch!
Glad someone posted this. If we're somehow saying that a raw count is important, this is the data that matters.
-
Good change. It doesn't impact most games, if the killer leaves the hook it the game is the same. Survivors still want to get the unhook as quickly as possible unless camping or tunneling are a risk. It weakens a style of gameplay that people generally find unfun which is healthy game design.
I'll be interested to see how it impacts the Western comp scene because they can't just ignore it like they do the anti-face camp system.
-
It depends a lot on what you want. It seems like a lot of people like 2v8 because it gets rid of things like perk choices, the additional killer/survivors aren't a big factor. Hard to tell what the playerbase as a whole would like.
On the killer side it would be difficult. You mention things like hooks, but while survivor perks are based around the idea that they could be used as a team, the killer perks aren't. Like Hubris could suddenly become a really strong perk if you bait a stun and the other killer gets an insta down.