crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
If you're just going for super fast heals to have fun, great. As a build the heals are excessive. Instead to play healer if you're soloq you'll need perks to either help find your teammates and/or perks to keep you hidden from the killer.
-
They probably figured it out and just leave.
Or they find your hex and use something like BU+FTP.
-
We do things that make money = we do things that make our customers happy.
The driving force behind all companies is appealing to and expanding their customers base. They attempt to do that my releasing products they think their customers want and are willing to pay. Some companies are better at actually accomplishing that than others.
Saying 'they are only doing this for money' is basically saying 'I'm upset I'm not in the group they are targeting'.
-
I feel like I ran into more bully squads when I was new to the game, so there might be something to the idea that there are survivor groups out there keeping their MMR low.
-
I think there would be two problems with the design.
1: What is process whereby the killer earns the points/upgrades? The obvious would be things like hooks, but that puts the killer into the 'win harder category'. Basically, if you're already beating the survivors, your success is going to turn the game into a one sided mess which isn't very fun.
I've seen people suggest a similar idea where the killer kicks gens to power up (leeches the power). That could potentially work, but I think it creates a different issue where it might be too easy for survivors to deny the killer their power.
2: I'm not sure it would be very fun to level up basekit mechanics. You've got lunge, lower terror radius, and base speed. Everything else you are unlocking things perks already do. Which could potentially be the idea where you just unlock a whole bunch of perks, but that would be a nightmare to balance.
-
@Sunbreaker7 said:
Are you more inclined towards being the type of player who equips perks geared towards prolonging your own survival when hunted by the Killer, or do you lean towards perks that enhance teamwork and aid in keeping your fellow survivors alive longer? Or maybe a healthy balance of both?
Moreover, would you consider it a victory if you successfully rescued another survivor from being sacrificed, even at the expense of your own life?I try to bring a little bit of everything. Most of my builds have an exhaustion, an anti-tunnel, and a heal.
If I rescue a survivor and am sacrificed in turn, it's more of a draw. If I rescue and we both escape, a win, if we both die a clear loss.
-
@_Onyx_ said:
I'm curious to hear what people think about the potential that exists in a lot of maps to prevent the Killer from hooking anyone through the use of perks and comms.
This used to be a play style that Survivors in a SWF could abuse on any map, prior to the sabotage nerfs. Where they would equip No Mither, and 99 every hook so if the killer does pick them up, they can swoop in and drop it. This play style can still be abused on specific maps with an RNG on hook spawns that benefits the Survivors.
Hawkins is one of these maps. I try to keep up with Survivor channels that are popular for "bullying" and making compilations out of these moments so I'm aware of newer abusable things Survivors can potentially be doing. One such video showcased that Hawkins is a map that can be combined with perks such as No Mither, Breakout, Exponential, Flip Flop, Unbreakable and then Sabotaging hooks to make it so a Killer will never get a hook. The specifics are this:
You go up to the top of Portal Room and run right to the far corner behind the railing. The Killer has to down you and pick you up instantly to even have a chance of getting to a hook. If the RNG is bad enough, the only hook that will spawn in the area is the basement. Meaning the Killer will never make it to a hook unless they have what's known as the "backpack build". All 4 perks dedicated to carrying a Survivor around for longer than normal and getting hits on the other Survivors to extend the time and potentially get more downs, before hooking them and having more pressure straight off the hook. If the Portal Room rng is not in the Survivor favour, they can try this on the Isolation room side, by going down upstairs constantly on the side without the hook on or near the staircase, the Killer may never be able to get a hook out of it. And if neither of these options are available to the Survivors, they can try going down upstairs on the Catwalks in the rooms where the only way down is by the stairs or vaulting, and since you cannot vault while carrying, getting down a narrow staircase with Boil Over is not a great time.
Eyrie Of Crows is another map that can have a chance of providing this RNG. If the basement is in shack, then the hooks outside the building will spawn on the corners at the front and back, but on the same wall. This means once the Killer has either walked down the stairs or dropped down, the can be sabotaged. In addition, there is a spot upstairs which has a vault and a breakable wall near it, the Survivors can always go down there and the Killer will have to endure all of the perks being used against them to try and get a hook upstairs, but it will most likely be sabotaged though.
Mount Ormond Resort used to have this potential, but the addition to a hook upstairs made it so a Killer can actually get someone eventually.
Badham Preschool in the boiler room is another. If the basement is in shack, you can always go down in the middle of the boiler room and the Killer will have an awful time trying to get up the stairs and outside to a hook.
If there's other maps with potential for this, I'm sure someone knows of it. But I wanna hear what people think of this gameplay still being a viable way to play as Survivor. Making is so your opponent can never progress their objective. (The bleed out timer will become a factor if the Survivors don't do gens around this gameplay fast enough, but let's be real, they will be doing gens as well as stopping the Killer hooking). At best, in the worst rng for a Killer against these teams, they can get 1 kill through sheer force of bleeding them out. But that means they lose anyway, so it isn't a good feeling.
Do you think it should stay? Is it fine? Is it a problem that needs to be fixed?
I'm of the belief that all potential for this style of gameplay should be removed. Making it so that hooks are mandatory spawns in the upstairs areas of maps that have them. There shouldn't be areas of a map that a Survivor can go to that makes it so the Killer just wastes their time. There also shouldn't be upstairs areas that have no gameplay to them other than just going up there to get hit. It's a version of "comp corner" where you know the chase is coming to an end, so you position yourself somewhere that wastes even more of the Killers time.
Do you think it should stay? Is it fine? Is it a problem that needs to be fixed?The potential to rescue a survivor before they get hooked is an important part of the game. If survivors could never stop a hook from happening, why even have hooks?
The situation you lay out is incredibly rare, requires a 4 person SWF to be going out of there way to get it, and they still need to be able to get to one of the sweet spots on the map to pull this off. Given the massive weakness No Mither has as a perk, the fact that it can be situationally strong is not a problem.
Making it so that hooks are mandatory spawns in the upstairs areas of maps that have them.That some maps could use a few adjustments is a far different thing than overall gameplay.
-
You're basically calling all forms of map mobility teleports.
-
@LapisInfernalis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3708384#Comment_3708384
Tbh I don't know when and how exactly the Devs were notified of the support ending soon.
We only know that they work on the updates way before they are released and I can imagine that the engine update took a lot of manpower from the other updates.
Also "fixing a light switch can result in the elevator not working anymore, because the wires are not installed correctly". This is an analogy my friend likes to use when talking about Bugfixes. You may fix one issue but get 2 more in return.
Just look at Fallout 4's Next Gen update. It has more bugs than the base game had before.
Also "fixing a light switch can result in the elevator not working anymore, because the wires are not installed correctly". This is an analogy my friend likes to use when talking about Bugfixes. You may fix one issue but get 2 more in return.And if every time you replaced the light the elevator broke and the people in charge never fixed the wiring, they deserve to be criticized.
-
@ember__lol said:
I will die on this hill btw.
Tunneling is good, it forces survivors to improve at their looping skill, i wouldn't be half the survivor i am now If i didn't get tunneled.
You also won't be tunneled as much if you can improve at looping, killers like tunneling weak links, it's smart easy pressure. If your getting tunneled your probably the weak link, or so good the killer has to prove to themselves or you they can down you, in which case you buy loads of time for your team, and if your the weak link you can improve.
Now, i know alot of people rage bc of tunneling and complain it's bad. They have a skill issue and are not willing to forcibly improve themselves at the game. If they get discouraged and uninstall or leave that's shows alot Abt them. They were never worthy of improving.
If you want to improve you will, if you get tunneled all the time you'll want to improve.
Each time a survivor gets tunneled it creates harder survivors for killers to go against.
Tunneling is ultimately incredible for the games health, i know when i first got tunneled i was like "damn, I'm never gonna let this happen again" and i improved and now killers abandon chase with me after 30 seconds and i sit on gens all match because they know I'm good.
Feel free to disagree. But you have to admit i do have a point. Tunneling creates good players
And no. This isn't bait. And no I'm not a killer main (i play both sides evenly)
They have a skill issue and are not willing to forcibly improve themselves at the game. If they get discouraged and uninstall or leave that's shows alot Abt them. They were never worthy of improving.Others have mentioned it, but its a game. Lots of people are just going to play the game occasionally, the people who dedicate a huge chunk of time to it are going to be a rarity. The idea of using a word like "worthy" or saying it shows something about another person is ridiculous.
Its also a completely one sided thing on who is expected to develop the skill. Tunneling is a strategy that any killer can pick up from the moment they first start the game. Looping is a skill that takes an incredibly long time to really master.
Finally, it makes boring games. If the killer gets looped, the others just sit sit on gens. If the killer doesn't get looped, it creates a boring 3 on 1.
-
You'd need some kind of pre-map start mini scenario where the killer would set up where hexes would spawn. That would slow the game down and also tell survivors that a hex was in play.
It would also allow the more defensive killers to plop all of their hexes down in the most defensible area.
-
@LapisInfernalis said:
They updated from UE4 to UE5. I only know very little of programming, but I certainly know from a friend who works with stuff like this that an engine update can be very complicated and is always prone to be buggy on release.
For example: Certain bugs in the engine could have been fixed in a way that is not compatible with their code. Now the Devs need to first find out what exactly changed so they can redo the code. Sometimes even commands change. It's not something you can do in a day.
They were probably already working on it for a long time, because most bugs/glitches we have are of graphical nature. And fixing these is always low priority.
The next big update is also the anniversary patch and they needed to update the engine because support is running out for UE4 soon. So I guess they did not want to have all the glitches during the anniversary.
Programming is not just "write a few lines and it will work". It is very complex and even if you only have like 60 lines of code, finding a bug there can take HOURS.
Programming is not just "write a few lines and it will work". It is very complex and even if you only have like 60 lines of code, finding a bug there can take HOURS.Absolutely. I'll be upfront that that I don't have the most extensive knowledge of coding, and its not meant to undermine the difficulty of the task.
But none of this would be secret. Was ending support for UE4 sprung on them on that last second? Did they have reason to think it was going to be a seamless transition? As you said, people should be well aware that transitioning between enigines is going to be a time consuming process.
And buggy is one thing. If this latest patch was an anomaly I think a lot of people would be far more understanding especially given the engine update. But its a common thing to have new, significant bugs appear in every patch.
-
@Sava18 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3707777#Comment_3707777
I can't specifically say the balance team is large but bhvrs team in general is very large. I bring this up often but league is a frustrating game that has probably at least the top three most players in the world outside of mobile games. But it has a two week balance cycle that keeps such a large system somewhat fresh. Let me be clear league has a higher level of frustration potential but not the frustration consistency of dbd. That stems from how little the devs know about their own game and how infrequent they balance.
I'm pretty sure league has no more than 10 people that come up with and implement changes on a two week cycle that averages 15 changes a patch working on a terrible 32 bit game from 2009 so I don't really think spaghetti code is an excuse. Overwatch is in the same predicament as dbd right now and it's also due to their balance/change/design team, they've been running that game into the ground for years.
It's almost like a relatively small game like dbd would benefit from just mindlessly listening to their top content creators at this point which isn't the case with every game. But I'd trust some goofy person who barely cares about balance like jrm more than the current team.
It's almost like a relatively small game like dbd would benefit from just mindlessly listening to their top content creators at this point which isn't the case with every game.The thing is, its not a small game. Sure its not league, but when they hit the 60 million player mark in November they also said they had 300 people working on the game every day.
I usually defend BHVR pretty heavily. I get the balance issue, the meta is very different depending on region, SWF vs soloq is a huge challenge, that the level of sweatiness is left up to the player, and the ultimate goal is not a balanced game but one that is tilted toward the killer. That doesn't mean I think they make the right decisions on it, but I at least understand the problems they face.
But the bugs? If it was just one bad patch I'd say to give them a break, but its like every patch we get completely new things that are broken. I usually disagree with the idea of an 'Operation Health' style patch, but if every update is going to have bugs it really should be considered.
@ArkInk said:
Rant Start!
I know how necessary new updates and content is for live service games, but the latest patch is just another in a mountain of simply bad updates that should've been delayed. Legion 1.0 happened already, Twins 1.0 happened already. BHVR had ample time to realize this update wasn't finished and the precedent set in the past was all the warning they needed not to let the game get to this point.
I don't really know what to say that we haven't all heard of or seen ourselves. Between the game suddenly deciding to flash lights so harshly the devs have to warn people to ask their doctors before playing, the rubber banding many players are experiencing, map collision not working sometimes, pallet breaking not working sometimes, killer powers not working sometimes, etc. Frankly, it's embarrassing.
BHVR made the PTB specifically so this wouldn't happen. Everyone and their mother told them this update was broken the moment we got our hands on it. I don't know which higher up at BHVR needs to hear this, but playing so recklessly with the one game almost your entire company depends on for revenue is a bad idea and I don't need to explain why.
The devs themselves likely aren't to blame for this. They're just workers under deadlines, and it honestly sucks to see them have to take so much crap all the time simply because they're forced to send out products that aren't ready. The whole reason Starbreeze had its publishing rights bought out was specifically because of their crunch culture issues, so why is this still such a large problem?
This game isn't invulnerable. I don't think it's fated to die soon or that this is the nail in the coffin or anything, but if an update came along that genuinely broke the game past the point it was unplayable, I honestly couldn't say I'd have faith that BHVR would do anything other than make a vague statement and kill switch a quarter of things that actually need to be turned off.
Rant over. Look, this aside, the past year has honestly been one of the cleanest comebacks I've seen from a game in awhile. After the duo flop that was Knight and SM, it kinda felt like Armageddon, but Larry, Alien, Chucky, and Unknown really did a lot to change the game and its rules, and in my opinion most of the changes have been healthy. I just wish we didn't have to accept the obvious misstep that came with it.
Do better BHVR, or else I'll…uh...play the game for another eight years? Yeah, that'll show them.
The whole reason Starbreeze had its publishing rights bought out was specifically because of their crunch culture issues, so why is this still such a large problem?I think its all the platforms. Releasing a patch on something like PC is pretty easy, but things have to go through testing on consoles (not for bugs in gameplay, but I think to ensure compatiability). That means there needs to be firm dates that probably can't be moved.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3707184#Comment_3707184
The shrine eats a lot of shards for just one perk... And a couple of weeks still means within that time you don't have it... And you don't even know how long it takes for the perk to be in the shrine again, worst case you have to wait for months... Buying the character takes a huge amount of playtime to buy it with shards. I don't think such perks should be locked within high amounts of playtime or behind a pay wall... Besides that dead hard would probably be quite hard to use for a beginner... So that one does not really help them much anyway.
He means via purchasing the character with shards. Zarina is 4500. I understand the anger at the shards that are locked behind pay, but unlocking things via gameplay is a pretty normal mechanic.
-
I mean how crazy do we potentially want to go? If we're reimagining the game it can get pretty broad.
On the base level, removing the 4% would be an easy solution and wish they would do it (plus the hook checks on 2nd stage). If they really think players should be allowed to leave a game, that's fine, just allow them to DC without a penalty if it is really impossible to keep players in the game.
I'm looking forward to them trying the game mod with no hooks. If I remember the description, you get to be downed twice and can pick yourself back up (death on the 3rd down) after a set amount of time, but you don't have to pick yourself up if you aren't ready (killer standing right there).
Here's one random idea I had while reading through the thread:
No hook timer - instead a survivor on the hook decreases gen speed. If the killer camps, survivors just stay on gens, but if they go to chase a survivor and no one goes for the save the gens will actually be slower than rescuing.
-
@Spare_Them_Mori_Me said:
It also doesn't mean it needs changed because its rare. But I'm not going to get into it really: We won't know til it gets to live. But have some faith! Could be amazing. Probably not. But could be!
This is the first of the mods I'm looking forward too. It's going to add in even more random elements, there's no secret there. Some people won't care for it, but that's the whole idea behind the different game mods - they aren't meant to appeal to everyone.
I suspect that people will find the true random a bit too much, especially given there are some perks / addons that actually make you weaker. I think a semi-random system might be more popular, but will see what they actually do with this one.
-
@Vlarian said:
So, I've been playing this game for a while, and I've really been enjoying playing wesker! I've been playing with only corrupt and deadlock for passive slowdown, and trying to focus on getting chases on every survivor. I've been having a good amount of fun, but I haven't won a single game in the last 10 games. The MMR the game has put me in, essentially has made it impossible to stop all the gens from being completed because of how many chases I'm taking. I don't really want to run pop and pain res, and I don't want to start slugging or tunneling, so what can I realistically do here? It feels like the strategy to have as much fun by chasing survivors is obsolete, as even with 8 hooks the emblem system only counts that as "bronze" so I'm not ranking up at all.
I feel completely powerless and my matches seem meaningless
What are your thoughts?
Spreading pressure works on some killers better than others. If you can't get across the map quickly (either a teleporter, Wraith, Blight), then the survivors correct strategy is to spread you out.
It just becomes a numbers game. In any game of DbD survivors have to occupy the killer long enough to get the gens done (in chase). Now the amount of time they have to keep you occupied is reduced by all the time you spend getting around the map and finding survivors.
And without gen regression perks, Deadlock is just a minor annoyance especially if they are already spread out.
That said, if you're having fun, keep having fun.
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3706725#Comment_3706725
Yeah they took that away when they nerfed it. Never use a medkit on another survivor in a CoH boon, it just wastes your medkit charges for nothing. It still stacks with other perks though.
I forgot that as well, thank you. It's such an unnecessary bit of code because as Peanits mentions the stacking already has declining returns.
Hmm, so I think that would make the fastest possible heal - 1.7 seconds instead of 1.439. Though that is a good example of how little impact the healing speed has as it get stacked, losing a total 150% between two survivors nets less than 0.3 seconds if you had ever other possible benefit.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3706662#Comment_3706662
To be fair, free BP every week is good for new players to catch up/get going.
Also just because the first one is BP doesn't mean it will always be BP. If it was gonna be BP only, the ambiguous use of "gift" is suspect. Would have been better to call it "the blood well" or something.
So worth getting some details first I feel before I'd start to rag on it myself.
Would have been better to call it "the blood well" or something.Man, that's just a missed opportunity on their part as the blood well sounds really cool.
-
@Alen_Starkly said:
Does anyone know what is the maximum healing speed (in percentage).
Let's say you're healing someone with We'll Make it AND We're Gonna Live Forever, do those 2 stack? Also, does Botany Knowledge stack with them?
Is there a hard cap on healing speed in solo healing and group healing?
I don't think anyone answered the group healing question - to my understanding there isn't.
I think the hypothetical fastest possible heal (injured survivor to healthy) would be 1.439 seconds - that would be two survivors starting a heal simultaneously with the following perks
We'll Make It, Botany Knowledge, Desperate Measures (all injured), No One Left Behind (gens powered), medkit with addons, downed survivor with leader, in a boon - that 5.56 charges per survivor, or 11.12 charges per second.
Beyond the math though it is worth noting that because the percentages are additive, it becomes harder and harder to notice. On their own, We'll Make It saves 8 seconds while Botany Knowledge saves 4, but if you have We'll Make It and then add Botany Knowledge, you save only an additional 1.6 seconds on the heal (from 8 to 6.4).
-
The why.
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3705651#Comment_3705651
Lol good day!
What I find interesting is that if you ask people which matters more in their own personal experience, they will almost always say "why". However, if you reference game balance or game statistics, now the why is totally irrelevant and the win or loss is all that matters.
Interesting right?
We as the community can't measure overall player satisfaction. A big part of the why as Singularity said is having a fighting chance. That means balance might not be the predominant consideration in players' minds, but its certainly part of the why.
-
Why is that a question for survivors? Seems like that is a question for all players regardless of role that they play.
Also, survivors aren't a homogenous group. I play exclusively soloq - I'd like the game balanced around that. But if someone plays just in SWFs, their opinion would probably be different than mine.
-
I don't remember the true first game I played. It was not long after it released and I gave it a go and didn't care for it.
I looked at it again around the time of Deathgarden and didn't care for it.
I got back into it when I saw VLDL (New Zealand comedy group) was going to do some skits on it. I watched some twitch streams about the game, this was around patch 6.1, and decided to try it one more time. First game was as a survivor on Eyrie of Crows against a Trickster. I was the last survivor alive, I think we got like 4 gens done, but I really had no idea what to do to get hatch or anything like that.
First game as a killer was as Wraith on The Game. I stomped them so easily that I almost gave up the game right there. But I knew that DbD had constant arguments for which side had it too easy, so I was determined to get a few games under my belt, and then play ten games on each side and do my best to offer a neutral first time take on the game. For probably the first hundred hours I had multiple times where I almost quit the game, but around 100 hours I had come to accept the game's frustrations and treasure the things it did really well.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3705387#Comment_3705387
I think they played 6 matches and the Western teams won 4 and the Japanese 2? So not really a huge statistical difference.
That's a 66.67% win rate though. So looking at the raw numbers it was a rather decisive victory. I get your point though. Had the Europeans lost one more match, it would have been a tie. So 6 games is a relatively low sample size.
About how strong the Japanese teams were, I cannot speak. I only saw snippets and the match on The Game was rather embarassing. An argument can be made, that Elysium played at a disadvantage because the Japanese killer had a very high ping but my god some of their decisions in that game made them look like a bunch of complete beginners. Why did they drop so many pallets against a Legion that had their power as well as the iri addon and was not even close to them?! It's like they were begging for the map to become a dead zone.
It was also a contrast between their different levels of comp rules. The pub scene is also quite a bit different.
That is true but because the teams always followed the same set of rules this didn't make much of a difference. In fact, if anything it favored the Japanese because their rules were used.
I only saw snippets and the match on The Game was rather embarassing. An argument can be made, that Elysium played at a disadvantage because the Japanese killer had a very high ping but my god some of their decisions in that game made them look like a bunch of complete beginners.The Game is apparently a map more frequently played in Asian comp matches and that was one of the games they won. I think the idea was that the deadzones weren't nearly as important as breaking up the 3 gen. By spreading out and healing it also meant every time Legion went into his power he could tag one of them, then had to drop out which ate up time.
Also the fact that Hens was worried that the Western survivors might not complete a single gen when it was there turn during the game was pretty amazing (they ended up finishing 3 I think).
that Elysium played at a disadvantage because the Japanese killer had a very high pingThat was true for both sides. Gathering players from around the world is going to always create ping problems.
In fact, if anything it favored the Japanese because their rules were used.They did play games on both rule sets.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3705322#Comment_3705322
Yes. Apparently in Asia Self-Care is actually a meta perk. They also have a very different approach to the game than westerners when it comes to tunneling. Instead of tunneling someone out immediately, they try to spread hooks. Although in a recent tournament between European and Asian players, the Europeans had the upper hand, so it seems that hard tunneling is the more effective strategy after all.
Although in a recent tournament between American and European and Asian players, the Americans and Europeans had the upper hand, so it seems that hard tunneling is the more effective strategy afterI think they played 6 matches and the Western teams won 4 and the Japanese 2? So not really a huge statistical difference. Also the the Japanese team that played the second set seemed to be considerably stronger.
It was also a contrast between their different levels of comp rules. The pub scene is also quite a bit different.
Instead of tunneling someone out immediately, they try to spread hooks.Well, spread pressure and map defense I think is the idea.
Apparently in Asia Self-Care is actually a meta perk.I was more surprised by the idea that Blight's don't use hug tech.
-
The most interesting thing to me about the meta is that it varies based on region.
-
I thought I was going to hate the idea, but I actually kind of like it.
The problem is that I don't think the mechanics that are getting put in place to stop certain behaviors should be impacted by perks. Like a killer perk that gave more gen kicks would be a bad idea. But this might actually make the game more interesting.
-
I generally like Otz, but think he was way off on this take.
Survivors, and killers, should both have multiple strategies that they can pursue. All the time spent rescuing each other could have been spent hitting gens.
Also if new killers are frequently hitting coordinated SWFs who are perfectly hitting flashbang saves, that's a problem in and of itself. But at least they have far more agency there then the SWFs who genrush. More likely they are hitting SWFs who will frequently mess up the saves.
It's also weird the focus in the video and the channel on the playing casual. Great, go ahead and play casual, I usually do as killer. But the expectation that you should be able to get the same result is silly.
-
I probably only played at that level when I first really got into the game. As some others have said, I tend to mix other games in with DbD, but its the game I've played the most over the last couple of years.
@Seraphor said:
Generally play roughly every other day, so 3-4 days out of 7. As regularly now as ever.
Not sure why people would be on these forums if they haven't played at all in months...
Not sure why people would be on these forums if they haven't played at all in months...Yeah, that surprises me as well. There are games in the past that I was involved in the forums of and when I stopped playing them I stopped visiting the forums as well.
-
@Vindictus said:
I am asking as I bought this game by myself and I was interested in it because when I bought it, it was advertised as a game where there is no communication between players, so it was very shocking to find out you can make premade parties.
People state this game isn't playable unless you are playing in a premade party.
I didn't see that it was a feature until playing over 100 hours, I assumed it was only for custom games.
I am at the point of the game where now it's pretty much impossible to escape, and it seems like it's impossible to counter most killers and perks without communicating. But winning as killer is way way too easy which for me isn't normal if this is really a solo game.
I want to know if it's balanced around SWF so I can permanently quit the game if that is the case. I now see everyone say don't play the game unless you are playing with other people. If the developers are basing their balances only on SWF, then this game should be advertised as a party game and playing solo is optional but not recommended. I liked the game at the beginning, but the matches are unbearable now. I feel like I wasted all my money because I've reached the point where now matches are not playable unless you use comms. Hope devs see this and decide what type of game they want it to be and to make it clear, so people dont fall into the trap.I've played soloq for years and loved the experience.
The game is balanced around killers winning the majority of the time. It's a harsh reality, but it is what it is. Even if you were playing with friends you might see a surge of victories, but that would even out over time.
-
Huntress when its at range - seeing a survivor running off in the distance, planning the timing as they run behind an obstacle, and getting that hit is pretty amazing.
-
@solarjin1 said:
The forums question is interesting and i kinda think @WolfyWood is right. It handful of people posting the same messages over and over. I like to think of the forums as masterfully ongoing story crafted by C3tooth. You got your establish main cast consisting generalV, Reinami, Nazzzak, pulsar, etc (can't name them all). You got strong side characters who usually mind their business but still post frequently enough like iron cutlass, blighteddolphin, Raccoon, count in the fog, etc. Usually the antagonist of the season is a new account who posting 20 threads a week and wilding out nonstop (skill issues, Professor dunwich, more recently camper_villain). Every so often they kill off major characters like MikaelaWantYourBoon & Ayodam to keep the crowd on their toes.
My initial reply was eaten by the edit - just wanted to say this was a really entertaining post.
-
@GeneralSkien said:
Real question, should Addons be taken in consideration when balancing the basekit of a killer.
Good example being Myers, Very "Bad" Killer however the addons border on some of the most busted in the game, only staying in due to a grandfather clause. Myers on its own is a d Tier killer, but with Add-ons shoot up to A, or even S tier. Not everyone runs that addon however.
My question is this, should Add-on's be considered when it comes to make base kit changes?Presuming the game as it is: yes, they have to take addons into consideration.
Ideally addons wouldn't be powerups, but variations like mentioned already. As an example, I think Wesker's Uroboros Vial is an example of a bad addons - its just free power with no downsides. Pig's addons are how I think addons should be designed, they have pros and cons to taking them.
Myers Tombstones does fall into the latter category conceptually - you trade in slower progression for a more powerful effect. It also though just leads to pretty boring games and an all or nothing effect.
-
The challenge and trying to work together with people you can't talk to makes it appealing to me. Yeah, it can be incredibly frustrating, but an amazing experience when it comes together.
-
Run whatever perks you think work best, that's your right. If other players don't like your choice they don't have any right to sabotage the game.
-
Forums: I spent the last couple weeks arguing about math.
10 out 10 on the enjoyment scale, highly recommended.
Game: I've been at the same opinion about the game for about the last year or so. I really enjoy survivor, even though I'm soloq, though you can sometimes get a run of games that make it look like the worst game in the world. I play killer, its okay, but not nearly as captivating as survivor.
I regularly take breaks when I find something else to play, but after a week or two I come right back into DbD.
-
@zarr said:
I will more or less agree on the prevalence of tunnelling, insofar that it doesn't appear to be as problematically common as it is sometimes being made out to. At least "hard" tunnelling is fairly rare, where the killer will go out of their way and do everything in their power to get the first 3 stages on a singular survivor. And I'm playing in the EU region, said to be one of the sweatiest, from which most top tournament players hail (true EU at that, not UK, two remarkably distinct player pools that Scott has before falsely conflated). It does happen, with a frequency of I'd say maybe 10-20% (with an increased incidence in matches where I play with randoms, i. e. where there's quite regularly weak links that make for tasty tunnel-out targets), but it isn't ubiquitous. I do have to note that I almost always play in SWFs where there rarely is a weak link, but still, even in cases where the killer gets an early down and by all accounts should feel inclined to camp and/or tunnel that player, it happens surprisingly rarely.
But I will counter the general narrative he seems to try to build with both this and even more so a previous video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDSdD_RPCCk), which is that tunnelling is not really a problem and in his opinion not even a particularly good strategy. The former is debatable, the latter is outright untrue.
Now first of all, I won't say tunnelling is the worst issue in the game. Ever since the 10-second unhook Endurance was introduced, I haven't been too vocal about it because as it is now impossible to be "farmed off hook" without there being anything you can do about it, the survivor regularly gets into a fair chase scenario if they're being tunnelled, and good players want, enjoy and excel in that scenario. But it does become a real issue against certain killers, in matches with a lower skill level, and in solo matches. Some of the reasons for this I have outlined in this comment on another thread regarding one of his videos on tunnelling. Some things have changed for the better since then (first and foremost the introduction of the 10-second unhook Endurance as well as the removal of hook grabs), but some of the points still hold, such as certain killers being particularly oppressive in tunnel scenarios, uncoordinated (i. e. non-4-SWF) groups having limited means of combatting this strong strategy, it exacerbating the issue weak links can pose, and just the fact that it can make for an undesirable game experience to have a killer essentially ignore to the best of their ability any but one player. I will say that tunnelling would already be much less of an issue if people were to more regularly actually use anti-tunnelling perks, be that OTR and DS or even stuff like Second Wind or Lucky Break/Plot Twist that you can use to try and hide after an unhook. But the game experience and balance shouldn't stand or fall with the usage of perks.
My concern with this post however is more so to address the idea that tunnelling isn't even all that great a strategy. I think it's objectively the most optimal strategy. Responding to specific points made in the video:
"I find tunnelling to be detrimental to my (macro skills') impact on the match" - First of all, it really isn't that you're exclusively engaged in a micro battle against the survivor you're tunnelling. Not only can you do a fair few things mid-chase that affect other survivors (such as zoning the survivor you're chasing into them or pressuring the other survivors with your presence and abilities), but once you down that survivor you can hook them in places where you can then apply macro pressure, and continue doing so during that hook time. Knowing where to hook, how to pressure other survivors during hook time, when and how to camp, these are all macro decisions and skills. There is also the aspect of playing around the other survivors' potential attempts to support or rescue the tunnelled survivor, which can be a bit of both micro and macro play. And then even regardless of that, micromechanical skill differences can be huge in this game, leveraging them can be very gratifying and rewarding, especially on killers with high-skill-expression chase abilities. Sure an even just decent survivor can run trapless Trapper for 2-3 minutes on a good map (although you'd perhaps be surprised how big the differences even there can still be), but once you play killers with actual chase abilities, the outplay potential shoots up, and as does the ability to win games by leveraging chase skills.
Next, it's not like the survivor you're tunnelling actually has "the whole map". If they take the chase to areas gens are being worked on, the killer can pressure those gens while still pursuing their tunnel. Worse still, they risk going down next to those gens, then getting hooked there and giving the killer tons of pressure being able to defend both the hook and progressed gens. He also argues the survivor you are tunnelling as opposed to the other survivors knows which resources on the map have been used and thus where to run, but even if we ignore that average players aren't regularly good enough to actually have that map knowledge and presence of mind in a tense chase scenario to both lead and plan the chase with that in mind (as well as ignore the killer's ability to zone them into deadzones (and the popularity of Windows Of Opportunity, which shows other survivors where (not) to run)), something he doesn't consider is that the tunnelled survivor will regularly be hooked in places where they went down, i. e. where they used up resources. And the killer can of course also intentionally carry them into those deadzones. The survivor will often have no choice in the matter.
And finally and most crucially, he neglects here the entire part of what's so good about tunnelling to begin with: you create a 3v1 scenario that is skewed heavily in the killer's favour. You can leverage your killer macro skills in a 3v1 much more reliably and to much more impact. Once in that 3v1, you can stop tunnelling as hard and spread out the pressure much more efficiently, effectively and consistently. This is true to an extent where even in tournament matches tunnelling and camping a survivor out is seen as optimal even if it may take 4 gens to do so. If a survivor gets taken out before all gens are through, the winning chances of the killer skyrocket. Juggling 3 survivors is just such a completely different dynamic from trying to do so with 4. Any hook in a 3v1 can spiral into a won game then and there, because if you interrupt and down the would-be unhooker, now you only have one survivor left standing, instantly creating a match-endingly precarious situation. And that's just one obvious example.
"Rolling the dice on the first person you're chasing" - Here he is neglecting the fact that you can swap off a survivor. I guess this would extend into the notion of "smart tunnelling" which he touches on later, but yeah, nobody said tunnelling means tunnelling the very first survivor you find. If they show themselves to be a decent or good looper or simply just better than you, you can identify that relatively quickly and swap off in the hopes of finding an easier target. The same goes for "rolling the dice" on whether they have anti-tunnel perks or not: if they have Off The Record, you can tell that they do and swap off before you overcommit to a potentially too costly attempt of tunnelling - and simply try the same with the next person. Although it's not like tunnelling through anti-tunnel perks is a big issue either, not against the average survivor you'll meet, and not on a good chunk of the killer cast.
"Tunnelling is so prevalent in comp because anti-tunnel perks are limited" - While that is certainly true, it precisely goes to show that tunnelling is the best strategy and that only changes if non-basekit things are in play to change this. And to keep in mind again, this is only true because in a tournament setting you have 4 survivors all of which can hold their own in a chase, so if they are using anti-tunnelling perks on top of that, a tunnel attempt can get to be too costly, but this has no bearing on the average match with this game's matchmaking, where tunnelling someone out even through OTR, DS and DH can and will most of the time still happen long before all gens are through.
I do agree that if all survivors have to be expected to be on anti-tunnel perks, trying to alternate hook stages between two survivors is likely more optimal, but again, the fact that even the best of teams are expected to stack anti-tunnelling perks if so permitted highlights nothing but the fact that tunnelling is the strongest strategy that the best survivor players will always spend most of their perk slots combatting, despite being good in chase and having the team coordination to try and help the tunnelled survivor. I also think that OTR and DS don't do enough against some of the killers to deter a killer from tunnelling even in a tournament setting where all survivors can be expected to be good, because they can regularly just slap the survivor off hook to get rid of OTR Endurance and eat the DS and down the survivor again quickly thereafter because they are Nurse or Blight or Spirit or Wesker or Billy or Huntress or Artist or Unknown, … Buffed DS will change a bit about this again (if it actually will be buffed, it's arguably nerfed on the PTB), but it won't make tunnelling much less powerful either, certainly not in the average match with the matchmaking we have.
Momo's Blight streak loss which Scott brings up I think if anything happened due to him giving up on the tunnel. He had Ace edge map at 5 gens but noticed he had OTR so he gave up on tunnelling, instead opting to venture out into the map where he then spent time searching for and chasing someone else. I really don't think tunnelling through OTR and potential DS and DH as Blight is all that daunting a prospect, at 5 gens he should have simply tried that and I feel like he very well could have won doing so. It was actually later in the game where he then ate anti-tunnelling perks that costed him, which is precisely not what he should have tried to do. You have to tunnel as early as possible, at least against competent survivors and/or if you expect anti-tunnel perks to be in play.
In the pros and cons section he is again neglecting to speak to the pros of tunnelling. I think even when ignoring the (incredibly compelling) 3v1 argument, there are very obvious pros to tunnelling. A survivor off hook is injured, that already makes them a much easier chase target than healthy survivors by default. You know where a unhooked survivor is, you don't have to search for them like you do other survivors (if you weren't across the map at the time of the unhook anyway, but even then, again, being injured they're easier to find (or just use Ultimate Weapon, haha)). You might already know some of the chase perks that survivor is using and can try to play around them better, as opposed to having to figure that out for another survivor instead. In general there are a plethora of perks (and items) tunnelling can nullify: he brings up how not tunnelling can make anti-tunnelling perks useless (although they can still be used offensively, so this is only partly true), but what about things like generator perks and items (Deja Vu, Prove Thyself, toolboxes, Hyperfocus, etc.), hook perks (Deliverance, Borrowed Time, Babysitter, We'll Make It, Reassurance, Resurgence, etc.), healing perks and items (Self-Care, med-kits, Inner Strength, etc.), Background Player, Boons, Unbreakable, even DH or Second Wind if you get slapped into Deep Wound, Overcome, Dramaturgy, … - there is no end of perks that can be rendered essentially entirely useless on a player that is being tunnelled.
Any hook stage you get will only ever be that one hook stage, and any survivor you chase will only ever be that one survivor being chased - concentrating the stages on a singular survivor objectively progresses your win condition more than spreading them out on multiple survivors, and since in either case you are only occupying 1 survivor's time, you aren't really forgoing anything for it. Obviously there is stuff like healing and rotations and such, the game can slow down more if you spread the pressure (but only if you can do so reliably and keep up that pressure), but it can also be noted that almost every time in a typical match, other survivors will try to support someone that is being tunnelled, often going as far as literally throwing themselves at the killer and doing all kinds of things that waste a huge amount of time and create pressure for free, "pressuring" themselves so to speak. This is a major reason why camping and tunnelling are so problematic particularly in an average match scenario, where other players out of sheer boredom or frustration with the gameplay dynamics of these strategies as well as out of empathy, solidarity or a sense of obligation or whatnot for the player on the receiving end will try to engage as much as they can, sitting and running around.
All of this is not to say tunnelling is amazing and everyone should tunnel. If you want to win as consistently as possible you probably should tunnel, keeping in mind however the things Scott also points out about knowing when and who and how to tunnel, doing it in smart ways and capitalizing on tunnel opportunities when they present themselves. What this is to say is that tunnelling is a game balance and experience issue because it is too strong in the average match and uncoordinated (non-SWF) groups tend to fall apart against it while also not seldomly having an undesirable experience in the process. And it should be rebalanced on a base-game level, not worked around with band-aid perks, let alone ones locked behind paid DLC. I do welcome a DS buff and I know it would create a more tangible baseline "threat" with its mere existence again that will deter tunnelling more, as well as actually punish it more whenever DS does come into play. I also believe adjusting strong killer perks to more strictly discourage tunnelling would go a long way to improve things (such as buffing Pain Res, Barbecue, Grim Embrace, Weasel and so on in scenarios where the killer is spreading stages across survivors, nerfing them if they are getting stages on the same survivor or killing them). But more than that the game would benefit from better base adjustments to make tunnelling less powerful. That can range from making the tunnel-out more difficult or costly, to making the 3v1 be less skewed in the killer's favour. Of course compensatory buffs especially for the lower half of the killer roster would ideally go along with this, but we should first see what the live balance settles on if tunnelling isn't as objectively optimal anymore. And the fact that it isn't a ubiquitously abused strategy in the live environment if anything adds to the merit of the argument, given that rebalancing it wouldn't upset the live balance so much as a result.
I always enjoy a good massive length zarr post.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDSdD_RPCCk), which is that tunnelling is not really a problem and in his opinion not even a particularly good strategy. The former is debatable, the latter is outright untrue.So I watched that video when it came out and I didn't think his opinion was that its not a particularly good strategy. I just rewatched the video and still don't think that is what he is saying.
You say in your post:
And finally and most crucially, he neglects here the entire part of what's so good about tunnelling to begin with: you create a 3v1 scenario that is skewed heavily in the killer's favour.And he agrees with this. At the end of the video he highlights how tunneling is the strongest strategy if it presents itself. I don't think he or really anyone denies that eliminating a survivor is the strongest thing that can happen for a killer.
And that's why I think your first main criticism of his video is a little off because I don't think you and he actually disagree. If you can eliminate a survivor while still maintaining pressure on the others, great, but a single minded approach to targeting one survivor and getting them out as quickly as possible is not the best strategy (more broadly, his points seems to be that killer's need to adjust their strategy over the course of the game).
but yeah, nobody said tunnelling means tunnelling the very first survivor you find.I'd say that is what tunneling is, but we're all just making up words to describe behaviors.
To me tunneling is trying to eliminate one survivor as quickly as possible, basically ignoring everything else in the game. What you are describing seems like just normal gameplay.
"Tunnelling is so prevalent in comp because anti-tunnel perks are limited"- While that is certainly true, it precisely goes to show that tunnelling is the best strategy and that only changes if non-basekit things are in play to change this.But if X is strong unless Y occurs, and Y does occur, then X is no longer strong.
That's pretty much the whole game, certain strategies are or are not strong depending on what the other side does (meta). As an example: if the meta strategy was to run prove thyself and triple up on gens, the value of pop and pain res would drop substantially.
Summary: I think you're defining tunneling differently than he does, and so broadly that it just melds into general gameplay. I agree with the last paragraph about issues with tunneling.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I know a lot of people don’t follow DBD content creation, but I know a lot do and I was curious to see what other people thought on this issue.Recently there has been a lot of discussion regarding the state of the game since the implementation of SBMM- with most content creators saying it has been an overall negative for DBD. This video by CoconutRTS is the one that has gathered most traction:
https://youtu.be/x1vSY0qQe0Y?si=Ar97zGUspbPXLDfV
Now, Coconut seems like a genuine guy. I do think he actually believes that SBMM is an issue for the playerbase as a whole, those who are casual and more serious. However I can’t help but think that for experienced, skilled players the idea that they’re burned out from having to sweat to win matches does tie in with the fact they want to have easier games when streaming and when trying to create content.
There’s no doubt SBMM makes running things like meme builds a little more tricky and it makes being able to fool around with chat a little problematic as you have to focus more. But is wanting to run a meme build, read all your chat AND still win the game the real issue here? It seems to me like there’s an attitude of “I want to play casual and still win a majority, if not all, my matches”.
On a similar note, sweating to win isn’t all down to SBMM- it’s a player choice. Admittedly you can argue that it’s a vicious circle, where SBMM reinforces the need to sweat because that’s the play style that’s gets rewarded (because wins are based on just kills and escapes). That I agree is an issue. But even then, the individual player can still dictate how they play the game. If you want to win all the time, then I’m sorry but you can’t expect to play casually.This post isn’t to totally defend the DBD matchmaking- it definitely has issues. I think most of us have experienced sessions where it feels like it’s either stomp vs get stomped with hardly any close, interesting matches. But is the desire to do away with SBMM really for the benefit of the whole playerbase? And for the veterans out there was the time before SBMM really a matchmaking utopia for this game?
There’s no doubt SBMM makes running things like meme builds a little more tricky and it makes being able to fool around with chat a little problematic as you have to focus more.If SBMM actually works, this shouldn't be an issue. Let's say the content creator is a hypothetical 7 on the skill level, they play meme builds that take them to a 6, and then they engage with chat which takes them to a 5 - that means they should get sorted against other 5s over time.
It seems to me like there’s an attitude of “I want to play casual and still win a majority, if not all, my matches”.I think this is a huge part of it, even if its just subconscious. Going on 50 kill win streaks or perkless runs for content was a huge part of what drew viewers in.
But is the desire to do away with SBMM really for the benefit of the whole playerbase? And for the veterans out there was the time before SBMM really a matchmaking utopia for this game?I'm not a veteran, but I did play DbD not long after it released and looked at it a few times, especially around Deathgarden, and never liked it. I get the idea and why people liked the idea of multiple, vague winning conditions that pips had, but it went too far for me.
-
@Ranch_Jello said:
Survivor hides the entire time...no saves, no doing gens, just hidden. I felt bad because I'm Human and empathetic towards my fellow players so I hunted down the hidden player, hooked them, and let the other one go.
was I wrong?
Was working with the survivor wrong?
Was feeling empathetic because I know how they feel wrong?
Was working with the survivor wrong?Unless the other survivor was helping you locate the remaining survivor (i.e. downing them to see auras, the survivor waving you over, etc.), you weren't working together.
You can hunt whichever survivors you want and show mercy to whoever you want.
-
Taking a break is a pretty normal part of any game. I know people who've burned out on shooters, MMOs, sims, etc.
It doesn't invalidate whether a game has flaws for not, but its just not really surprising for any game.
-
If its actually impossible no, though I've definitely tried times where it was so close to impossible that it felt foolish later. If the other survivors want to try for the save, I'm always in.
As the one on hook, if I think I'm in an impossible situation to be saved, or at best it will be a trade, I'll sacrifice myself on hook before I let any of the other survivors die for me.
-
@HerInfernalMajesty said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3700676#Comment_3700676
What specific things are banned from comp? What about them is broken? I’m just genuinely curious.
It varies from tournament to tournament and region to region. Hens just had a video up about this that compared the differences between Japan and European/US comp playstyles (Japan killers tunnel less, play more control playstyle, hug tech not a big thing, self care viewed as S tier perk instead of garbage).
Self unhooking, including AFC, not including deliverance, is banned (both regions)
Map is known by both sides
Killer is known in western tournaments (usually) but not Japan
Hatch is set in western tournaments
Japan bans emotes
Japan prohibits hex cleansing until at least 1 gen is complete
Western tournaments you cannot bring the same perk more than once on the survivor side
Both sides limit survivor items, Japan you are allowed to open chests
Western tournaments usually limit all killers to yellow or lower addons
Win conditions are different
-
In terms of what perks are banned, I've actually looked for a list and been unable to find one that is recent. The problem is that what is banned changes as the game updates and each tournament has their own variations.
-
It's kills and escapes, with survivor escapes being modified by the result of the other survivors (others escaping is better), and then the overall result impacted by MMR comparisons. Also, if the game lasts under 10 minutes it has a lower impact.
The system is designed so that most players will succeed 50% of the time. This means that a person using meta perks / iri items can be in the same spot as a better player intentionally running non-meta / no items.
You can keep your MMR lower by intentionally playing a weaker build. Hypothetically you could do this in chess as well by intentionally playing a weak start, its just DbD is the only game where people actually try to do it.
-
One thing I've come to realize more and more about DbD is that its a guessing game. Bring distortion and if you hit a killer with aura reads, tons of value, if the killer brings no aura reads its a wasted perk. Healing skills become useless against a plague. Mindbreaker grows in power the more exhaustion perks there are. Etc.
The doesn't mean the game is unbalanced, that's a different issue, it just means sometimes one side or the other has a huge advantage over the other based on guessing correctly. If competitive DbD played a season of games instead of tournament, that would even out (not that a season of esports would be practical for other reasons). Thus because its tournament style they try and reduce the randomness of the game, which leads to knock on effects requiring more and more rules.
-
If the game is getting stale for people after 8 years and thousands of hours, that's not really surprising. It's overall an amazing run.
Skill expression - part of the issue here is the asymmetrical nature. In a symmetrical game both sides can advance on the same progression, on DbD some killers have a much high skill ceiling than survivors can possibly reach. So maybe the killer spent a lot of time to achieve that level of skill, but the survivor doesn't have an equal opportunity to match it.
-
@C3Tooth said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3700186#Comment_3700186
34sec x 4m/s is 136 meters in straight line. Is this the map you're talking about?
When you posted the original I didn't think you were going to get any engagement.
Wow, was I wrong on that. People ran right into it despite the drawings.
-
There are multiple ways that BHVR could address the early game suicides, so far they've just decided to live with it, but this wouldn't be one of the ways.
On the idea of giving survivors a chance: when two survivors die really early it would be nice if something changed because the game just kind of collapses, but I don't think this would work. At that point the entity might as well just sacrifice the other two survivors so we can move on.
-
@Rythoriak said:
I am truly curious to see how far people are allowed to go where before there is consequences for their actions. I feel like I report people who go above and beyond when it comes to all the things I listed in my title (trolling, BM'ing, endgame chat language/threats, etc) but don't know if I'm just wasting my time. Here are some examples:
- Inappropriate communication in endgame chat. Is their consequences for language/insults/massive trash talk (minus racial/sexual slurs)? Where is the line drawn at people who use threats?
- BM'ing. This can include spamming flashlight clicks, constant tbagging at pallets or exit gate (or by a Ghostface instead of picking you up), camping a hook and hitting you over and over again, refusing to leave the match unless you force them until the last second every single match they're in.
- Trolling. Examples such as being the last 2 people alive and knowing you can't win so you just hide for 30 minutes straight with no gen progression. Not doing gens and just farming flashlight/flashbang saves (just one example) as an entire premade team (normally followed by nodding/tbagging). Running Knock Out and just bleeding an entire team out and refusing to hook them (have had one pick people up until they got stunned just so they could knock them again and 'tbag' their body by walking up an down their body)
- Taking the game hostage. Just wondering where the actual line is drawn on this one. One of my examples above is basically taking the game hostage (hiding in lockers for 30 minutes straight). In 1000 hours I have never had a killer trap a survivor in a match where they can't get out but I know that is another example.
Where is the line drawn by Behavior? Have they ever made a stance of where people will receive sanctions for their actions when it comes to their behaviors (pun not intended)? I just want to know what things I should bother reporting to them cause the amount of reports I have made over the years honestly gets tiring as it can sometimes be daily but I want the community of the game to be less toxic so I do it.
1: I believe BHVR has said they are okay with a moderate level of trash talk, not sure where they draw the line. Threats, racism, etc. I know are over it, but not sure they penalize beyond that.
2: None of that results in punishment.
3: On your 3 examples
Hiding - This is a tricky one. You are required to progress the game, but hiding is a component of the game. Hoping the other survivor dies so you can get hatch is also accepted. I think hypothetically this could be a violation, but I doubt it would ever actually be punished.
Not doing gens - If they don't ever try and do gens, they are not advancing the game, but they aren't holding you hostage as the killer. If they even occasionally touch a gen they are definitely in the clear.
Bleed outs - that's not considered holding the game hostage. Picking the person up repeatedly might be as that is holding them in the game.
4: Hostage - I think the criteria is - will the game end in a defined period of time, or does it only end when the servers shut it down (one hour). This is why body blocking a survivor in a corner is a violation if done during the game or when all other survivors are dead, but not a violation if it happens after EGC has started. Beyond that, I think they are vague on where they draw the line and handle things on a case by case basis.
-
@Archael said:
So. Because certain topics went into the course of killrates and winrates i came into conclusion that new topic is needed.
This is not a suggestion tho it will contain my suggestion of how to balance things. Main point of this topic is to discuss over what feels fair in terms of team balance. And as much as balanced players opinions are most valuable, because they know each side more less the same, all opinions are valid since its not a suggestion thread but a discussion one. So killer players, survivor players and even entitled players can be heard.
So. Current devs aim is around 60% killrate. Some people may call it being killer sided but truth is that its not as simple.
Statistics is about big number, and statistically 60% killrate means that every one survivor has 40% chance of escape, and 2.4 survs in every match are sacrificed. But this also means that killer wins 40% of the time with rest 60% being draws/loses. Idk how devs calculate hatch escape for killer, i would consider it as 4k for better statistics, and aim more for 57-59% killrate, but 40% winrate for every player is quite fair tbh.
But this is because dbd is not team game. Survivors are competing against the killer but also with themselves - even if killer kill only 1 survivor and lost a match, this still means that at least one survivor lost along with the killer.
For more balanced and good feelings, i would AIM for 50% winrate for each TEAM but this would require survivors being a team, yet since every survivor can loose before others fate is decided its impossible. We would need to remove one of core dbd gameplay features - hook sacrifices.
I have an idea of making trials having timer.
Killer need to hook, mori, hit, and do whatever they can, to interrupt survivors objectives.
Of course objectives would need a balance pass.
Hooks would last a minute with ability for being unhooked, but after a minute, hooked surv would be removed from hook and placed at least 36m away from killer.
Mories would put surv in ghost mode, where they can move freely, but cannot take conspicious actions, nor have collision, and may or may not be visible by other survivors. Mori lasts for 1.5 minutes.
If survs manage to do their objective their whole team won and escaped.
If survs fail to do their objectives, they are sacrificed to the Entity, and they are dead (did i mentioned that trials should be at night, and timer should count down to dawn?) by daylight.
and statistically 60% killrate means that every one survivor has 40% chance of escapeSure, that part is true. Over many games each person playing survivor should escape 4 out of 10 games.
But this also means that killer wins 40% of the time with rest 60% being draws/losesAnd this part is not true.
This is only true if you presume each possible outcome (0k, 1k, 2k, 3k, 4k) have an equal chance of occurring. But they don't. DbD's outcomes are not evenly balanced, they aren't even a bell curve, they are skewed toward the extreme edges (an inverted bell curve would be a closer model that is then dragged to the killer side). 2ks are especially unlikely meaning that the higher kill rate also has to translate into a higher win rate.
Everything else in the post is about game direction, but that's a different discussion. The presumptions on the equation you are constructing are incorrect.
-
@Commander_Nefarious said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3698974#Comment_3698974
but ur saying that killers should only get a 2k if they are equal in skill right? but that is just a draw for the killer, so killers get either a draw or lose. in other pvp games there is always a winner and a loser. draws are extremely rare, and the one that wins is the better team right, using all their knowledge and mechanical skills correct?
so if i get skilled at the game to only get draws whats the point? if the game acknowledge my skills for example says victory instead of vague things like brutal,ruthless,merciless, and was direct i wouldnt feel as bad.
and what of the survivors, the 2 that die, did they win or lose? and the 2 that made it out? did they win or lose?
are survivors part of a team or are they individual?
if they are individual then fine, im good with 2 kills 2 escapes.
but if not then thats lame, its considered a draw and thats what is expected?
conclusion is that if i put alot of time in the game to only get draws as the standard then the game doesnt reward the time invested
make the game direct to the player: defeat, draw, victory so we can avoid all this confusion
but that is just a draw for the killer, so killers get either a draw or lose. in other pvp games there is always a winner and a loser. draws are extremely rare, and the one that wins is the better team right, using all their knowledge and mechanical skills correct?Two things here:
1: When people say a 2k they should mean on average. You should have some 4ks, 0ks, etc. that balance out to a 2k. 2k is the rarest of the the possible results.
2: As for does the better side win? Not always, all games have elements of luck and chance, DbD had a lot of random elements built into the game.
conclusion is that if i put alot of time in the game to only get draws as the standard then the game doesnt reward the time investedEveryone else is also putting in time and getting better at the game too.
make the game direct to the player: defeat, draw, victory so we can avoid all this confusionI get the point and confusion here, and somewhat agree, but its just not what the game is. The game has zero win conditions outside MMR. You can play for BP, pips, kills/escapes (MMR), as a survivor you can care about your team or ignore them. You can put a rulebook on yourself and your playstyle, or sweat it out.
The game is asymmetrical in many more ways than just having two different sides. It doesn't even give players clear objectives and leaves that up to them. It can be frustrating, but it does lead to more variety in the game and prevents it from becoming stale.