crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Domicci said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4099318#Comment_4099318
Coll yet another person not understand why a 60% kill rate is needed for a 50% winrate in killer senses its an asim we have to use middle school math not first grade math. When you have 3 negative out comes for kilelr and 2 positive out comes for killer you need 3 kill avrage per game to have a 50% win rate meaning a 60% kill rate to equal that 50%. Now let's look at survivor we can go back to first grade math they have 1 good out come and one bad out come meaning if escape rate for survivor is 50% they get a good out come 50% of the time. So no the 60% which most killers dont even reach isnt kilelr sided its to make the game balanced because this is an asim not a normal pvp game. This community and the devs in particular need to learn how to read numbers properly and understand them its not hard its basic middle school math .
Coll yet another person not understand why a 60% kill rate is needed for a 50% winrate in killer senses its an asim we have to use middle school math not first grade math.Not the math argument. That's not true at all.
1: Even if your math was correct, it would still be killer sided because draws existed. Killers would have a 50% win rate, but the remaining 50% isn't losses, its a mix of losses and draws, meaning their win rate is higher than their loss rate (thus the survivor win rate being lower than 50% because it would mirror the killer win rate).
2: The math isn't correct because it lacks steps (being Middle School math instead of High School math). An average does not inherently mean the most common result. The five possible results (0k to 4k) aren't distributed evenly, the game tends towards the extremes - meaning the average being in the killer favor to get the 60% kill rate the killer needs more wins than losses.
3: If the discussion is MMR based, that's decided on an individual metric, so killers have a WR of 60% and survivors a WR of 40%.
-
Good post and well laid out. The rush/ease at which others are blamed post match is a pretty big issue.
It's never something I think about when I load into a lobby, but I've noticed certain characters, especially Sable and Meg, seem to receive an unfair amount of judgement before the match has even begun.While I can't speak to how universal it is, I think a lot of players who engage in this are just joking/memeing. They don't actually think the player is inherently worse, its just a community joke.
But maybe I'm too hopeful on that issue.
-
@Xernoton said:
I think what sets killers and survivors apart in this is that a killer has nobody else to blame but themself. You can always try and blame the other side but that's less convincing.
When you lose as a killer, you're bad at the game, you're a loser and you obviously should uninstall. That's the emotional overreaction a lot of killer players get after a loss. You can't really shift the blame on anyone else, so it's much harder to deal with.
This is amplified by the fact that you as a killer have a lot of control over the match. That doesn't mean you always have a realistic chance to win but there are very few things that happen during match, that you have absolutely no impact on. You unconsciously associate everything that happens with how you perform, which logically makes sense but emotionally can be quite draining because you learn to expect these things and try to play around the possibility of a survivor doing X thing. Whenever that doesn't work out, you not only have stressed out about something irrelevant, you're also worse off than before because you didn't account for what they actually did.
Meaning: You're stressing about a strategy, become stressed because your strategy didn't work out and because your strategy didn't work out, you are further away from winning the game, which also stresses you out. Once your brain associates playing killer with that level of stress, you get killer anxiety.
I think this is a pretty good layout of the killer arguments, so let me explain why the opposite is true for people who find survivors anxious.
Note, this is not to deny that some people find the above anxious. However, its not a universal 'factual' feeling as has kind of come up in the thread, but something that applies to some people, not all. Just as what I'm about to say applies to some people, not all.
Killer:
I think what sets killers and survivors apart in this is that a killer has nobody else to blame but themself.Alternative: Two things here
1: You have no one to let down but yourself. Personally, I care far, far more about what happens when I'm in a team than playing individually. No one likes losing in either scenario, but if I make a bad play as survivor it bothers me far more than if I do as killer as I have not just let down myself, but three others.
2: Having to only worry about yourself takes out a lot of unknowns. Even if I'm doing a gen and someone else is in chase, I'm wondering - are they fine, should I be setting up for a save, bodyblock, stay on the gen, etc.
To try and not sound too critical of the killers in the thread as I'm trying to be fair minded - but the ease at which some blame the other survivors instead of themselves surprises me. I tend to focus on what I could have done better, as killer that's usually pretty clear, but survivor leaves you with lots of question marks (thus causing more stress).
Killer:
When you lose as a killer, you're bad at the game, you're a loser and you obviously should uninstall.Alternative: Wins are rare, thus that feeling of almost getting it adds the stress. Again perspective, if I win four games as killer and lose one, I focus on the four I won, not the one I lost (I understand others are different). But when wins are rare and a game is going well it really ups the tension 'am I/we actually going to escape this time?'.
Edit to add: a related idea is that as survivor I never feel safe. Until we're all literally in the exit gate there's always the possibility of the match being turned. On the other hand, as killer I very rarely feel out of it until the gates are open. Some killers seem to stress when a few gens pop quickly, for me I don't worry about it as I feel like I have plenty of time and the area they have to attack is narrowing.
Killer:
This is amplified by the fact that you as a killer have a lot of control over the match.Alternative: Kind of dealt with this above. The control is a relief. From the start of the match there are a lot less unknowns to worry about, I see the gens, picked the killer, and can make a general plan really quickly. While constantly doing something as killer, I'm deciding what to do (edit to add: much like a horror movie, where you build tension via quietness, those moments of 'am I safe? am I doing the right thing? what's going on? are far more stressful than the killer who never has the need to stew). As survivor though there are a lot of factors outside of my control, what the killer decides to do or the play of the other survivors.
Killer:
You're stressing about a strategy, become stressed because your strategy didn't work out and because your strategy didn't work out, you are further away from winning the game, which also stresses you out.Alternative: Kind of like the winning point. As killer I set up the strategy, but survivors have to do the work and beat it. Far more stressful as survivor to be doing that in the moment. If as killer my strategy is bad, I can see where I went wrong and take as much time to readjust as I need and/or the fact it wins far more outweighs.
Once your brain associates playing killer with that level of stress, you get killer anxiety.That's true, but same for survivor.
-
On a final personal note, I should add my take on this changed as I got older. When I was young I found playing on teams (soccer, basketball) fun and relaxing, but sought out individual sports (running, wrestling) because of how much more stressful/rewarding they felt. Now, being quite a bit older, I'm the opposite, if its just me I don't worry so much about it, but feel a much stronger sense of not letting the team down.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4099275#Comment_4099275
Gen kick regression, removal of gen taps, 90s second gens, bloodlust, nerfed infinites, nerfed main buildings, nerfed map sizes. Since apparently every feature added to the game is a perk. The amnesia about what your favorite side also receives is truly remarkable.
In addition to what @Nazzzak has added,
Respawning hooks (twice I believe, so two perks)
Windows auto blocking (a bit broader than nerfed infinites, but covers that as well)
Basekit shadowborn
-
@HexSlugged said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4099233#Comment_4099233
being stressed by itself is not a mental health issue nor is anxiety. anxiety is a normal thing to feel. when it comes to any activity that someone is invested into or cares about whether it be regarding job performance or your next up to bat at your softball game.
To say that you just shouldnt do something if you feel anxious about doing such thing isnt a real solution. and i dont think a solution of preventing people from doing various activities of life due to a feeling they can not control is a good idea at all unless it is something actually medically serious and your having panic attacks and stuff like that but thats not whats happening (presumably) with anyone in dbd.
associating anxiety with "playing like your life depends on it" is not understanding why people feel anxious and you are thus misrepresenting it.
I also never stated anything about the devs or that anyone should do anything at all so no idea the purpose of that part of your comment.
being stressed by itself is not a mental health issue nor is anxiety. anxiety is a normal thing to feel. when it comes to any activity that someone is invested into or cares about whether it be regarding job performance or your next up to bat at your softball game.Anxiety as a mental health issue is a very serious topic.
If we're not talking about, then what's the big deal? Anxiety becomes just another form of 'I don't like this'. Which goes along with other arguments about not liking something - boring, unbalanced, lack of theme, etc. And discussing all of that is fine, there's nothing wrong with not liking something and wanting it to change.
However, when we look at the anxiety issue as people have been laying it out there are two problems, to use your softball example:
1: Some people like the anxiety and stress associated with coming up to bat. That's a huge reason people play competitive sports. However, they aren't for everyone, if you don't find the experience of going up to bat ultimately fun/rewarding, you should seek out a different activity (this can be expanded to a basic statement on any activity - there will always be some people who don't like something).
2: If the experience shouldn't be stressful, let's say a casual softball league where records aren't even kept, and someone is still stressing out to the level they aren't having fun, then one of the first pieces of advice would be changing a mindset to a more casual level as @Aven_Fallen has been recommending. And if that doesn't work, we're back to 1.
In sum, that's the problem with the stress argument (again if we aren't talking about a mental health condition). Like many competitive activities, some people are actively seeking that level of stress. DbD is modeled after horror movies, capturing those feelings of stress and worry isn't a flaw, its a goal.
-
Nightlight doesn't show either of these perks having a problematic escape rate. If you're arguing that something should be nerfed just because its common this paragraph:
Also to acknowledge the Elephant in the Room, yes Dead Hard is around the usage levels of Sprint Burst and Lithe. But I think Dead Hard is fittingly appropriate right now as an anti-tunnel Perk. Not easy to use, but provides plenty of reward while also having a very purpose in the current state of the game.hurts the argument, because you're saying popular perks should be nerfed, unless you happen to like them.
-
@HexSlugged said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4099188#Comment_4099188
you cant nessecarily control what makes you feel anxious even if your not taking it seriously. You really shouldnt dismiss peoples anxiety but "just dont do x if you feel that way" as it doesnt actually solve anything other than saying dont do something you like doing.
I'm going to agree with @Aven_Fallen with a little more explanation:
If the game is not just stressful or unpleasant, but actively harming someone's mental health, they should talk to a professional and stop playing.
If the issue is just general stress or the prospect of losing, trying a change in mindset is pretty normal advice.
If the issue is just general burnout, then its time to take a break.
All of the above would not just apply to this game but any type of activity.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I think people who dismiss the notion of ‘killer anxiety’ need to realise that the anxiety isn’t coming from a place of “I’m worried about playing killer in case I don’t get my 4K”. It’s coming from a place of “I want to play killer but the thought of being mocked, bullied, abused (the latter two, particularly in endgame chat) is putting me off.”
It’s not just about a fear of playing badly- it’s a fear of playing badly and being picked on for it. We can have a discussion on why certain people are more bothered by this than others BUT invalidating these feelings is not the right thing to do.
End game chat is the crux of a lot of this, but DBD is a game where it’s very easy for players to determine when their opponent is outmatched and make fun of them for it. Again, people will question why someone spamming crouch or emoting bothers another person, but it comes from a feeling of being powerless and rubbish- MMR is massively to blame for this. The casual, after work/school gamer who wants to get a few rounds in as their favourite horror character will be matched with players beyond their skill and far more determined to sweat.
Also not to go full ‘us vs them’ but a killer is four times as more likely to get griefed simply due to the nature of the game. In any one session playing a killer it’s likely you’re going to get grief just for existing.When you put it all together, it’s not hard to see why the thought of playing killer is anxiety inducing for a lot of people.
Again, people will question why someone spamming crouch or emoting bothers another person, but it comes from a feeling of being powerless and rubbish- MMR is massively to blame for this.It's not that most people are questioning this, its questioning why people think this only applies to the killer.
Some people feel anxious playing only killer. Some playing only survivor. Some for both. Some neither. Everyone has their own elements that they might cause stress/anxiety, but despite what people say we still get lots of 'well how I feel must be universally true' arguments.
Also not to go full ‘us vs them’ but a killer is four times as more likely to get griefed simply due to the nature of the game.That one is probably the most unique. However, given the 60% KR target the killer is far more likely in a position to grief than survivors are. Sure they have more capability in end game chat, but the killer has more capability in the game.
When you put it all together, it’s not hard to see why the thought of playing killer is anxiety inducing for a lot of people.It's much more about uniqueness. There's no example I've seen where others can't explain why it actually the survivor side of that example that causes anxiety for them.
-
Hook grabs should also return because they make hook rescues feel dangerous instead of turning them into nearly free trades.There were two problems with hook grabs and the game is much better off without them
1: Ping - going from healthy and about to rescue expecting nothing more than an injury, to picked up and the other survivor still on hook, was way too powerful of an effect especially given the impact a bad connection from the killer could have on it
2: The click game - the killer just standing behind the survivor as they click on and off trying to bait a swing was just awful.
Generators - the comeback mechanic for the killer seems far more complicated than its worth. I'm not opposed to the idea, but I think the game needs a simpler, more straightforward 'catch up' mechanic if it goes that route.
Limiting healing - no, survivors already have built into 'you'll run out of this' mechanic in the form of pallets and items. Right now both sides have a good incentive on when they need to move from just defense to offense, a change like this would take the game back to the Overbine era where it becomes attack/defend.
Make healing take longer after a lot of heals? Maybe, if we're talking larger changes. but healing is such a base mechanic of the game that eliminating it entirely causes way too many problems.
Boons - not as big an issue given the numbers you provide, but also why? In the vast majority of matches this would never come up, the only one I could think of is laying down exponential against a slugging killer, and encouraging slugging killers is not healthy gameplay.
EGC Timer - I've always advocated for it beginning when the fifth gen completes. The rest of the changes seem unnecessary.
I don't really have an opinion on the BP ideas as I don't care about them at all, except for the idea of giving a bonus to survivors for doing totems. In many matches cleansing a totem has no merit and just a time waste. This creates a split in the player base, with some playing to maximize points and others just to get escapes. That makes things like balance much harder.
-
@Abyast1 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4099015#Comment_4099015
Yes and No, How long did you have most of these before they got fixed. Broken Things like COH stayed in the game for 6 months before getting touched. DS and DH both were in there for years. FTP+BU addressed instantly. The only things that took comparible length from my memory was old ruin (which was comparitively broken). Unhookable builds still exist to this day, 80s off the record took 3 years to nerf.
Now some killer examples of "incredibly broken stuff" and how long it took to nerf-
Machine learning (18 months), Eruption (from the 2022 patch when it became problematic (7 months)), Ultimate weapon (8 months), pain res (132 days/4ish months), undying (5 months).
My issue is it seems killer stuff gets hotfixed generally within a handful of months when it is seen as problematic (which is still slow, but much faster than a lot of the nerfs that happen otherwise) whilst survivors broken perks take years. The DH/DS discussions were going on since laurie strode came out essentially.
To highlight two things I said in my own post that you quoted
Though its not really worth nitpicking the difference between 'complained about a lot' and 'complained about slightly more than a lot'.If we want to to discuss the whole history of the game on what side gets called out for having cheap tactics its going to get to be a long list on both sides.The post I was responding to set up bodyblocking vs tunneling/slugging, I'm pointing out limiting it to that is leaving out a lot.
You also say
"incredibly broken stuff"- I don't know what you are using quotes for as I didn't use that phrase, the discussion was about cheap, which is related to broken but different.Anyway, to go against my own advice on the nitpicky side, I could point to thinks like fog vials that if someone was on a short vacation they could have missed the initial version of (and this being bigger than most nerfs as it was the first new gameplay element for survivors in a long time). Additionally, on the killer side, how long facecamping was allowed to exist and, of course, that tunneling is still very much in the game so its clock is still running.
-
@Raptorrotas said:
Thanks for pointing out my mistakes. (Honestly, Im hardcore killer biased and dont wanna end up as much a hypocrite i accuse others to be)
But I think the surv examples of flashlights or bodyblocking are interesting.
Item dodging is an acceptable comparison to killer dodging.
Do you think bodyblocking gets comparably as much hate and demands to be changed by devs as tunneling/slugging?
I feel like blocking has been accepted and peopls play around it ntead of being added to the scrub rules.
Do you think bodyblocking gets comparably as much hate and demands to be changed by devs as tunneling/slugging?Just bodyblocking? Probably not. Throw in SWFs and shift-W gameplay, sure. Though its not really worth nitpicking the difference between 'complained about a lot' and 'complained about slightly more than a lot'.
I'd also add that a lot of things killers have called cheap BHVR has addressed. FTP+BU, MFT, old DH, old old DH, 80 second OTR, unhookable builds, etc. If we want to to discuss the whole history of the game on what side gets called out for having cheap tactics its going to get to be a long list on both sides.
-
Why is no other game of ANY kind ever expect that? Why doesn't football? Why not let the other team score a goal to be nice?It's interesting you cite football as sports in general is a horrible argument for the idea that this is somehow unique to DbD. In sports broadly if a team has a huge lead they put in their backups and stop playing as seriously and its viewed as rude to try and 'run up the score'. In football teams will usually just run the ball with a lead. Baseball has a bunch of these about things teams shouldn't do when winning by a lot (i.e. bunting).
To go back to football, the NFL specifically, teams have given up opportunities to break the most points scored in a game record (this happened notably between the Dolphins and Broncos a few years ago).
Being nice is actually a pretty common idea in sports.
-
@Raptorrotas said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4098973#Comment_4098973
The scrub mentality is going soo strong in dbd.
- Dont use that character
- Donut use that item/addon
- Dont do that strategy.
Its funny that survivors only sometimes get subjected to on of those and killer to all 3.
Its funny that survivors only sometimes get subjected to on of those and killer to all 3.Survivors literally can't be subjected to the first one being that all survivors are the same (though when we've had really quiet survivors, yes, they've been called cheap).
Survivors get accused of 2 and 3.
They also get accused of being in SWFs (whether its true or not), which much like your first is something killers can't be accused of.
-
When I started playing the game heavily a few years ago I thought it was on the downswing, which seemed natural for me given the game's age.
Instead we're hitting record player counts.
I think the game has another 5 to 10 years in it and can probably push past that. Over time player counts will begin to decline (and my stance on this always is that is not inherently a failing of the game, but basically an inevitable part of a game's history), but the game could lose a lot of players and still be profitable.
I thought the way forward was going to be new game modes, but they seem happy to just mostly cycle through 2v8. However, it looks like it isn't really necessary yet, even if a lot of us our burned out the broader player base doesn't seem to be.
I think part of the reason they don't worry about bloat (and why it hasn't effected them much) is that for two different groups of players it doesn't matter. Experienced veterans who have memorized everything find depth in the variety, and for more casual players who don't care about knowing the layouts of every map it doesn't matter whether there are 10 or a 100 maps really, they're just going to jump in and play them.
So guess on the future: probably more of the same for the next couple of years, at some point when player counts start to drop too much see an increase in new game modes. I wouldn't be surprised if the player base splits between the game modes, with 1v4 being a massive bloat of possible killers and perks, while 2v8 is more focused on the class system. But I don't expect anything truly 'radical'.
-
Before the questions: Intended Purpose is a bad argument. Is something unbalanced? Is something unfun? If it doesn't meet either of those, if it isn't too strong and makes the game fun, who cares whether it was the intended purpose or not?
Onto the questions:
Why are second chance perks like decisive strike, off the record and basekit BT used aggressively by some?Two possibilities
1: It's the correct strategic thing to do (or the player thinks its the correct strategic thing to do). This should be obvious why a player would do such a thing.
2: A little more nuanced as it would vary player to play, but the gameplay is boring without interactions. Trying to pull off a bodyblock is far more interesting and challenging than just sitting on gens. It might not even be the best tactical decision, it might actually be an awful decision, but just doing gen after gen isn't very interesting.
When I play killer I also find it more enjoyable when survivors play like this - I don't understand those who want less interactions and less skill expression in the game.
Do you think its fair to now tunnel that survivor at least 1 hook state maybe 2 (depends how mean your feeling) if they intend on throwing themself at you because they have these perks?You can play the game however you want (within the rules).
However, anytime I ever see this discussion come up, everyone says it isn't tunneling if the target literally puts themselves in front of the killer. People in end game chat might say that, but don't take people trolling comments at the end of the match seriously.
-
If your game is actively giving one side a real form of anxiety there needs to be some form of change. I think that more attention should be brought to this subject.So others have already addressed the idea that this is 'one sided' quite well. I personally find the survivor side far more stressful.
But on the note on anxiety and stress: those are elements that the game goes for. Its meant to be a heart pounding experience that mimics the intensity of a horror movie.
Is that bad for some people? Sure. But I don't know how you make a game be stressful and anxious for the people who want that but avoid it for those who might have a problem with it.
@Gamedozer7 said:
I do think the devs can hit some of the pain points to help with the killer role. They did it to help survivors combat tunneling and camping they need to do a little for the killer as well. Killers got 10 seconds more on gens that's great but then they added 10 seconds to hooks and that totally overwrote the gens. Killers got buff to some of the base kit but then they went and slowly buff stuff about survivors that undid the buffs. Oh faster animations we'll add more pallets so the break speed increases doesn't matter because they have to break more.
They did it to help survivors combat tunneling and camping they need to do a little for the killer as well.Except these were elements that were boring, not anxious. I remember the games of face camping killers where the three other survivors just did gens and left. They were (and some still are) just bad design game elements.
Boring elements have been removed from the killer side. DH when killers had to do the dumb head nod for every player. Gen tapping. Even things like 80 second OTR for body blocking and FTP+BU have been removed because of killer complaints about how these things felt.
However, this is very different than a lot of complaints in the thread about balance issues. If the anxiety is that you might lose, even that you might lose badly, that's just a part of competitive games and neither side is unique on that front.
-
When I hear second chance it means someone is about to make a really bad argument.
-
@I_CAME said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4096010#Comment_4096010
Am I the only one who doesn't see the issue with this? I believe the result was 48% escape rate vs 52% kill rate. Can you explain how this is horrifically unbalanced? This was with fast track too. Both sides brought the most broken setups possible and the result was… fairly even? How much do you think killers should win?
In addition to all of this, which is true, its worth pointing out a few other things:
1: If it was truly unrestricted the killer side would have played Nurse every match. In essence we had one side playing S Tier every match and the other side sometimes forced to A/B tier. It's not surprising that the side constantly running the absolute best possible did a little better than normal.
2: A few of these tournaments have been run, but in at least one of them I saw the survivors also knew the killer they were going to face. This is a pretty substantial advantage for the survivor that exists in lots of comp frameworks that gets overlooked.
3: They weren't playing for kills/escapes, but hooks. That has a lot of impacts on the games, but an obvious one is that in end game situations the killers will target a fresh hook instead of an elimination, lowering what the expected kill rate would be.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4095964#Comment_4095964
You can still hear people even with the music. It doesn't deafen sounds, it just makes it harder.
Elusive still allows for noise notifications on perks like FttE and Infectious Fright. It also doesn't block Killer Instinct. There are no ways for survivors to go around Undetectable. Undetectable is stronger.
Lucky Break and Parental Guidance already do this. Poised, Dance With Me and Shadowstep have similar effects too. Killers have managed with suppressing perks. You can often just guess where people are.
On cross-examination - if its overperforming, then by all means nerf it.
But in relation to this:
You can still hear people even with the music. It doesn't deafen sounds, it just makes it harder.I find it funny how much of the forums/social media is always in an uproar when survivors get anything that might make things easier, but the idea that there would be a perk that would limit 'some' of the ways to track survivors in 'some' loops against 'some' killers and thus they would have to demonstrate more skill (or, play without their hand being held, to use the common insult thrown at survivors), well that's just unthinkable.
-
The "game" is killer sided. Now, if you limit it to less than the game and just create a hypothetical scenario (usually four person SWF against a weaker killer), sure, you can make it sound survivor sided, especially if things like the different skill ceiling levels are not looked at. But the game as a whole is, by design, killer sided.
-
First off I want to say I don't care about low-level players, when discussing balancing we should focus on high-level (not comp) players.You're fine to not care about certain groups of players, but you can't have balance discussions that totally leave out large portions of the player base and focus just on the portion that you (likely) identify yourself as.
@FerrousFacade said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4095751#Comment_4095751
If the gen is popping in 30 seconds solo from a solo build then no you don't have enough space for SB. If everyone SBs or Lithes away they don't have full gen rush builds and you have interrupted ALL of their gen progress, you are in a winning position and the match has just started. Complaints about WoO will never stop being funny to me, the survivor is just as bad as they were without it, if you can't down someone because they have WoO its a skill issue on your part. I would much rather every survivor have WoO than another perk that is likely to be significantly more impactful to the match.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4095755#Comment_4095755
Are you seriously ignoring that this took: a comp team, many attempts, a survivor sided map, full builds dedicated to just this, a bad killer (or at least a killer that played poorly in this match), and the killer to choose to sit on top of a slug while the survivors completed the gens? Ya, if the killer does nothing and is unable to down survivors the gens go quickly, is that news?
It'd be like posting the world records for fastest killer downs.
-
@ShanoaLegendaryPlz said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4095239#Comment_4095239
Id argue it pushes more people away including the ones used to the grind. Nothing feels worse in a game than the company betraying you to cut costs. The cake problem isnt also about the grind, as even vetrans who are done grinding, still have a ton of new characters now with barely anything on them. These cakes were a nice way to give empty characters something to work with even if you don't want to fully prestige them. Now you can only afford to pick one of the over 60 characters and give that one enough cakes for the year, and play only them with no variety. Not all the side characters you also enjoy playing, or your p100s, or the characters you like to use at certain times. Just that one and only character can afford to build up cakes now. And if you play the game hard enough you might even get "some" cakes for a 2nd character. Having cakes to spend on most of your characters didn't just help with grind, it helped give players incentive to keep playing. What incentive would i have to keep playing when i ran out of cakes, and the reason i did is because the game company does'nt care about its player's satisfaction anymore, just their numbers? It feels like you are paying someone you hate for something you don't even need. And eventualy people will see value in anything else but this game. A live service game lives off its players satisfaction. They are starting to throw that away.
As much as I wish a lot of this was true, I just don't think the evidence supports it. I want to focus in on one line in particular:
They are starting to throw that away.Starting to?
How many times have we all been through the 'DbD is just about to die'. From bugs, to dev comments, to perk changes, to new unbalanced things, etc. - and we all keep going 'well, this will be the straw that breaks the camel's back'. Instead, we're seeing record player counts.
It's nice to think that people will have a reaction to it, but all of the game data seems to tell a much different story. The larger player base is either happy with it (in which case, great), don't care (also fine), or so caught up in the grind it doesn't really matter (a bothersome thought).
-
Can I explain it? Sure. Are you going to like it anymore? Probably not.
The reaction of the forums prove the reason - the fact that people are so irate proves they care about BP. Even people who have hundreds of cakes from prior years and more items then they could ever hope to spend, want that sweet, sweet BP. It doesn't really serve a purpose, but manufactured scarcity is a surprisingly effective tactic.
Maybe I don't see the big picture but aren't more of the new people leaving the game when they notice how unbearable the grind got with all the characters in the game?The new players are the reason they've been able to cut back.
The longer we all play the game, the more they have to up the BP bonuses to make them seem somehow relevant. Have a hundred cakes? Could you imagine how cool a thousand would be?
Except for the new players, they standard of what is a boost is totally new. This month seems a lot better than last month. Next year will probably have to be better than this year, and so on. The goal is to find the right mix that's just enough to entice people, without giving too much away.
As for turning off new players, the player counts seem to tell the opposite. Grinds bring in players, if they didn't we'd still have multiplayer games like we did 20 to 30 years ago where you just had all the stuff right from that start. But the idea of having more stuff to unlock, more levels to achieve (even if they mean nothing) is one of those things that brings people back.
So to go back to the question:
BHVR wants people to grind, they don't want it to be too fast, and every data set we have from the game seems to indicate its a pretty good metric of keeping players.
-
Meanwhile, survivors can put together builds with a huge variety of options (when I play survivor, I never feel pressured about not having new perks, because the old ones are enough and offer a variety of playstyles).All survivors have for variety is builds, killer variety comes from all of the different killers.
Also this doesn't really jive with what you say later:
Today, in 2026, I can still play decently with the same survivor build I used back in 2018That statement is much closer to most people's experience, very little has changed meta wise on the perk front for any substantial amount of time (every now and then something comes in for a few months before being nerfed).
In contrast, what did killer players whodon'ttunnel get? NOTHING. What do we get for rotating hooks?Well, if you aren't tunneling the basekit endurance has very little impact.
There was also a huge idea to combine anti-tunnel with basekit benefits for unique hooks, it was primarily shot down by killers.
Why do these kinds of changes always benefit the survivors' overall win condition if the goal is just to prevent a specific behavior?Survivors used to have builds to make themselves unhookable. One of the counters to this was putting more hooks onto the map. I've never heard anyone suggest that killers shouldn't use these hooks.
Yesterday, I lost at least two matches because survivors (in an SWF group) sabotaged all my hooks, forcing me to drop the person I was carrying.Okay, what happened after that? That means all the survivors aren't on gens. On future downs did you slug and look for sabos, go to unusual hooks, etc? Sabo plays can work, but both sides of ways to play around it.
At that moment, I knew there was nothing I could do to win the match (and not even a minute had passed); it’s a completely disheartening feeling.You're down one gen, the earliest gens are the hardest ones to defend. That doesn't seem particularly devastating.
I constantly have to keep up with updates and buy new perks just to play without getting frustrated—and that simply isn't fair.Nurse is still the best killer.
What's the new perk that killers 'have' to have? The meta on them seems to be just as stagnant as on survivors.
I don't want to be forced to play only top-tier killers just to have a reasonably fun match.You can play whatever you want, but you seem to be conflating fun with winning. There's lots of builds I like to play as survivor, but know there's only a few I should really run if I want to maximize my chances of winning.
-
@Domicci said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4094954#Comment_4094954
The reason i want it to work just gates open is because survivors can abandon after being "slugged" to many times and if it was just if one survivor has not left or dead then duos could just hide together to keep it from popping up. and the killer can just open gate if they need too like a swf is just hiding or a cheater is well cheating the killer can just leave and not have to deal with it and go to there next game.
if it was just if one survivor has not left or dead then duos could just hide together to keep it from popping upAnd a killer can intentionally avoid downing the last survivor, intentionally trying to subvert the end game mechanic.
Its the same situation though of trying to detect when this is done intentionally vs when gameplay is still going on would be extremely difficult (if it was actually possible). Now, we could just greatly expand the abandon system to cover lots of 'potential' stalling situations, some people want that, but it would be a substantial expansion not just a survivors to killer comparison.
a cheater is well cheatingEveryone wants to leave when there is a cheater. Survivor, killer, no one wants to be stuck in a game against a cheater.
-
@Domicci said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4094699#Comment_4094699
So do you agree killers should be able to abandon when a survivor hides in ebd gane just to waste the killers time?
But how would you be able to detect it?
How do you tell the difference between a survivor hiding to antagonize the killer, and one who is stealthing around the map waiting for the best opportunity to make it to the gates?
That's one of the main problems with the scenario - there's the hypothetical about whether it would be good, but the more difficult practical question of how to implement it for just this scenario. Which is why we usually get the suggestion of abandon becoming available after the gates are open - except at that point the game is still frequently very competitive.
-
1: A single event, whatever sided it might be, doesn't prove anything about the overall game.
2: In the case of new things to do: the killer side has 42 possible options for play, the survivor side has 1. It's not really surprising that they try to focus on more things to shake up the survivor side.
3: Jason's impact doesn't need to be amplified by an event.
-
Played it when it came out, didn't really care for it.
Gave it a look when Deathgarden was out, really had lots of problems with the design philosophy.
Looked at people playing when VLDL was doing some comedy sketches about the game, seemed more fun though I still had some issues with it, but got into it more than I expected.
-
As already mentioned, this was largely what they tried with anti-tunnel changes and this was one of the things survivors and killers both said wasn't working.
it still gives the killer the option to tunnel if they want to OR it allows them to not tunnel and go after the other survivorThis is preserving killer options while railroading survivors.
Right now, survivors and killers have choices on what to do after an unhook, with pros and cons to various strategies (lots of which I'd alter). This says the killer still gets to choose what he wants to do, but survivors actions are extremely curtailled.
The intent to try and hold onto this was one of the reasons it failed before. You don't want survivors to body block? Sure, make them completely intangible who have no collision and can't be hit. But unless the game goes all the way on that, it just going to get more messy.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4086680#Comment_4086680
Probably no way they could. Makes it hard to get accurate feedback for sure. It is pretty much just internet shouting.
Have the feedback form be done in game so that it is directly linked to the account and feedback could be sorted based on playtime (or any other data point you want). They could still have open feedback, but there's a pretty clear way they could link feedback to the actual PTB account.
-
@Chomperka said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4085953#Comment_4085953
Bro I opened your clip and literally first 10 seconds is just Jake running into you and dying 🤣 Kwon just stays at the same place after you hit him with m2. Thanks for showing clips, now i understand why you are so confident this game is killer sided.
The clip shows @cogsturning targeting one survivor while another is down, but instead of chasing the first survivor he turns back and catches a survivor trying to come in while he is distracted and get the pick up. Its a demonstration of how survivors can collapse late even when they have things going for them.
Also, Kwon doesn't stay in the same place, he's moving when the M2 comes the 2nd time.
-
@Spirit_IsTheBest said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4085407#Comment_4085407
I think you're actually proving my point.
If players keep running slowdown because it's the most efficient option no matter what, that suggests slowdown perks provide a huge amount of value. Players generally go toward whatever helps them win most consistently.
As for mobility killers, I agree they're common, but I don't think the strongest killers should be the benchmark for the entire role. Most killers don't have Nurse or Blight-level map control, and discussions about generator pressure usually involve the rest of the roster too.
I also don't think kill rates tell the full story. A killer can have a healthy kill rate while still feeling heavily incentivized to run certain perks. My argument isn't that killers are weak or survivors are overpowered. It's that regression perks seem to be one of the most universally valuable perk categories in the game, and I think it's fair to ask why that is.
Saying "good killers can manage without them" doesn't really answer why so many experienced killers still choose to run them in the first place.
If players keep running slowdown because it's the most efficient option no matter what, that suggests slowdown perks provide a huge amount of value. Players generally go toward whatever helps them win most consistently.I think you are correct on consistent, but I don't think that necessitates a 'huge' value or what you bring up in the original post.
Slowdown will always provide value. A totem build might run up against survivors with cleanse perks, an aura read build might hit survivors who are just going to shift W, spreading pressure can run into a bunch of resistance players (or dedicated healer build, probably more common before diminishing returns).
Slowdown perks are always pretty good. Whether SWF or soloq, whatever the strategy, the slowdown perks are going to give stable value. That would remain true even if gen times changed. It doesn't hurt that this remains pretty consistent across killers, reinforcing how common it is.
You are guaranteed pretty reliable results with gen slowdown, why take a risk on a perk that might have slightly more situational value but also far more possible counters?
-
So looking back at the patch notes:
Survivors now spawn within 12m of each other by default, when possible.Survivors now spawn on the same floor as each other by default, when possible.
That 'when possible' was never really clarified and is doing a lot of work. Why wouldn't it be possible? But there must be something in the spawn logic that necessitates survivors sometimes getting booted away from each other.
-
I think @FerrousFacade covered a lot of the issues elegantly, and @SOULWARRIOR71K did so succinctly, but I wanted to add on two things.
You simultaneously complain about the ease of exhaustion perks and also survivors using DS/Unbreakable. Now to get value out of the latter, survivors have to commit half their build to it, get into the correct situation, and not just be successful on the body block but time it correctly (too early and they aren't offering much help, too late and the killer can wait out DS).
This seems to be a common complaint - if survivors perks are too easy, bad, but if perks allow the possibility of timing and skill to pull off, also bad.
Staying on DS though:
Anti-tunnel perks are not completly problematic as long as you use them as intended, DEFENSIVELY, but the problem is that people just use them offensively. Putting killers into just lose lose scenariousI never got why this gets referred to as a lose lose scenario. By this standard, everything in the game is a lose lose scenario.
Survivor drops a pallet? Break it and they gain distance, not break it and they might be able to use it later.
Killer tunneling a survivor? Get off a gen and lose gen progress, or get in the way and bodyblock while giving up gen pressure.
That's just what the game is, a series of tradeoffs that both sides are making. It's not different in this scenario. The survivors is sacrificing gen progress to make a risky play to try and buy another survivor time, while also sacrificing one of their perks that they might need later. The killer is having to make a trade off between multiple possibilities (getting around the bodyblocker, switching to the DS target, letting him burn out his unbreakable, waiting out the DS).
That's just what the game is, and I can't get being upset about the trade off strategic game while also being upset about the ease of a Sprint Burst.
-
Most of the points I was going to cover have been made.
1: @Science_Guy points out, and I agree, that the idea survivors have been getting a lot of great perks is not correct. Things that were meta builds (on both sides) many years ago are still meta builds.
2: @cogsturning mentions that killers are just inherently more difficult to design perks for. Take Haywire, a pretty weak perk in initial idea, but brokenly strong on Singularity.
3: Survivor's have built in systems that make new good perks not as good as they sound (even before diminishing returns). Mostly the exhaustion mechanic, adding a new strong exhaustion perk doesn't actually make survivors that much stronger, it just serves as a slight variation of what they could do. Also healing perks, which have always had their own version of diminishing returns, adding new variations of ways to increase healing aren't really making survivors stronger, its just giving them more variety of how to activate a boost.
On the other hand, we're still basically reliant on Unbreakable and DS as the anti-slug/anti-tunnel.
4: If we're going to talk about perks in the PTB, the devs designed a survivor perk that makes more sense as a killer perk for the vote chapter.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4083123#Comment_4083123
No, it's a survivor perk meant to confer a benefit to survivors. Nowhere in the perk does it specify that it's meant to be a purely anti-tunnel perk. That's something the community made of it.
If it was purely anti-tunnel, I'd be fine with it getting more tightly constrained to tunnelling scenarios, but it'd have to be basekit, too.
I still find it funny that the anti-tunnel got taken down for trying to 'railroad' how people play, but the idea that a survivor might attempt to use a perk in a generally ineffective manner is game ruining.
-
@Slurp_Ramen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4083462#Comment_4083462
streetwise didn’t get killswitched for how long?
The devs straight up came and said it was a non-issue.It was actually so bad people were saying killswitch streetwise on overwatch posts XD
While legion is killswitched for the entirety of the blood moon event only for bhvr to announce, while he’s still killswitched, that he wouldn’t be returning to 2v8 and half of the roster likely will never come to 2v8.
yeah you’re right killers are just whiny babies who want everything on a silver platter.streetwise didn’t get killswitched for how long?
The devs straight up came and said it was a non-issue.1: Arguing about how quick bugs are fixed is a lot different than intentional design feature changes (the anti-tunnel, fog vials, language they used for OTR, etc)
2: The 'devs' didn't say that. The streetwise bug occurred over a weekend (long weekend for Canadians due to a holiday I believe) and the individual who said those things was a forum moderator (mostly on discord I think). The individual didn't say it was a non-issue, but that it didn't rise to the level of the kill switch. When the devs got back they removed the forum moderator, officially apologized for things that had been said, and kill switched it (they also said they would update what constituted a kill switchable instance and release that to the community, I don't believe that has occurred.)
While legion is killswitched for the entirety of the blood moon event only for bhvr to announce,3: One of the ways people try to make the devs sound anti-killer is take whichever killer (singular) has been treated the worst and extrapolate that to apply to all killers (plural).
that he wouldn’t be returning to 2v8 and half of the roster likely will never come to 2v8.4: Survivors meanwhile just go their 5th class, so I'm sorry that killers will only end up with 20 or so possibilities of what to play.
-
@Slurp_Ramen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4083070#Comment_4083070
if I did just leave her there, high likelihood she either uses her unbreakable, or waits for her duo with wglf/mft.
If I did happen to find her duo with the anti slug build he can just plot twist/conviction under a pallet.
Haddie and 4th both are likely easier chases but that requires me to not only find them but eat their sprint bursts likely wasting a bunch of time and let the 1 scenario to play out un-pressured. So where’s the win condition here? Every time I run the game back in my head every play I come up a with is countered either by the map, my killer choice, or a perk. I guess I hope they decide to play bad or pick a high tier next time?
Every time I run the game back in my head every play I come up a with is countered either by the map, my killer choice, or a perk. I guess I hope they decide to play bad or pick a high tier next time?You're the only one who knows the full game, but this broadly is just part of DbD regardless of the role you play.
Trapper vs all meta SWF? Meme survivor perks vs sweaty Nurse? If one side sweats harder than the other in what they bring they'll have a pretty substantial advantage.
@Slurp_Ramen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4083074#Comment_4083074
you’re right, I technically dont have to chase anyone.
It just so happens she is the best position possible and was the worst player. The others simply either made themselves scarce or pre-ran and pre-dropped.
The time is constantly ticking, gens are constantly being done, there simply isn’t enough time to do what you suggest, especially on someone like trapper and on a map with no grass.And forgive me for misunderstanding, but doesn’t the bodyblocking already fall under using it aggressively. Whether basekit BT ran out or whether I decided to hit them or not, bodyblocking in that manner is inherently aggressive/weaponizing, no?
And forgive me for misunderstanding, but doesn’t the bodyblocking already fall under using it aggressively. Whether basekit BT ran out or whether I decided to hit them or not, bodyblocking in that manner is inherently aggressive/weaponizing, no?You're going a little overboard on how you portray what people say about DS.
Sure, a person with DS can run up and attempt to bodyblock the killer. It's just when compared to everything else they could be doing, its a pretty silly strategy. In your example the survivor has dedicated their entire build to trying to get in your way after being unhooked (and being this was a 2k doesn't really come off as having actually been meaningful).
Perks aren't broken just because they can gain value, they should, that's why they exist. Would you have been better off if the survivor had a chase focused build and it took longer to down them? A quick heal build to be at full health off hook and not even need the DH? Or a gen build where they don't even focus on you and just slam gens.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4082893#Comment_4082893
I agree with this actually. I hate playing against Trapper. I'd rather play against almost anyone. On some maps the traps are impossible to see and you just get nabbed for existing. It's even more aggravating when it's the auto reset add-on. I can't stand that in 2026 dbd I have to scope out the location of the basement and avoid it.
It's interesting, the feeling of running into an unknown area where I have no idea if there is a trap or not is as close as I get to feeling like DbD is a horror game.
But basement Trapper? Ugh.
-
Potential Energy runs into a pretty big problem:
Getting value out of it requires coordination to leave a gen unfinished to farm stacks.
Except, if the survivors are coordinated, then breaking a 3 gen that the killer has overcommitted to is not that difficult and there are better perks at doing it.
So its a perk that requires something, but if the survivors have it, then it defeats the purpose of having the perk.
-
Refusing to advance the game. Killer standing over a slug for no reason, all alive survivors just standing in the exit gate.
Attacks in end game chat.
I think if people are playing a sweaty build when they have other advantages is also a problem. Killer using best build when they have a 90+% WR or a comp level SWF running full meta builds - I think if you're on that level you should be giving yourself challenges instead of advantages.
-
There's an unpopular opinion thread going on, but probably my most unpopular opinion is that BHVR is right on how they reward MMR (well, survivors should be treated as a team, but I don't think that would make a huge difference) and the hockey comparison actually makes sense.
Games (whether video or sports) usually have some type of score objective / win condition. Other stats are interesting, but the only one that is truly relevant is the win/loss.
Usually the argument's against are something like 'so I could loop a killer for 8 minutes, but be left on hook and lose?' Sure. The thing is, a single trial is not meant to be the overall arbiter of a player's skill. Again, for many games a single data point is not really reflective of overall performance. That trial will ultimately be irrelevant when the data set is hundreds or thousands of games.
There are things they could address about MMR. Backfilling being one of the biggest. Probably consider increasing the time it takes to find a good MMR match. Consider how MMR is adjusted when players take a long break or play a new killer. As I said, treat the survivors as a team.
Unfortunately, given some of the other design decisions of the game, its always going to have more problems than other games, but the issue is not just boiling it down to win/loss.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4082009#Comment_4082009
I could say much the same of you but sure. I know for a fact that killers are capable of winning without excessive tunneling and slugging, but they just don't want to. I also know for a fact that anything that would actually be effective is considered "abusable" in your eyes.
But sure, we can end the discussion here. Have a nice day.
I know for a fact that killers are capable of winning without excessive tunneling and slugging, but they just don't want to.I think this is especially true given the argument.
You proposed a basekit Soul Guard, no pick up, just endurance. Even if we take it to mean the 8 second version, this gives the survivors all of 8 to seconds 'abuse'. So this is only usable if
A: the killer is just staying around the slug (what we want to prevent)
B: the killer chases a survivor to the slug, the survivor picks up the slug, the killer downs them again (what we want to prevent and easily avoidable on the killer's part)
C: A survivor in chase leads to the killer back to slug, survivors pick up, slug gets in the way, bodyblocks, and the killer swings through the endurance instead of waiting it out. Which brings up a couple of points
-that's three survivors not on gens
-there is a huge degree of risk with such an action. If the survivors mess up the timing on multiple moving parts they are now in a far worse situation than before (this is something I find funny about discussing survivors, simple mechanics are called babying the survivors, but also if there is any chance that survivors could try something risky requiring a high degree of timing, that's also a problem)
Any other situation (killer in chase, killer carrying another survivor, killer in a different section of the map, etc.) and its irrelevant.
-
@Xendritch said:
I don't really get the springtrap comparison tbh. Springtrap is only teleporting next to gens otherwise he's Huntress with a 100lbs hatchet. Jason meanwhile can appear anywhere there's a pallet or window and can actually be used in chase so he's waaaay more dynamic with his teleport. As for the projectile it seems nowhere near as weighted as the fire ax and reload seems faster and the pinning mechanic will have niche applications in forcing people into dead zones on certain maps.
Jason is in the same killer archetype sure but they're absolutely not the same killer. As for Jason being judged on his own it's interesting cuz if Jason came 6 or 7 years ago people would be losing there minds over how cool he is and to me at least he really feels like early DBD killer in his simplicity while still being strong and that's great considering the world of power bloat we've fallen into recently. I think it's just a case of it being 10th anniversary and Jason does nothing to reinvent the wheel that's disappointing to people.
But to me Jason is the most DBD killer we've gotten in a very long time. No weird counter items no far out killer props just jump scares, a reasonable chase power and brutal mini moris that feels strong and I think that's all Jason needed to be, that's how you create a killer as popular as Huntress and Hillbilly.
Also side note I know a lot of people are worried he'll be overpowered but you know his ass is gonna struggle on Lery's and Hawkins lol.
I don't really get the springtrap comparison tbh. Springtrap is only teleporting next to gens otherwise he's Huntress with a 100lbs hatchet. Jason meanwhile can appear anywhere there's a pallet or window and can actually be used in chase so he's waaaay more dynamic with his teleport. As for the projectile it seems nowhere near as weighted as the fire ax and reload seems faster and the pinning mechanic will have niche applications in forcing people into dead zones on certain maps.Jason is in the same killer archetype sure but they're absolutely not the same killer.This seems to be what people are saying about being a powercrept version of Springtrap.
He's got a projectile, but it's a little better.
He's got a teleport, but it's a little better.
Will that pan out in the PTB and (more importantly the live release), I don't know. I'm sure the smaller differences will become important, but a first look at the killers just make Jason looks like a Springtrap with some of the downsides removed.
-
The comparison to Springtrap is interesting. I don't think the game has much room for anything truly unique at this point, but kind of disappointing to think about a repeat exactly one year later.
I never like the idea of Jason teleporting, but kind of accepted that it was inevitable. I was expecting multiple powers, thought there would be more (i.e. four weak powers instead of two strong powers), but not really surprised with the direction.
-
@ShanoaLegendaryPlz said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4081267#Comment_4081267
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/LYFG2YPOF9OY/screenshot-20260525-034456-samsung-browser.jpg
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/39OTRRL8RS9D/screenshot-20260525-034643-samsung-browser.jpg
The rights seem to be all over the place lol, on google it said jason universe has the rights to pamela. My search was "what characters does Jason universe own"
To be the 'don't put to much trust in AI guy'
Google seems to be drawing heavily from the reddit thread "PSA: Confused about "Jason Universe"? Let me explain:" by Slxsher. Now maybe they know exactly what they are talking about, but there aren't any citations (i.e. Horror Inc employee says X). Even in the thread I see disagreements about what may or may not be true and lack of certainty over other things.
So when we're saying 'google' we're really saying reddit.
-
I think we're going to get a little bit of multiple things killer, like Dracula/Vecna. Not sure if this will be done by a power wheel, or just giving him a variety of powers.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4081017#Comment_4081017
Some people just aren’t satisfied unless they are escaping a majority of their matches (at much higher rates than the average 40%) and because they don’t play killer, they don’t care how negatively it affects the killer experience.
I'm baffled that people are saying this in the same thread where the Killer playerbase decrees that they slug specifically to avoid Survivor perks that activate with hook states and because it's super effective. And the only solution they propose is to nerf survivors and/or those perks even more. It's like they're never satisfied unless they get a 100% kill rate.
I'm baffled that people are saying this in the same thread where the Killer playerbase decrees that they slug specifically to avoid Survivor perks that activate with hook states and because it's super effective.It's a lot easier to complain that the other side 'wants it easy' then to admit to wanting something easy for oneself. That is the central crux that most people seem to try and avoid.
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4080983#Comment_4080983
I wonder the same thing myself. I would much rather be slugged than hooked. Most of the matches I’ve been in where killer tries to slug everyone have been losses for the killer because none of the survivors ever get progressed towards elimination. If every single survivor gets slugged that’s far more of an inability of the survivors last more than 5 seconds in chase and not pick up their downed teammates.
slug everyone have been losses for the killer because none of the survivors ever get progressed towards eliminationIf the game is just about winning/losing, okay.
I was in a trial awhile back against a slugging Krasue. It was an overall bad night and this was one of the few matches that was a win (because there was an exponential in play), but it was so boring and tedious. Get slugged, move to the exponential, get up, killer regresses gens, move in, progress gens, chase, down, back to exponential, killer regresses gens, etc.
There's no excitement in a game like that, very little tension. Hooks give you something substantially different. It doesn't repeat on and on, there's a clear progression three stages that impact how you play. On top of that, you have a far more meaningful ticking clock while on hook that creates a sense of tension, not just the boredom of being slugged.
And again, survivors won, but I had a lot more fun in some of the losing trials then I did this one.
-
Will die if left alone for 210 seconds (3 minutes 30 seconds)You might want to double check your numbers there. You start on stage 1, not stage 0 when hooked (70 x 2, not 70 x 3).