crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
Verbose: You've got a good point, if you could just keep it short. You provide a 15% boost to other survivor actions within an 8m radius, but for every 10 seconds you are around them decrease it by 5% to a -25%.
Skepticism: You have trouble believing the whole situation. You cleanse totems 200% faster, but heal actions on you are 50% slower.
Wrestler: You've got a background in grappling, you just weren't that good. If no survivor has been killed and you are on your second hook state, when the killer downs you they are stunned for 15 seconds. Afterwards, you are automatically moried.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626723#Comment_3626723
Design wise - the above is the right design because it supports everything that has happened up to that point.Does it? we have pulled this off with only 1 survivor + 1 on the hook, the one not on the hook was on death hook. So at that point, following your logic, the we should just have die because the killer have the upper hand, do i have that part right?
Does is? we have pulled this off with only 1 survivor + 1 on the hook, the one not on the hook was on death hook. So at that point, following your logic, the we should just have die because the killer have the upper hand, do i have that part right?"The we should have just die"
No, I never said that. You're misrepresenting. There is a massive difference between "has earned an advantage because of what has happened in the game" and "just win".
If the killer has one on hook and only survivor left to rescue, the killer has a significant advantage. Nearly unstoppable to get at least one more kill if they camp the hook. Slightly less of an advantage if you are on comms. Much less of a an advantage if the killer plays nice and refuses to camp.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with them having an advantage, even a monumental advantage, because of what happened in the game up to that point.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626676#Comment_3626676
I'm trying to understand what you are saying because it sounds like you are talking about a different topic.
I don't think anyone really doubts that a survivor hooked near the exit with a healthy team that is not trapped within the gate is almost certainly going to get out. There's a few extreme plays a killer could try, especially killers like Trickster or Wesker, but the survivors have the advantage. We're not debating the factual nature, we're on the game design.
To be fair, you were the one quoting me and saying i was wrong, why my claim have always been the same, i guess we have a misunderstanding here.
I almost just typed 'seriously', because it seems so obvious to me, but I'll do my best to answer in more detail.
Did you ever play a game when you were a child where the person losing was like 'next score is worth 9 points' (or however much they were losing by?). That's basically what we're talking about here. Over the course of the game the survivors have gotten themselves into an incredibly advantageous position. They've outplayed the killer. It would be crazy if we just reverted to a 'both sides have an equal chance to win'.
As others have said, it would be like if the killer got an elimination all other survivors got a massive buff ensuring they still had a 50/50 chance of escaping from the exit gates. When one side succeeds at an objective in a game it should increase their chances of winning, when they fail it should decrease their chances.
But the way dbd works, the killer gets "stronger" (meaning they are getting closer to the 4k) as the game progresses and are getting more kills closer to the end game than early game.
I dont think you could say "hey we did four gens and the killer have 0 kills, so they lost".
On top of that, there are some killer builds that are all about the endgame.
But the way dbd works, the killer gets "stronger" (meaning they are getting closer to the 4k) as the game progresses and are getting more kills closer to the end game than early game.The stronger nature though alters when the survivors get the gens done, it tilts dramatically when they have the gates open. As I said in an earlier post
"Over a course of DbD the match tilts in the killers favor, unless the gens get done in which case it swings back in the survivors favor (barring an end game killer build). That's the game design."
That covers a lot of what you lay out. It's even been discussed on the first page that if the killer does have an end game build a hook close to the exit gate is by no means an easy escape for the survivors. That was one of the things that was pointed out to the OP on arguments about endurance, that NOED is a viable path to turn the situation around.
I dont think you could say "hey we did four gens and the killer have 0 kills, so they lost".But that's a big jump from what anyone is saying. Every time the survivors "win" something (examples being: exceed the average in a chase, stealth the killer, make a pickup save, etc.) the game should tilt in their favor. Every time the killer wins something (examples being: have a quick chase, pull off a pop on a high pressure gen, get something like devour hope going, etc.) the game should tilt in their favor. It's a little trickier than that given the asymmetrical nature, but that's the way games work.
If we've gotten to the point where the killer has picked up a survivor, they are not on death hook, the only viable hooks are close to a gate, that gate is open, there are multiple survivors left alive, the killer is unable to push those survivors out, and the killer does not have an end game build:
Factually - the survivors will almost certainly make the rescue
Design wise - the above is the right design because it supports everything that has happened up to that point.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626641#Comment_3626641
Did you read this? i would not call it an exaggeration, this is factual. https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3625847/#Comment_3625847
The killer can leave the survivor slugged and try and injure others first.Depending on how good they are, they manage to get the slugged survivor up while killer chases one the other people. OR They heal up and come back, it takes 16 secs to heal up, in those 16 secs the killer pick up the survivor who is now crawled away from the hook, by the time. Each hook state is 30 secs, more than enough time to heal up and perform a rescure.
Should all hooks have an equal chance to kill?Why not?
Did you read this? i would not call it an exaggeration, this is factual.I'm trying to understand what you are saying because it sounds like you are talking about a different topic.
I don't think anyone really doubts that a survivor hooked near the exit with a healthy team that is not trapped within the gate is almost certainly going to get out. There's a few extreme plays a killer could try, especially killers like Trickster or Wesker, but the survivors have the advantage. We're not debating the factual nature, we're on the game design.
Why not?So this is in response
Should all hooks have an equal chance to kill?Because the rest of the game matters.
I almost just typed 'seriously', because it seems so obvious to me, but I'll do my best to answer in more detail.
Did you ever play a game when you were a child where the person losing was like 'next score is worth 9 points' (or however much they were losing by?). That's basically what we're talking about here. Over the course of the game the survivors have gotten themselves into an incredibly advantageous position. They've outplayed the killer. It would be crazy if we just reverted to a 'both sides have an equal chance to win'.
As others have said, it would be like if the killer got an elimination all other survivors got a massive buff ensuring they still had a 50/50 chance of escaping from the exit gates. When one side succeeds at an objective in a game it should increase their chances of winning, when they fail it should decrease their chances.
-
If you are trying to win the game, nothing should be considered toxic. Even the elements of the game I find very unfun, I don't blame either side for pursuing, those issues are on the game itself.
The only game things that are toxic are the drawing things out for no reason / mocking (staying at the exit gates, hump motion on downs), and even those don't justify hostile end game chat.
-
I think it would create two bad modes. My general playstyle is I want to try, I want the survivors to try, but I also don't want to be so intense on the game that I scream at another survivor for opening a chest or running a non-meta build. But I also don't want the level where people can just DC at will.
A ranked mode would interest me more as killer than survivor, but I also think I'd get bored of the game overall. I'd play all out, learn roughly how good I actually am compared to others, and then probably move on. It would be a very different vibe than DbD as it exists with trying to fill out various archives and challenges.
@LordGlint said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626646#Comment_3626646
I just know for me... I very rarely play SWF. I'm either soloQ or killer. I wouldn't mind queueing up for the mode that makes me think my teammates are actually going to do what they're suppose to do rather than wasting time or DCing if they go down. Would be great if I could start a match knowing everyone has the goal of doing the objective and escaping. So yeah... sign me up for the "sweaty try hard mode" where all 5 players are going to stick around til they either die or the match is over.
Separate thought... maybe instead of a DC penalty timer, people who constantly DC just get matched with other people who constantly DC. Surely they all had legitimate emergency reasons and matches with 5 constant DCers will do just fine.
I just know for me... I very rarely play SWF. I'm either soloQ or killer. I wouldn't mind queueing up for the mode that makes me think my teammates are actually going to do what they're suppose to do rather than wasting time or DCing if they go down.I never play SWF, I sympathize with the idea, I just don't necessarily think it would actually work out that way. If you do manage to end being ranked pretty high, you could count on good teammates, but I don't think that would be true for the lower levels. There I think you'd just guarantee having sweaty killers.
-
@C3Tooth said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626564#Comment_3626564
No, you're disingenuous my point.
- Survivors get beaten hard that 1 die at 5 Gens, should the other 3 survivors have 50% chance to win the match, by at least 2 or even all 3 escape?
- Killers get beaten hard to the point 4 survivors not on death hook, being healthy, many pallets are still around, Medkits still not being used yet. Should the killer have 50% chance to get 3 or 4K?
You keep saying the game isnt over yet. While the answer are already clear at both case: NO.
The chance for survivors to get 2 escape is zero percent, its all about 1 escape hatch (or not). The same case to killer, get beaten that hard should never win the game at that point.
If you think killers should have half a chance to get 3-4K in killers' case. You should think its fine that survivors should have half a chance to get 3 escape in survivors' case.
The chance for survivors to get 2 escape is zero percent, its all about 1 escape hatch (or not). The same case to killer, get beaten that hard should never win the game at that point.Its actually even more stark than you say, because even if the survivors have dominated the game up until that point, a killer can still snowball the survivors. Its far more common than the survivor comeback.
-
1: I don't want to go back to the era of long DbD games. Killers lost Overbrine, losing CoH fits the way games work.
2: From a balance perspective I think killers overestimated CoH. Especially when it was on the other side of the map, being a survivor trying to break a 3 gen or rescue someone on hook and watching the others run to the other side of the map and then slowly heal was basically knowing the game was lost.
So I don't want to go back to it because I don't want to see the other survivors abandoning more important objectives to go heal, especially at slower rates.
3: I think some people are being silly worrying about the upcoming 3 gen change with the gens having charges. But if CoH was back with self heal, they'd have a much more legitimate concern.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626613#Comment_3626613
I think i have written an answer here - https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626595/#Comment_3626595
I don't really think it address it.
Why should a hook not be a chance to secure a kill??You might aswell argue that as soon as 3 gens are done the survivors should win, because the killer could not stop it?Should all hooks have an equal chance to kill?
To say the killer has no chance to kill is also an exaggeration. Let's throw out everything that has happened in the game up until the point of the down.
The killer can leave the survivor slugged and try and injure others first.
The killer can hook and instead of camping the hook try and intercept the other survivors first.
The killer can try and body block the exit gate instead of the hook and hold the survivor until the basekit endurance wears off.
The killer can do the straight forward hook camp and hope the survivors mess it up.
Are any of those likely? No, but that's the point we are at in the game. Over a course of DbD the match tilts in the killers favor, unless the gens get done in which case it swings back in the survivors favor (barring an end game killer build). That's the game design.
Or perhaps the game should just end as the last gen is done ?All games, whether they are sports, board games, or computer, have a point where the game is fundamentally over. Outside very rare instances is that moment of ending literally the very last moment of the game. Just because there are points where each side really only has a hail mary option is not a failure, its an inevitable part of competitive games.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626263#Comment_3626263
Im not sure you understand what i am saying?
Try reading my comments again SLOWLY, - im not talking as a killer.
I'm saying that if I or someone from my SWF is hooked near an exit gate, we have a free escape.
Depending on what perks we use and the map configuration, the killer might not have a choice to get one of us to a hook that's far enough from an exit gate so that they can secure the kill in any way, thus ensuring a free escape for us....
I did give a pretty good example here on how it works - https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3625847/#Comment_3625847
Are you really saying that you have trouble escaping, if you are hooked near the exit gate in the endgame??
or saving someone that is??
I'm saying that if I or someone from my SWF is hooked near an exit gate, we have a free escape.But is that a problem?
If a survivor goes done in the corner of the basement on death hook its a free kill for the killer. That statement seems silly to type because obviously it should be, calling it a free kill negates all of the other things that happened up that point of the game.
If we've got to the point of the game where a killer's only option is to hook a survivor near the gate, that survivor isn't on death hook, and the killer doesn't have a build that is able to capitalize on the situation - at this point survivors have given themselves a considerable advantage because of how they played. They played well which means they should have a higher chance of escaping. Everything that has occurred up that point is the reason for it.
To use sports as an example: if a basketball team was losing by 10 with 30 seconds remaining, the game is almost certainly done. Barring an absolutely epic collapse by the winning side, or legendary play by the losing side, its over. If they were up by 30 with 30 seconds even the worst players in the world wouldn't make a difference. But that doesn't mean one side is getting a free win, there was a whole game that occurred before this that needs to be taken into consideration.
-
I'm going to use a quote that I like from Neil Gaiman (an author):
when people tell you something's wrong or doesn't work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong.We are all experts on what we find fun. Game development (or any type of creative endeavor) is much harder than people make it out to be. Working on the game is the devs job, they spend a lot of time thinking about the game. Even those who play the game a ton are still limited by their personal perspective and desires, while the devs have a much larger community to think of.
This isn't to say they don't make mistakes, they do, frequently, as does anyone who does creative design. If the community (which is far larger than these forums) is telling them something isn't working, the community is right. Suggestions on how to fix it though are a much more difficult task than people think it is.
Which doesn't mean we shouldn't make suggestions, its always possible someone has an idea / point that hasn't crossed their mind, but the expectations that people put onto their 'how to fix the game' posts should be tempered down quite a bit (I say this as a person who has fallen into this and once got a warning for headlining a post 'the devs design philosophy is crazy').
I'll throw in another quote from Sid Meier (game Civilization series)
Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game -
Don't worry about accidental tunneling.
1: If you're new, you're playing new survivors as well. While I disagree with a lot of what killer mains say, survivors do have to take some responsibility for their own actions. A survivor on death hook does need to learn to be more cautious, survivors not on death hook need to learn to take risks. If you refuse to target a person even when they make obvious mistakes, they're going to grow the assumption that its not their fault and any future killers who play differently are being toxic.
2: It doesn't feel good as a survivor to be spared. I'll compare it to basketball. If I was playing basketball against someone and they gave me a 10 point handicap, and I won by 6, did I really win? Mercy in the game has an important place, but playing around others poorly can also be off putting.
3: If you find being killer too easy to start, run fewer perks or give yourself some other type of handicap. Eventually you'll get to higher MMRs and if you've gotten into the habit of playing intentionally poorly, you're going to lose games because you skipped an opportunity.
Number 3 is the thing I wish someone had told me when I started off. I find it much more entertaining to give myself an intentionally weak build as killer and then play to the best of my ability, then to give myself a meta build but also have a set of rules I follow to keep the game interesting.
-
@C3Tooth said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3626472#Comment_3626472
The strength of the perk isnt about regression, its about you dont spend 20sec to walk across the map to kick an abandoned with progressing Gen, then going back to find a chase.
Its about a survivor spend 14sec to cleanse.
Its about a survivor would prefer to get rid it first and spend a bunch of time to find.
The result isnt consistence, that's why people dont like it. PGTW requires you to spend time to walk and kick a Gen, all that time could end another chase. Or survivors could healing next to Deadlock Gen. But they cant do anything by actively running around and cleansing.
The buff on Ruin is already enough, its the totem spawn that should be buffed. Fixed locations (like shack, under Swamp rocks...) should go.
Fixed locations (like shack, under Swamp rocks...) should go.I don't think that would actually be feasible. Not talking balance or anything, I just don't think it could happen. Like the totems could theoretically spawn anywhere in the map?
-
Buff her crouch speed.
-
Nerf every other killer but Pig to balance things out. (j/k)
One meta kind of off topic note about Pig: her Iri addons are, in my opinion, very well designed. They have clear benefits and losses. You gain a power and give something up in return. There's no real super sweat version of Pig were you just give yourself a bunch of powerful bonuses at no cost like you can with some other killers. I think if more killers were treated like that on the addon front the balance issues would be clearer.
-
Design wise its not a bad choice, but its also not inherently a good choice. It all about balancing the risk / reward and gameplay. Ultimate powers are something that a killer would play towards, meaning their basekit to that point should be weaker.
You mention Knight for example, he would be a bad way to do it my opinion. What makes the Knight unique is his ability to engage as an M1 killer while using his guards to either help his chase, protect a gen, or engage other survivors. If he had an ultimate power his base kit would have to be weakened, which would make him ineffectual.
Nemesis already does charge up his power, its just not a single instance, once he has it, he has it.
Some killers have what you want, its just not as strong/important as Main Event. Legion's fifth hit down for example.
Like I said its neither good nor bad. Having a killer like Blight is just always strong is good, but also having killers like Oni who enter periods of being really strong is also good. You want a mix.
If you were going to add an ultimate power to a killer that already exists, they would probably need a rework. I'd vote for Nurse, which some others have mentioned. She works like a normal killer until she charges up, then she gets blinks (either for a time or a series of charges).
-
1: People cycle in and out of any company. There might be a few big devs, but there are hundreds of people at BHVR.
2: The live service model is all about change. Moving things in and out of the meta. It's not about getting the game/killers to some perfect balanced state, but to keep things continually changing.
3: The devs, while slow, do generally take the pulse of the player base.
-
I frequently play a hit and run style which might lessen the impact. Grim Embrace and DMS are most powerful if the survivors don't have anything else useful to do. If survivors are injured they just use the grim embrace time to heal. But if all the survivors are healthy I can see how powerful the slow down will be.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3625355#Comment_3625355
You'd think that, but 2 people slamming out gens and you never getting hooks is certainly not a win. Not sure who you are watching, but I see upper echelon players hit by background player all the time and it's almost always a visible frustrated look because they know it was entirely unavoidable.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3625364#Comment_3625364
Game sense can't predict someone is half a map away and will suddenly zip into your face the moment you pick up. As for walls, I already said that walls are the only counter, but survivors going down at a wall or not is entirely in their control. Higher mmr, all survivors have to do is if they feel they sre going down, go down at a pallet or run out in the open and get downed. 100% guaranteed to be saved if their teammates had BGP.
If you two are never seeing this situation, then yall are at an MMR level that's not relevant to what I'm talking about. Granted, the game is balanced around average players, so there is that, and average survivors don't utilize BGP or think to go down out in the open or at a pallet. If yall are talking about average players, then yes, you two absolutely have a point. I'm not talking about average players, however.
You'd think that, but 2 people slamming out gens and you never getting hooks is certainly not a win. Not sure who you are watching, but I see upper echelon players hit by background player all the time and it's almost always a visible frustrated look because they know it was entirely unavoidable.Let's assume everything you say is absolutely correct and survivors are able to save each other consistently.
How in the world is 8 regressions going to make a difference?
Where this thread is at with those opposed to the 3 gen mechanic is kind of silly. We're supposing that the survivors are élite tier running rescue after rescue against a helpless killer, but these same survivors foolishly 3 gen themselves and have no idea how to break it.
Are the survivors good or are they bad? What scenario are we talking about?
High tier killers are getting a buff. You're getting increased gen regression. Is it significant enough to stop the uber gen rush squads? Probably not, but its exactly the thing killers have been complaining about needing, more base kit regression.
Even 3 genning is more powerful, its just limited. Your ability to hold the 3 gen is now stronger, you do more damage on a kick and survivors can't just tap it to stop the regression, Yes, there is a hypothetical limit to the time now, but you have more of a chance to actually down the survivors / create a snowball than you previously did.
Killers are getting a pretty clear buff and are somehow trying to talk BHVR out of it.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3625202#Comment_3625202
Fair thoughts, but the problem is that this also affects perks that don't even do gen damage but require kicks such as Nowhere to Hide or Trail of Torment. Not only that, but both can even literally provide no benefit (such as no one being near near gen on nowhere to hide, or otherwise distortion being in play).
On top of all of that, killers have a million and one things to worry about and balance, and now there is a generator just sitting there and they have to feel discouraged from kicking it? Playing killer is feeling more like jumping through loops of what they are not allowed to do so survivors can just keep standing there teabagging. Can't grab of hook, can't kick gens, have to stand way over there if someone is hooked, can't hit people off hook, and so on. While some of that definitely was needed (ie basekit BT), killer is constantly being bombarded of things they aren't allowed to do and it's becoming and increasingly more frustrating experience where every patch has the hands tied behind your back becoming tighter and tighter.
Fair thoughts, but the problem is that this also affects perks that don't even do gen damage but require kicks such as Nowhere to Hide or Trail of Torment. Not only that, but both can even literally provide no benefit (such as no one being near near gen on nowhere to hide, or otherwise distortion being in play).These perks just got a buff (and killer overall got a buff). You've got enhanced gen kicking power and harder for survivors to regress a gen - so even if you don't get the perk value, kicking itself is buffed meaning going around kicking gens is more valuable. Trail of Torment especially is buffed, it just got a 5 second extension.
Hypothetically, I can see a killer running 4 gen regression perks very rarely running out of 8 charges on a gen while playing normally, but I doubt it will happen. Kicking a gen though 8 times and still needing to kick it a 9th (especially being gen kicking will be rarer with no gen tapping)? There's just not enough time in the game for that to occur. The only way that happens is with the dedicated 3 gen from the beginning, the exact thing the change is saying it should prevent.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624950#Comment_3624950
Look, i don't say this to be insulting, and please don't take it that way. But it is clear that you aren't going against teams like this and so likely you aren't at an MMR where it matters to you.
Losing 3 gens in the first chase is expected at high level. And it doesn't take a lot of resources to do it. Holding shift + w, not using pallets, windows, nothing, means that a killer who doesn't have a ranged attack, will take around 60 seconds to down a survivor and hook them. Now factor in that every forced pallet break adds 20 seconds to that time, and then if they run to comp corner you probably add another 5 seconds or so. All it takes if for a survivor to shift + w, run to shack pallet, predrop it, and then run to comp corner, get downed, then enough time went by that the other 3 survivors finished 3 gens.
Now granted, this is playing against optimal teams that actually do gens. Aren't playing immersed claudette hiding in a corner, or working challenges, or doing totems for no reason etc.
I know that you are going to say "this is rare" etc. But not, its not, not at my MMR, its pretty much 25-50% of my games that are like this. This is why 3 genning is so important to the core game, because the game is designed in such a way that the killer is basically a wet noodle in the beginning of the game. That is of course unless they are playing nurse or blight. But i'm not talking about those killers, i'm talking about the other 95% of the killers in the game.
Look, i don't say this to be insulting, and please don't take it that way. But it is clear that you aren't going against teams like this and so likely you aren't at an MMR where it matters to you.What are you talking about? I'm literally conceding to the idea that we're talking about an absolute, top tier team and explaining why this change (the limit of regression) will have absolutely no impact.
Please listen to what I'm saying here because your post doesn't sound like you read what I wrote.
Let's take every single thing you say as true. 3 gens get done, very few resources are used, etc.
So that's our scenario, now explain to me, how having only 8 regressions is going to make a difference. I don't want to be insulting either, but your post doesn't even sound like it is responding to what I typed.
Right now, status quo game, survivors should be able to finish those remaining gens before the killer can regress them more than 8 times. If they've got resources, they have coordination, the killer is not getting 9 regressions. Survivors incentive is to still go fast, every second they are not getting gens done is still time the killer can be getting hits or downs.
And even if this is a SWF that is extremely cautious and resets frequently and the killer refuses to leave, the survivors are going to win. Their ability to reset and go back to gens is superior to the killer's ability to regress them if the killer doesn't get downs. At the absolute extreme end of the chess merchant spectrum, all it has done is sped up what was going to happen.
The truth is the killer just got a buff to their chance to defend this scenario because until they hit 8 regressions their ability to defend this limited area has increased substantially (higher gen kick damage, no tap to stop regression).
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624671#Comment_3624671
In a 3 gen scenario, with a team of survivors that communicate, this is absolutely possible. You simple call out when the killer starts running to someone else, that person preruns really hard, meaning that they are probably running at 24-30 meters away. Do you know how long it takes a killer to catch up to a survivor that is 30 meters away to hit them? 44 seconds. And that is just for a single hit. Now to down them, its another 20 seconds if they just shift + w.
By the time the killer walks back to the gen that the other survivors are doing, that gen will be finished. And, if the killer abandons the chase, that survivor just calls out to the others that the killer dropped chase, and they get ready to run super early again, that injured survivor (if the killer actually injured them) just gets healed up, and they repeat until the killer can't regress the gens anymore and they slowly get the gens worked on until they are complete while being almost 100% safe.
You don't even need pallets or windows or anything.
Then factor in that these teams communicate super hard, and you are likely going to get 3 gens done for the first down. The killer stands 0 chance against these teams now if they want to drag the game out.
As for the AFC mechanic, it was pretty abusable at launch before they added the grace period on it, so now its a lot less abusable which is nice. However i have had a handful of matches where someone runs me to the survivor who is hooked in say, basement shack, i start mindgaming, but instead of running the tile, they just leave the tile to somewhere else, so while i'm mindgaming a survivor that isn't there the timer is ticking away. However this has been less of a problem due to the grace period and the better vertical detection on camping.
Lastly, Against these top tier teams, yeah MFT was not quite a buff, but it is still strong. When i face these coordinated teams, they typically run dead hard/DS/MFT/hyperfocus(or some healing perk) you know, all those dead perks that kept getting nerfed? I wonder why top teams continue to run them....
You simple call out when the killer starts running to someone else, that person preruns really hard, meaning that they are probably running at 24-30 meters away.And they finish the gens long before the killer gets to 8 regressions in this scenario.
Either the killer chases the survivor, in which case a gen gets finished, or the killer doesn't chase a survivor and rotates back and forth between gens, in which case the gens still get finished, just slower.
Survivors ability to do gens exceeds killer's ability to regress them. Whether a regression limit exists or not has nothing to do with that. All that changes is it prevents a killer from dragging out the 3 gen into the 30/40 minute game times (though the buff to kick damage has made the initial holding of the 3 gen much stronger).
Then factor in that these teams communicate super hard, and you are likely going to get 3 gens done for the first down. The killer stands 0 chance against these teams now if they want to drag the game out.But why would they drag the game out? If you've done 3 gens and the killer is just getting a down either
A: there are very few resources left, meaning downs will happen a lot quicker
B: the survivor ran the killer so well that they still have tons of resources left, meaning the killer has lost and doesn't need 8 kicks
Even if we're talkin an elite SWF, trying to draw out the gens doesn't make sense. The killer's only real chance here is to create some kind of snowball, running back and forth between gens isn't going to do anything. Likewise the SWF has no reason to slow things down, if they drag the game out all they are doing is giving the killer a chance.
As for the AFC mechanic, it was pretty abusable at launch before they added the grace period on itIf by launch you mean PTB, there's a reason they are run, but also it was barely an issue even then. The timer was pretty generous and that was with killer's not even knowing the bounds / intentionally playing around with it.
-
@FFirebrandd said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624769#Comment_3624769
You seem to have forgotten two things. First, For the People saves, Flashlight saves, Flashbang saves, Pallet saves, Head On saves, Unbreakable, DS, Body blocking/Breakout, Boil Over, and Sabo saves all exist. So it is entirely possible to have surge go off 8 times and not have 8 hooks. Second, if those 8 hooks are arranged just wrong, all 4 survivors could be still alive which is not winning yet in just about anyone's book.
1: How frequently are survivors being saved in your scenario? Even if they manage to rescue half the time, which would be a sizable accomplishment, you've still gotten four hooks.
2: For surge to proc on all 8 of these downs and saves this also means that survivors have to continually be going down by the same gen which survivors either have to have put a lot of progress on or they need to continually working on it to get it to count as a gen regression event.
3: Even if this happens, was the killer able to get zero hooks on the other four gens survivors needed to finish?
4: Even if all the above is true, the survivors will basically need to do 6 gens to escape with how much time will be bled off the last gen. If that's not enough time to turn the game in the killer's favor they are pretty clearly outmatched and having additional gen regressions wouldn't make a difference.
@supersonic853 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624692#Comment_3624692
The only problem i can see is the nicher perks that involve regression. Machine learning. Trail of torment. Eruption/nowhere to hide for aura reveal. Surge for m1s. These are restricted to regression for some other benefit then just endless kicking. And they can easily hit the cap by just being used for their intended purpose. Surge may be the biggest since it can hit like 3 gens at once with one proc. But as long as i don't randomly run into the anti-kick stopping me for me playing normally should be fine. Maybe they could bump it to 10? Not sure. I do think the hard limit needs to be there just 8 might not be the right number.
I do think the hard limit needs to be there just 8 might not be the right number.I mean we have the PTB to test it out, but 8 regressions per gen is a giant number.
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624747#Comment_3624747
So what happens if survivors accidentally make a 3 gen, and then decide their strategy is to purposely repair the 3 gen in short bursts of time, and excessively hide, until the generators become damage immune?
So what happens if survivors accidentally make a 3 gen, and then decide their strategy is to purposely repair the 3 gen in short bursts of time, and excessively hide, until the generators become damage immune?The same thing that happens already if the survivors rush in, fix gens, and rush out and the killer doesn't chase. They win. Since the end of Overbrine and chess merchant 4 survivors can break a 3 gen without too much trouble if the killer refuses to chase. If the killer is not getting downs the survivor gen repair speed will exceed killers ability to regress.
The only reason a killer might even get to 8 kicks in the new scenario is because they just got a buff to gen regression. That's actually given the killer more time to punish survivors who accidently 3 gen.
-
@Green_Sliche said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624512#Comment_3624512
You seem to forget that it's not about kicks alone. There are perks that will contribute to event burning. Stack few of them and suddenly getting a gen that can't be regressed becomes a quite real possibility.
All this talk would not happen if they limited it to a real 3 gen situation, but they didn't. This change is also a buff to survivors because there will be no such thing as a bad generator repair. Survivors will now get rewarded for repairing less risky gens that killer is less likely to defend and once it's 3 ''dangerous'' gens left to repair they will simply force killer burn whatever remaining events left and eventually get the gens done.
You seem to forget that it's not about kicks alone. There are perks that will contribute to event burning. Stack few of them and suddenly getting a gen that can't be regressed becomes a quite real possibility.I'm not forgetting about it, I'm just trying to discuss the situations you present. Throw in any of the other perks that trigger gens to pop and you as the killer have been forwarding your objective by quite a bit.
All this talk would not happen if they limited it to a real 3 gen situation, but they didn't.Why not?
People are here giving you math talking about how much time it would take or how many downs would need to be achieved to actually run a gen out of charges. You're just saying it will happen without really laying out the how and why.
This change is also a buff to survivors because there will be no such thing as a bad generator repair.The overall change is a substantial killer buff. Every killer just got double the kick regression and gen tapping disappeared.
-
@CrypticGirl said:
I really wonder how this will affect Ruin. If a Survivor keeps short repairs on it and leaves it eight times, does the regression stop even if the hex is still active?
Otherwise, I like the changes.
Ruin is not effected.
From Peanits on the first page of the dev update thread:
It is not. Only things that cause an instant 2.5% regression or more (not counting Survivors missing skill checks) count as a regression event. Since Ruin has no instant regression and only gradually removes progress, it does not count as a regression event. -
@H2H said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623740#Comment_3623740
They probably didn’t intentionally lie. It’s more likely that they’re just extremely bad at the game and don’t understand it at all.
@woundcowboy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623904#Comment_3623904
This has been true for the life of the game. Most devs aren’t good at their own game, so that’s not a big deal. The problem is that these devs think they know better than people who play, which is how we get disasters like Skull Merchant.
Like everyone, I've got my problems with some dev decisions, but I am always amused/amazed by the stance that you can be bad at game design and still stumble into an incredibly financially successful video game.
-
I'd combine them with keys and give the new item greater variety in aura reading powers based on addons.
-
@GetEmLUNA said:
Why is the Killer being punished when Survivors can just run away and not do gens when there are 2 Survivors left? That's an issue and its larger than folks like the admit.
For a game full of casual players, a lot them really care about things that affect win rates, smh.
Why can't we get a refund for Dead By Daylight? For those of us who are disappointed with the product, why can't we just get our money back?
Why can't we get a refund for Dead By Daylight? For those of us who are disappointed with the product, why can't we just get our money back?If you've played less than 2 hours on Steam, you can return it for a refund.
If you've played more than 2 hours, you've probably gotten your money's worth.
@GetEmLUNA said:
I thought not attempting to do gens was ban worthy, because it halts the progress of the game. The same thing Killer is said to be doing leading to this nerf. When before in a DBD Dev video, some man and a woman who looks like Dwight spoke on how Killers can only hold up the game by body blocking Survivors so they can't move, which is not what 3 gen entail. So instead of just making it harder for Survivors to stall the game, I have to adapt and waste perk slots?
It's a 4 v 1, is it not? I have to outsmart 4 people, with 4 perk slots, 2 addons and a offering. Yet near the end of the game I have to chase because Survivors refuse to do gens. Even though Killers are being pushed now, for now chasing and being smart. Why should we have to chase around multi people when we can manipulate them into coming to us? You basically just told me to play better, yet Survivors, who have numbers on their side, can complain about 3 gens even if they never attempted to break it.
My issue isn't losing, its fairness. And this isnt really fair. In a 4 v 1, we have to outsmart 4 people, how are we supposed to do that when we get limited everytime we figure out a way to make going against 4 other humans to not be a chore?
Some Killers are becoming damn near unplayable. You pay for a character that it's pointless to use because the strat that made them not suck, is being reworked to make the side with 4 people, have a better experience.
My issue isn't losing, its fairness. And this isnt really fair. In a 4 v 1, we have to outsmart 4 people, how are we supposed to do that when we get limited everytime we figure out a way to make going against 4 other humans to not be a chore?You don't have to outsmart 4 people. Outside an uber level SWF, the fact that there are four different survivors causes them a ton of headaches. Being the stronger one against the uncoordinated 4 is a massive advantage.
Why should we have to chase around multi people when we can manipulate them into coming to us?Neither side has presumption that it is their responsibility to initiate an action. If the killer is standing on a 3 gen and the survivors are looking at him waiting for him to move, both sides are allowed to stand there and wait. The killer will eventually win if everyone is willing to let it go the full hour.
Why should we have to chase around multi people when we can manipulate them into coming to us?Are we in "chess merchant" territory?
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623744#Comment_3623744
Its not 8 kicks, it 8 "regression events" which means that those "8 regression events" are going to fly by. The actual strat for survivors now might be to intentionally 3 gen themselves, and then force the killer into the point where they can't regress gens anymore.
They "fixed" the problem of 3 genning by making 3 genning a survivor tactic instead of a killer one.
The actual strat for survivors now might be to intentionally 3 gen themselves, and then force the killer into the point where they can't regress gens anymore.I thought 'SWFs will exploit anti-face camp' and 'MFT nerf will actually be a buff' were the most outlandish arguments I would see, but 2024 is off to a strong start.
How in the world does this happen? Have survivors suddenly gotten infinite downs and pallets? If they are running around tapping gens why is the killer kicking these low progress gens? And not just kicking once, but 8 times?
Killers are getting a gen regression buff.
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623780#Comment_3623780
This isn't accurate, though. You're only allowing 4 uses of eruption per generator. Typical matches has way more cases of eruption triggering. It's even less eruption allowed if the killer also brings another gen damaging perk. This is significantly going to affect all kinds of killers. For example, if I down a survivor and surge hits a gen, and a survivor pops back on it, once I kick that generator to prime eruption, then once eruption triggers, I've already lost 3 of my 8 stacks for that generator. That could easily all happen within a 30 second time period. So in 30 seconds, I've already lost 3 stacks. If I go kick the gen to use eruption again, suddenly I've already lost 6 of my charges. That means every 2 times surge procs, I get one less eruption use for that generator. Surge was nerfed but was also changed to be able to apply multiple times in succession to take advantage of survivors out of position while injured. We are supposed to be using surge, a lower damage regression hit but multiple times. With this change, surge users will have their perks entirely disabled pretty darn quick.
As a reminder eruption REQUIRES a kick before it can be used, so every eruption use takes 2 charges up. That adds up fast in NORMAL gameplay! How in earth does this only affect killers who camp 3 gens at the beginning of the match? This affects every killer who uses a generator damage perk. Hell, it even hurts trail of torment users who usually can kick any generator to go undetectable. Even THAT perk will suddenly be disabled for the match eventually? This is silly.
Typical matches has way more cases of eruption triggeringYou're triggering eruption more than 4 times a match on a gen? That's a "typical match"?
Eruption has a cooldown of 30 seconds. That means, at absolute fastest case scenario you would have to kick the gen, chase and down a survivor, go back to the gen 30 seconds later and kick it again, get into another chase and down a survivor, go to the gen 30 seconds later and kick it, get into yet another chase and down, go back to the same gen 30 seconds later and kick it, and then get into another chase with a survivor and down them.
Even if we presume the average time to chase is 30 seconds and you kick a gen immediately after the eruption cooldown ends, that's four minutes of game play on just this one gen (for which you also got 60% regression not counting any passive regression). This presumes an absolute perfect scenario where you go back to the gen to kick it right as the timer expires, much more likely this scenario would take twice that long. Either you should have a bunch of dead survivors or they should have been doing the other gens while this was going on.
@TWiXT said:
I just thought of something... The killer brings in Hex: Ruin, and since the gens are now restricted to 8 separate regression events caused by either kicking or perks before they can no longer be regressed, Theoretically, does that mean a survivor can go to a gen, tap it, let Ruin start regressing it, and then keep tapping the gen until all 8 events are used up?
I mean yeah, the survivor has to repair 5% each time before letting Ruin do its thing again, but that's 40% of a gen repaired by essentially "tap" repairing it, and after the 8th time, nothing will make it lose progress anymore.
Upon realizing this, If it works the way I'm theorizing, I don't think I'll ever feel the need to cleanse Ruin ever again... Might as well change its name to Boon: Ruin.
Ruin is not a gen regression event.
@Krazzik said:
The proposed '3-gen solution' seems like it should genuinely nerf 3-genning killers while leaving 'normal' killers unaffected, but what about 3-gens caused by the survivors?
It seems like if survivors 3-gen themselves, it's no big deal anymore since they can just play it slow and defensive and burn through the killer's kicks.
This is exactly what many were worried about, as survivors 3-genning themselves and the killer capitalising on it was seen as fair. Now survivors can just do whatever gens they want and don't need to worry.
This is exactly what many were worried about, as survivors 3-genning themselves and the killer capitalising on it was seen as fair. Now survivors can just do whatever gens they want and don't need to worry.Let's say the survivors completely ignore 3 gens.
Let's say you as the killer don't just camp those gens.
This means while four other gens have been getting done you've been chasing survivors, getting downs and hooks, eating through resources, etc.
So let's say we get to the situation where there are 3 gens left.
If you've been at least partially successful in your chases up to this point, the 8 gen regression events you have on the gens will be more than enough. You're chases should be shorter and the survivors should be facing death hook scenarios. Either you finish them off here, or they get a gen done, but you're unlikely to regress any gen 8 times in this situation.
If on the other hand you've lost the chases badly and you have four healthy survivors, well the gen regression limit is irrelevant. Either the survivors are going to make a mistake allowing you to snowball, or they are going to finish the gens before you can regress them that many times. Survivors splitting up on gens can finish them well before the killer can run back and forth kicking them each 8 times.
8 regressions is a massive amount. Like AFC maybe this will trigger once every couple months for killers during the course of normal gameplay (and that's a big maybe, I think this would happen even less than accidental triggering of the AFC), but realistically the only people who are triggering that are 3 gen campers from the start.
-
Here's @Peanits comment from the first page of the dev update thread
It is not. Only things that cause an instant 2.5% regression or more (not counting Survivors missing skill checks) count as a regression event. Since Ruin has no instant regression and only gradually removes progress, it does not count as a regression event. -
@Xernoton said:
You know, it's a good thing when these mechanics don't come into play, right? They are not supposed to interfere with normal gameplay but to prevent the absolute extremes. Which is exactly what this will do.
No more 3 gen for all eternity. Eventually the killer will have used the 8 stacks on the last 3 gens and then you just progress. Just like the AFC stops face camping but doesn't do much in normal gameplay (or proxy camping).
I don't get it. There were a lot of complaints about how killers just defended 3 gens and it was insufferable. Now they add a mechanic to prevent something like this from happening but it's disregarded completely. Make it make sense.
The difference between this and anti-face camp is the killer buff.
AFC was a straightforward 'killer if you do this, you get punished'. To accomplish the anti 3-gen BHVR has given a buff to all other killers (higher gen kick regression, no gen taps to stop regression).
How much of a buff we'll need to wait and see until the final changes after the PTB.
Is it worth it (which presumes a trade off was necessary)? We'll see, I didn't run into 3 genning frequently enough since the end of Overbrine (especially a type that would be impacted by this change) to worry about it that much, but others might hit it a lot more than I do. Though that extra 2.5% on the gen regression will make the initial attempt to break the 3 gen even harder.
-
@Green_Sliche said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624453#Comment_3624453
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624454#Comment_3624454
Survivors trying to repair a particular set of gens and keep falling because killer interrupts them but doesn't get downs because there are still safe loops available. A standard game where survivors have to repair 5 gens. So by your logic killer should sacrifice gens that are easier to defend for the sake of survivor's comfort which they will gain once killer runs out of means of defending gens.
You want to limit gen regression so much - fine. Makes chases last less., but you don't want that too. All I see here is killers shouldn't be doing this and that because it causes discomfort to survivors. The fact that every patch is aimed at telling killer players how they should be playing just demonstrates where this is all going.
Survivors trying to repair a particular set of gens and keep falling because killer interrupts them but doesn't get downs because there are still safe loops available.So let's actually look at how this would play out. Killer comes across a gen and kicks it as survivors run. Killer chases, then sees that the gen is being repaired. Runs back, chases survivor off, repeat this a total of 8 times. Now because it takes 5 seconds to stop a gen from just auto regressing, this means that the survivor has to have been on the gen for at least five seconds.
So in a perfect hypothetical situation, to run out the gen charges would take 35 seconds of kick, leave for 5 seconds, and kick right as the survivor is finishing the 5 second repair without ever hitting or downing someone. This crazy scenario would require the killer to not chase and one survivor to be playing suicidality close to the gen. A much more realistic scenario would be two or three times that long if the killer was hyper focused on one gen (and hyper focusing on one gen should be a losing strategy). Which is more than enough time for survivors to finish the other end of a 3 gen before the gen kick limit ever comes in.
-
@Green_Sliche said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624412#Comment_3624412
Combine gen regression and gen kick perks, add a need to kick a gen that has a high progression accumulated and you get that scenario.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624426#Comment_3624426
Likewise.
I figured already this forums are just dominated by survivor mains so there's less and less reason to debate about fair balancing of this game.
Combine gen regression and gen kick perks, add a need to kick a gen that has a high progression accumulated and you get that scenario.Then give me the scenario where it happens.
Because lots of others have laid out the math where if you actually manage to get all of these gen regression events realistically all the survivors should be dead unless you are playing only to defend the 3 gen. The only other possibility I see is a survivor team running and resetting frequently, in which case they win anyway under the current setup, it just doesn't take as long.
-
@Green_Sliche said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624303#Comment_3624303
What makes you think you are successfully chasing ALL survivors from the gen every time? What about cases where there's one survivor hiding near and once you kick or make that gen regress he / she comes back, spends 4.5 seconds and stops regression?
I'm not against the entire idea being used when it should be, aka 3 gen, but I'm against the fact that it now allows survivors either abuse it or circumvent their poor choice of generator and allow them to hop on nearest gen in their sight. On top of that if that gen gets regressed often it is still beneficial to survivor because it will become immune to regression at some point which will make it impossible to be defended by killer, thus a free gen to repair.
I'm not against the entire idea being used when it should be, aka 3 gen, but I'm against the fact that it now allows survivors either abuse it or circumvent their poor choice of generator and allow them to hop on nearest gen in their sight. On top of that if that gen gets regressed often it is still beneficial to survivor because it will become immune to regression at some point which will make it impossible to be defended by killer, thus a free gen to repair.People are throwing numbers at you and you're talking about hypotheticals that could happen. Give me a game scenario where the killer runs out of the ability to regress the gen when the following isn't true:
A) they defended a 3 gen from the start, the exact thing this is meant to stop
B) the killer has not won the game
C) the survivors would not have won the game anyway under the old system
On B, I don't see a scenario where you can kick/down survivors enough that you haven't won. Even presuming a worst case scenario where the killer chased survivors from the start, they randomly fell into a 3 gen, the killer though managed zero downs during the entire game, they can still make survivors repair a generator twice basically to actually finish it.
Which leads us to scenario C - if you find yourself in this position where you have four coordinated survivors, and almost no hooks, they're going to win under the game right now. If they are that good at retreating and resetting they're going to break the 3 gen, except now they'll get it done in 15ish minutes instead of taking over 30.
-
@Green_Sliche said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624277#Comment_3624277
80 seconds of those wasted repaired gen time can now turn into gen that will never regress. Do they still count as wasted?
You assume that survivor has to be picked asap when it's being downed. Let's ignore 2 other survivors within your line of sight trying to get that 85%+ gen completed while you pick up and hook this downed survivor.
There are plenty of cases and situations in the game where you have to behave differently and resort to different tactics, depending on how fast or slowly things are taking place. It's never that simple.
You assume that survivor has to be picked asap when it's being downed. Let's ignore 2 other survivors within your line of sight trying to get that 85%+ gen completed while you pick up and hook this downed survivor.If you're chasing survivors away from gens, it goes right back to regressing now which is a benefit you didn't have before.
But this seems like exactly the situation BHVR is trying to stop where a killer is 100% on stopping the last gen from progressing. You down a survivor, you chase the others away, meanwhile the other survivor is picked up, they reset, and the whole thing happens again. Exactly how long do you want your games to last?
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624227#Comment_3624227
Come on. Everyone knows Nurse is a unique case. It was a bad faith argument that didn't warrant a response.
If Nurse was buffed to a point where 'average players' could consistently 2K with her for a 'fair kill rate' at all MMRs, she would be beyond broken at mid-high level play, let alone the top 1%.
None of this has been a good argument in favour of maintaining a 4 regression perk meta. I simply rolled my eyes and closed the thread.
It was a bad faith argument that didn't warrant a response.You didn't fall for a baited bad faith argument?
You're a superhero among forum users.
-
@Exxodus21 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624088#Comment_3624088
A killer will burn through 8 "regression events" not gen kicks in no time at all if they're specifically defending the last 3 gens. 4 survivors have a massive advantage in a 3 gen situation, so if a killer hasn't been taking chases they're guaranteeing their own loss. Survivors rushing gens without thought to their late game strategy and failing to notice they're 3 gen'ing themselves should be punished for it. And again, BHVR said the system would only apply to 3 gens and that's not what this is.
4 survivors have a massive advantage in a 3 gen situation, so if a killer hasn't been taking chases they're guaranteeing their own loss.Great, we're encouraging killers to play better. Win/win.
Survivors rushing gens without thought to their late game strategy and failing to notice they're 3 gen'ing themselves should be punished for it.The idea that survivors just accidently fall into these 3 gens is greatly exaggerated. Even if the survivors are just repairing gens at random the chance that any of four survivors haven't gone for one of the 3 closest together gens is very rare. It happens because the killer stays on those 3 gens.
And even if they do exactly that, and set themselves up for a 3 gen, then the killer never should have needed to kick any of those gens. Meaning they still have 8 charges on each gen, getting right back in the position you suggested.
BHVR said the system would only apply to 3 gens and that's not what this is.They also didn't say they were going to increase the time gens lose on a kick or how long survivors need to be on them to stop regression.
But it accomplishes the same thing. Killers aren't going to realistically run out of charges unless they are playing for the 3 gen. This is like the fears that anti-face camp was going to be somehow weaponized/become common. Instead most players have seen it trigger maybe once or twice since release outside killers deliberately doing what it was meant to stop.
-
@UndeddJester (and a few others) cover this well. If you actually manage to pull off a situation where you've gotten all of this value out of your slowdown perks and somehow aren't winning/already won then there is something else going on.
It didn't get a lot of focus, but @UndeddJester is also right to the change to time to fix the gens. How frequent is the situation were you down a survivor a few seconds after a gen pops? Well, its certainly a lot more common than regressing a gen 8 times.
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623999#Comment_3623999
I have had 3 regression events within seconds of each before. That's nearly half of my charges gone for the entire match in under a minute. That's simply not scalable.
I guess if the survivors manage to all pull themselves up before being hooked, you pull that off another two times, then you're just going to have defend the other 7 gens you have left.
-
@Exxodus21 said:
They could easily remedy this by preventing the system from activating until there's 3 gens left. They lead us to believe whatever they did would only apply to 3 gen situations anyway instead of giving us this blanket gen regression nerf. Getting out of a 3 gen should be difficult.
Except if it didn't apply from the beginning it wouldn't address it.
If the gen kicks didn't start until 3 gens were left, we'd still be in the same position we are right now. A killer can pick 3 gens to defend from the beginning, survivors can't break it until they do all the other gens (which would be even more logical now as trying before hand would be wasteful), and then we're right back to the 3 gen attack defense.
Having it from the beginning encourages survivors to try and break the 3 gen early because even if the killer chases them off it impedes the possibility of the killer setting their whole game plan around the 3 gen.
-
@sharpef3rn said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3624006#Comment_3624006
Do you realize how much time this would waste for survivors. Like the obsession needs to find an armed trap get trapped and freed to make the killer lose 2 stacks of STBFL. They also have to hope that the trapper doesnt have the purple coil to make them downed or bring a second survivor to free them. Like I will take that time sink as it will take another 16 seconds to heal assuming they want to try again or longer with a med kit. All for a perk they are either assuming I have or that I have enough stacks that they know I have it, either way is good for me.
Not to mention, you get a notification on where they are while they are doing it.
@RpTheHotrod said:
I just find it hilarious that a strat when the killer has high stacks now will be for one survivor with plot twist to go with a buddy hidden somewhere and just spam plot twist over and over (the other survivor can recover them so plot twist doesn't actually fully get used) to eat up all of the killer's tokens.
So the to pull this off its going to take two survivors roughly a minute of gameplay. That's being generous to how far they have to run to be safe so the killer doesn't just hear the injured survivor.
If there was a perk that got tokens the exact same way as STBFL that had the description: 'upon gaining 8 stats, two survivors will gain the incapacitated status effect for one minute', killers would definitely run that perk.
That's not even taking into account the possibility of the killer finding the survivors who are doing this, increasing the time needed by gaining stacks, the perk slots wasted, the killer actually running this perk, there not being a more pressing need like rescuing a survivor from a hook, or if the obsession doesn't end up on the right people. Realistically it's much easier for the obsession to just body block the killer and then run to teammates for more body blocks heals if they wanted to do this.
Even if, hypothetically, all of the above was wrong during the PTB, its an incredibly simple fix on BHVR's part.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623333#Comment_3623333
- The game already grinds to a halt BECAUSE of the hatch. Because the last 2-3 survivors will often hide hoping you to kill the other(s) so that they are the ones who get the hatch. Encouraging the survivors to actively play against each other rather than against the killer.
- Right, and those survivors lost the generator game, so again, why does the last survivor get 3 chances?
- Theme doesn't matter anymore as BHVR continues to "gamify" things between the anti-camp mechanic, basekit bt, and the fact that survivors are the true power role if you watch any SWF team like hens/ayrun and you'll see that they don't actually care about theme.
- Balancing the game around perks is bad
- What does this have to do with anything
- That is not actually true, most of the time the gates are on opposite ends of the map, and unless the survivor has already been spotted it is yet again another 50/50. So not only did you beat them at the game, but you won the 50/50 and now you need to win a second 50/50.
- Sure, but it still doesn't change that it is a terrible mechanic.
@Firellius covers this well, but I'll jump on.
1: The game grinds to a halt because people will try and win anyway they can, including boring the other side into afking. That was true before or after the hatch. As for survivors playing against each other, that's an intentional element of the game and a somewhat unavoidable one in elimination style games.
2: Again game perspective. If you want to say survivors lost, fine, you still have a 3k so you 'won'. The other side is the argument that each survivor is on their own and needs an opportunity to advance the game.
3:
Theme doesn't matter anymoreThis is profoundly wrong. BHVR isn't spending money on licenses for the fun of it. People deeply care about the theme of the game, that's why there is excitement for killer designs and map feel. It has changed over the years from a stealth horror to a dark comedy/thriller, but the theme is incredibly important. The idea that some players, who have put in the equivalent of the time spent by a child in the K-12 education system, are burned out is
A: Not at all surprising.
B: Irrelevant as their experience is so radically far outside the norm
C: Ignores that these people continue to play because of Twitch were the theme is one of the key reasons for the game's popularity
D: Not that different from horror fanatics who become somewhat immune to the very thing they are a fan of
E: Probably not even true as I've seen many of these huge accounts talk about the importance of theme and fun
The power role comment is bait to try and pull this thread into a totally different discussion.
4: Agree with the general statement, except that's not the issue here. This isn't like, say Reassurance before anti-camp, where the survivors have to guess ahead of time on killer strategy and hope someone not on hook has the right perk. Survivors don't start the game in the exit gate. The killer had the option of bringing a build to try and prevent them from getting to that spot or a build that can capitalize on that moment.
And even without a particular build the killer still doesn't have to hook by the gates. This situation only occurs if the survivors are on the cusp of escaping already. This gets to the next 2 points that there are situations (for survivor or killer) where the realistic answer to 'no counterplay' is that it had to happen earlier.
5: Because the killer never has to hook near the exit gate. The only situation this happens is if survivors have played the situation to the point that the killer doesn't have a farther viable option.
This would be like a survivor complaining that they went down on death hook right next to a hook and now they have no counterplay left. That's inevitable that there will come a point where the counterplay needed to happen earlier.
6: I specified that they were in chase and the hatch was closed.
Which, if anything, is being more generous to the killer here. The requirements for the OP scenario complaining about lack of counterplay requires the following
A: Downing the survivor near the exit gate so there are no real "viable" hook to carry them to
B: That survivor not already being on death hook
C: At least two other survivors being alive to attempt a rescue
D: The killer not having any end game perks/strategies that allow them to protect this situation.
I'd say that is like the idea of the killer chasing a survivor after the hatch is closed. The match is "decided" unless one side makes a tremendous error. The only difference being survivors are frequently put in that position for longer periods of time while it is much more rare for the killer and usually doesn't eat up as much gameplay.
7: It's a needed mechanic given the elimination nature of the game. It's possible there could be an alternate approach to the idea of how the 1 or 2 survivors left at the end of the game have an incentive to keep playing, but that's a question of implementation not of concept.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623093#Comment_3623093
The bias is astounding.
Your statement was "killer should not get a free kill in endgame because they lost the game" my response is "survivor should not get 4 second chances to escape because they also lost the game" You have to beat survivors 3 times in order to kill 4 of them. You have to beat them at the base game. Beat them to the hatch, and then beat them at the gate. Why do they get so many chance yet killers get 0?
The bias is astounding.So let's try and list all the differences before we jump to accusations.
1: The game grinds to a halt without the hatch in a way it doesn't if the killer has a hook close to the gates.
2: BHVR game perspective, each survivor is on their own. Even if you've killed 3 survivors, you haven't beaten the other.
3: Theme - last survivor in a horror movie has much more of a chance of escape than anyone else.
4: Killer perks. Going for an unhook always carries the possibility of a killer with NOED or other end game perks that can snow ball an escape into a 4k. Also certain killers can turn even a hook by the gate into a dangerous situation.
There's no equivalent to hatch play where the survivors somehow manage to revive their teammates.
5: Nothing forces the killer to hook close to the gate.
6: A better description than hatch is what happens when the killer has a survivor in chase after the hatch is closed. At that point the game is finished for the survivor with no chance to escape barring a massive killer mistake. This is the equivalent situation to a survivor being on hook near a 99ed gate, not the hatch being opened.
7: Hatch doesn't count as a full escape.
-
On the question of instant opening: I'd rather them not try and complicate the bot behavior.
@C3Tooth said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623286#Comment_3623286
I play with bots alot mainly to test something, bots mostly just open gates and escape, not caring about their teammates. Its really bore me if real players act like that. I think most killers dont recognize how bad it is for killers if survivors never attempt to get their teammates out.
Its really bore me if real players act like that.I kind of hate the end game on the survivor and killer side and really wish it was normal for survivors to just leave.
-
There are two components to a killer: mechanics and game sense. @GroßusSchmiedus has trapper higher and I agree: to stand a chance with Trapper you need to make a really quick assessment of the map and decide where your traps will go. Mechanically he is simple, but he does need to make some quick game sense decisions. A hypothetical peak skill trapper is making decisions right off the bat on where he wants to set up his traps, deciding which traps aren't worth getting, and keeping in mind where those traps are while engaged in chase.
Huntress is interesting, because I don't think its that hard to get really good with Huntress, but you're talking peak skill level. Arguably she should be in her own tier if we're talking about being able to master cross map hatchets in any possible situations.
I think Wesker and Wraith are too high. I'd have Wraith near the bottom. Wesker I think you're probably talking about hugging loops, if so we again have a killer who there is a jump in difficulty between really good and great.
Sadako is too low. If we're talking peak mastery, that means keeping a memory of where every TV is in the map, constantly checking them, and using that info to see where the survivors are and who does or does not have a tape. Also keeping track of where the survivors are in terms of condemned status.
Nemesis higher, but not that much.
-
@Iron_Cutlass hits all the details of it.
Whether it is good or not depends on how the killer plays. If the killer is not tunneling, We'll Make It is better in my opinion for a quick heal. If the killer is tunneling though this perk has a lot of value.
The downside is sometimes all survivors have either dead hard or off the record, lessening the value of this perk (its still useful, the added haste bonus).
-
Also agree on situational.
If someone has unhooking perks, like We'll Make It, that takes priority.
If the killer has teleported or otherwise clearly gotten away from the hook, well going to rescue might be the safest thing that can be done. This somewhat agrees with your idea that staying on gens might be far more dangerous.
Also sometimes the highest hook count just happens to be close while the other survivors are on the other side of the map.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3621836#Comment_3621836
Actually missed that discussion, guess I'll stop reporting players who do it...
However in my defence the description for one of the report sections reads:
Unsportsmanlike Conduct
Use this option to report a player for purposefully losing the game, not participating in or disconnecting from the game early to avoid defeat. Examples: AFKing, rage quitting idling, and refusing to participate in normal gameplay
Obviously reading the thread does highlight that attempting to unhook yourself and letting yourself die for hatch are mechanics. What this rule is depicting is going AFK to lose. So I understand it'd be very difficult if not impossible to police SoH.
However the issue is ofc, when people refer to Suiciding on Hook, they mean running to the killer, getting downed and then deliberately going for unhooks to get to stage 2, then letting the skillchecks go by uncontested so they die.
This does fill this criteria rules as written... so it's no wonder people get confused.
Edit: Maybe we need a community rule.
If you see someone suiciding on hook, let survivors save, down that player and leave them on the floor, with the mutual understanding of letting them bleed out. Let them get crows, then report them for AFK 😈😈😈😈
If lucky, maybe they'll DC for a bot, in which case you allow the reset and continue the game. They get their deserved DC penalty, and the game continues.
If nothing else, everyone will feel better. 😁🤘
If you see someone suiciding on hook, let survivors save, down that player and leave them on the floor, with the mutual understanding of letting them bleed out. Let them get crows, then report them for AFKI don't think that would really do anything.
1: If BHVR really cared about AFKs, they could handle it themselves. The game already detects AFKs, if they deeply cared about it they could just program some type of X amount crow time in Y amount of hours results in a DC penalty.
2: I don't think the AFK rule is meant to apply to situations were you cannot progress. More for players who AFK from the very beginning and do so repeatedly.
@UndeddJester said:
I've seen a few places now where people keep asking for Forfeit options and/or no DLC penalties. Suicide on Hook is of course an issue, and a common solution suggestion is to allow people to give up or allow people to leave for a bot.
The fundamental issue with adding/allowing these things is how common they will become.
If you take away DC penalties, you can't really give Survivors no DC penalty without giving Killers the same. The moment a Killer or Survivor doesn't have things going their way, they'll just dip, and we'll keep on having to queue constantly. Survivors at least have bots, however even if its survivor only, this will result in people leaving for the slightest infraction. Killers they don't like, perks they don't like, maps they don't like, teammates missing a skillcheck, teammates messing up a trade or getting caught as they go for the unhook... we'll be playing with bots a hell of a lot more... I would reckon it'd happen almost every game, and in my experience once there is a bot in the game, it always snowballs out of control, because while OK, the bots can't mirror a humans understanding on when to trade hook stages, or lose a hook stage to break an important gen.
So why not a Forfeit option? The problem with a Forfeit option is the same issue you get with games like League of Legends. Hardly any games will go to completion. Once the other side gets a little bit ahead, players will start trying to Forfeit. Again we hit the issue that if you're a killer, there is only you, so you can just decide to nope out of a game the moment it doesn't start going your way. You'll get "Garden of Joy? Forfeit. Looped for 2 gens? Forfeit. Successful Flashlight of Buckle Up save? Forfeit." practically every single time. Once again if we make it survivor only, you'll get people hitting the Forfeit button for the team to vote on every single time they aren't happy with the killer, with the map, with the perks in play for either side, someone makes a mistake around an unhook, or misses a skillcheck. Thing is, even if you want you soldier on, your teammates constantly begging you to forfeit will annoy you into submission. They spend more time screwing about trying to convince you to forfeit than just sucking it up, and eventually you get to the point you realise noone is even playing anymore, the game is lost, so you give up too.
I've been playing video games over 30 years, online games for 20. Trust me, you don't want either of things. They get VERY annoying... every game ends in players quitting a third of the way through the game on either side, players just nope out at the slightest inconvenience, you constantly have to keep hitting 'No' on a vote system while trying to play. Take it from someone who has gone through it over decades of gaming... all of your wins will feel hollow... and all of yours losses will feel bitter. If you think you hate playing the game now... you don't know anything until you add features like this.
Suicide on Hook at 5 gens is annoying yes... but at least it comes with the risk of everyone reporting that player (which needs to be improved tbh). DCing for a bot at least isn't common because it comes with a penalty. It's not perfect... but its far better than every game being empty, and the few games you are doing well and enjoying coming to an abrupt halt cause the other side just gave in.
So why not a Forfeit option?There's a few things that could be done to address most of your concerns.
1: The forfeit could have conditions. The most obvious would be a time limit, but if the worry was people would just wait to that point it could be based on something in the game. Say if a survivor is killed and there are still 3+ gens to go survivors get the option to say they have no chance.
2: Spamming could be addressed by never showing what the other survivors have put in.
3: No games go to completion: this could partly be addressed by given a countdown timer of 30 seconds. So the killer can't forfeit to deprive the survivors of getting out the exit (however, the forfeit does stop the idea of survivors just hanging around the exit gates forever).
Additionally, not going to completion is not a huge deal. One of downsides of DbD is that the end game can be long and pointless. Yes, DbD has exciting ends were you are rushing to the gate with the killer on your heels (or rushing at the survivors trying to get them before the line), but also times you're just lying on the ground bleeding out.
I highly doubt DbD would give serious thought to a forfeit issue, it would mess with pips, probably MMR, and the games theme. But I don't think the problems you mention are big deals especially given that people will throw a game when its not going well already, this would just speed up the process.
I've been playing video games over 30 years, online games for 20.You young kids with your new fangled ideas and gadgets. It sounds like you didn't even have the joy of an Atari or trying to play an FPS on a 33.6 K modem. 😋
-
I try to base things on what I'm going up against. I've been playing some killers with 0 perks/0 addons recently, I adjust my expectations. Likewise if I hit a team that I'm confident is a 4 or 3 person SWF (rare) I'll take a 2k as a win.
As a soloq survivor: if we finish the gens and anyone escapes it feel okay. If the killer is one I consider top tier and/or running powerful addons, then anyone getting out feels like a win. Generally, if I escape or I die and the other 3 survivors escape, definitely feels like a win.
Maps also factor a little into this on both sides.
If someone throws when I'm either killer or survivor whatever happens in the game feels irrelevant.
-
If we're counting Lightborn, definitely that.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3621639#Comment_3621639
Cheers. So it was basically just luck. Even at the very end he walks past me again but I guess I blended into the environment a bit too well.
It is an amazing break of luck.
He drops down and is facing away from you. You move ever so slightly forward behind his back, meaning as he turns right you are out of his view/he doesn't just bump into you.
He then turns right again as you take a step back, putting yourself behind him
He then makes another right turn to check the area that would have been behind him when he dropped.
If he makes one more right turn, he catches you, but instead he now makes a left turn and doubles back on his route.
He probably sees some scratch marks or something (don't know if you were running) and goes to check the end of the hall.
You move into the other hall and he checks that one. Now before you moved to that hall I hear a gen go off, so it is possible he is not looking for you now but is instead going for that (because otherwise it is pretty lucky guess to pick the hall you chose as that one he doesn't have a reason to go down as he visually checked it earlier).
As he goes down the hall it is kind of hard to tell where exactly he is looking. Even without shadowborn you might be in his view (I was kind of surprised you had not crouched behind the box), but he might just be more focused on that gen that went off and thus just missed you.
-
Maybe, but probably not. When he drops down he is looking away from you. When he looks around's he's never really that close to having you in his view.