crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
@NewPlayer100102 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552879#Comment_3552879
This I feel confident in saying outright is wrong.
SWF is better.
You know the people you are playing with to a degree and you know what they tend to do, even without passing a word or line of chat, its better. This topic has been resolved by the community. I can't add much to it, aside from saying here, its an advantage, so we could continue the other aspects of the conversation.
As for the end of your comments.
Yes, I agree. The game is more fun when the competitive aspects are removed. This game works best when its just a murderer and some victims running away. I think only a few people would argue that hyper competitive DBD is the superior experience. But this whole thing was about balancing around the competitive aspects, not about restoring the game to a classic experience.
This I feel confident in saying outright is wrong.SWF is better.Let me try and explain this in a different way because this wasn't what I meant.
Let me put it this way: who is a better shooter, a rifleman or an archer?
The rifleman is certainly more deadly and he is going to be able to hit targets at farther distances than an archer could,. However this isn't because the rifleman is better, he has an instrument that is giving him an advantage. He may or may not be a more skilled shooter, but comparing the induvial skill levels would be very difficult given the different instruments they use.
Your comment I was responding to was:
If a SWF is part of that growth path, I would assume the soloQ would want to do that.To continue the metaphor, I'm interested in being the best archer I can be, I have no interest in being a rifleman. So even if SWFs are stronger, which they undoubtedly are, its not part of my growth path because its a very different activity that I'm not interested in.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552783#Comment_3552783
And haven't you thought that perhaps what you are doing is precisely disagreeing with math? Just saying.
You can argue of the effects that changing that number could bring, but all of you are not doing that. Even by reducing the base progression multiplayer, it would still be more effective to split up or play however you think is the most efficient way. That is not an argument against it being so high that is the core of all the symptoms people in this post are saying are the real problem (spawn points, toolboxes, etc.).
No, the problem is not a toolbox granting a +50% progression bonus, the real problem is the progression of two survivors being 1.7 c/s to begin with. And I already did the math proving that.
And haven't you thought that perhaps what you are doing is precisely disagreeing with math? Just saying.the real problem is the progression of two survivors being 1.7 c/s to begin with. And I already did the math proving that.The problem with your structure is you are throwing out lots of uncontested facts (math) about the game and presuming that's what's being argued over. Based upon these facts you reach an opinion, that two survivors on gens is too fast, but you aren't seeing that's an opinion. You aren't distinguishing which part is the math and which part is your conclusion on what good game design/strategy is and why.
@mizark3 even puts up diagrams. If you're disagreeing with him, you're disagreeing with math.
So I'll ask - why is it that two survivors being able to do a gen at 1.7 c/s a problem?
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552807#Comment_3552807
What do you mean by "for 250% total speed" and "for 260% total" ? I'm doing my math as 100% + 50% = 150% Total.
It's a semantics thing, not a math thing.
It's an increase of 150%
Which can also be written as just 250% and drop the word increase.
-
@NewPlayer100102 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552561#Comment_3552561
I would think most players would want to play better over time.
If a SWF is part of that growth path, I would assume the soloQ would want to do that.
It somehow feels a little misplaced in its punitive focus to hold back balancing simply because some players have other people phobia.
If a SWF is part of that growth path, I would assume the soloQ would want to do that.Playing in a SWF is not inherently playing better, it's playing different.
Let me use pickup sports vs organized teams. An organized team would beat a pickup team barring radical difference in player skill, but that's not because the team is inherently better players, they are playing a different game.
Organized teams spend a lot of time not just working on teamwork, but working on where you fit with a specific group of individuals. This is one of the reasons even if they added comms it wouldn't suddenly bring soloq up to the SWF level.
In pickup sports part of the fun is having different teammates every game. Sometimes you might be a strong player, sometimes weak. Maybe your role changes on what you are doing. Part of the skill, and joy, is the variability that style of game brings.
Both versions bring different skills and different types of enjoyment. Neither is inherently right or wrong, better or worse.
It somehow feels a little misplaced in its punitive focus to hold back balancing simply because some players have other people phobia.There's lots of reasons beyond just "people phobia". Mine is that I feel it would really ruin the game's immersion. If someone tells me on chat that the killer is headed my way and I can get a jump on them before I even heard the terror radius, yeah, that doesn't sound very fun.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552524#Comment_3552524
Funny how that works. "Just bring Corrupt Intervention or Deadlock." is an acceptable answer. But when killers camp and say: "Just bring Reassurance or Kinship." that is an issue that must be fixed by the game itself without any perks. This is what you call double standard.
Because they are two different things.
Survivors objective is to do gens, as killer you have multiple perks depending on your playstyle/strengths that can slow that down. Alternatively you have perks to help you find them faster, make it harder for them to recover, etc. But you are going to get value out of those perks regardless of how the survivors play.
There are three problems to the idea of fixing camping with perks. Survivors don't know the killer/killer strategy they are facing, a survivor doesn't have enough perk slots to deal with all of the possible 'you should have just brought X'. Secondly, survivors don't know what perks the other players are bringing, so you have no idea if you need to be the player with reassurance or not. Third, reassurance doesn't fix the core gameplay issue that being stuck on the hook for a long time isn't a fun game, it actually just makes it worse.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552474#Comment_3552474
"It is not relevant to my point" It is relevant, because you are making a point against gen times. You wanting to use mental gymnastics to turn around the argument to "your point" is what is not relevant here. It's like a restaurant having awful food, and the chef saying "well, people can put sauces on top of it and mix various things so it is not that bad, also most of the time our food is fine depending on who cook it". Alright, but the possibility of the food being awful is still a base problem, and we should address it. In other words, you keep trying to derail the main argument to your point while yet again ignoring the base problem.
And I know what you are saying, and my answer to that is you are so wrong. It is present in every single match because it is the minimum the generator mechanic allow survivors to do, so it doesn't matter if they just shaves off 50 seconds instead of 60, they should not be able to shave off that much time in the first place. Spawn, toolboxes and progression perks are just symptoms of the disease, and solving the base problem would solve the rest. But you don't have to believe me, let's do the math:
- One survivor with Commodious Toolbox:
32 charges at 1.5 c/s during 21.333 seconds + 58 charges at 1 c/s base progression = 90 charges in 79.333 seconds.
- Two survivors, one of them with Commodious Toolbox:
(32 charges at 1.275 c/s) + (32 charges at 0.85 c/s) during 21.333 seconds = 45.332625 charges done.
90 charges - 45.332625 charges = 44.667375 charges left.
44.667375 charges at (0.85 * 2) = 26.27492647058824 seconds.
21.333 + 26.27492647058824 = 90 charges in 47.60792647058824, or 47.608 seconds.
- Two survivors, both of them with Commodious Toolbox:
32 charges at 2.55 c/s during 21.333 seconds = 54.39915 charges done.
90 charges - 54,39915 charges = 35.60085 charges left.
35.60085 charges at 1.7 c/s = 20.94167647058824 seconds.
21.333 + 20.94167647058824 = 90 charges in 42.27467647058824, or 42.275 seconds.
In conclusion:
- One survivor with the toolbox would only shave up 10 seconds from a gen.
- Two survivors, just one with a toolbox, would shave up only 6 seconds more than not having the toolbox at all.
- Two survivors, both with a toolbox, is slightly more effective than having 3 survivors doing the gen without any toolbox, and only 5 seconds more effective than only using one.
Now, with the numbers in place it is more than obvious than the toolboxes are not the main problem, as you would need two survivors with the best toolbox in the same gen at the same time and apply the full toolbox to that gen to be worth it, and doing that would left the toolboxes empty, so they would have waste them and aren't able to do it in another gen. And as you want to strictly argument about "realistic averages", this situation won't happen in random games unless at least two survivors are in SWF and decide to do it.
So, the problem are not the toolboxes adding too much to the base progression, the problem is not two or more survivors spawning in one generator, the problem is and always have being the base progression of two or more survivors allowing them to do one gen in at least 37 seconds less by default before adding other progression bonus on top. And taking in count that both toolboxes and progression perk works in a percentage basis, solving this big problem by lowering the progression multiplayer when two or more survivors are in a gen you would also solve every single smaller problem related to it. Easy, and simple.
Now, the big question: Are you going to admit you were wrong, or are you going to keep ignoring it and trying to make the argument about other points?
So, the problem are not the toolboxes adding too much to the base progression, the problem is not two or more survivors spawning in one generator, the problem is and always have being the base progression of two or more survivors allowing them to do one gen in at least 37 seconds less by defaultYour post is the equivalent of saying 2+2=4, anyone who disagrees with me disagrees with math.
Yeah, those are the numbers, but your conclusion still doesn't make any sense. The survivors are still going slower working together then they would if they were split up.
Why is ~53 seconds somehow unreasonable to do a gen when it is taking two of the survivors time? They are losing roughly 8 seconds if they hadn't been split up.
Your argument is based on the presumption that anyone looking at the numbers would agree its a problem, but they're not. Survivors make a trade off by working together on a gen, less overall progress, easier to be interrupted, but increase the chance to finish it before a regression.
I keep hearing this, but people that say it seems to forget that a killer can only chase one of you, letting the other one free to keep repairing the gen.And if they were split up, one of those people never would have even needed to get off the gen.
-
@NewPlayer100102 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3549853#Comment_3549853
I agree with most of your points.
But...
"Why is it this community for some reason thinks that this is the only multiplayer game in existence where you can't balance around the top level."
I really want to know why this is what it is...
It seems like such a cash losing tactic.
Because DbD, being asymmetrical, isn't like other games.You can balance most games just by looking at high MMR, because everyone is playing the same type of game.
The difference between soloq and SWFs is enormous. This is true of all games, but in other games both sides can either be playing without comms or as a team. In DbD the killer can't suddenly be more of a team player because there is no team to play with.
If you balanced around 4 person SWFs, soloq would get destroyed, if you balanced around soloq, even if it was the best soloq players, SWFs would have a massive advantage. So they try and shoot for the middle, which is a decision as a100% soloq player I'm not thrilled with, but realistically might be the only thing they can do.
-
@Iron_Cutlass said:
Im being serious, and Im not trying to be rude or mean, but what actually is going on at BHVR?
How come we are getting so many map reworks for maps that just recently came out?
Maps are suppose to be RELEASED in a good state, not PATCHED a year or so after their release. Basically all of BHVR's recent maps have been reworks. RPD, Eyrie of Crows, Garden of Joy, Decimated Borgo; Why were these maps not released in a better state to begin with? Surely there are QA testers who had to have pointed out many of the flaws with this map so they didnt release so poorly.
How come the recent Killer designs have been poorly thought out?
Knight released and their power is just outright horrible, buggy, and unfun to play with and against for the general playerbase. To make matters worse, you release Skull Merchant right after, which was so bad and poorly thought out that they could hold Survivors hostage for literal hours. And, of course, the Xenomorph that has a power that is hardly telegraphed to the Survivors and is insanely difficult to counter within a chase.
Again, how do these make it past QA? How does these Killer power ideas even go through the idea phase without even realizing the fundamental flaws with them to begin with?
Oh yea, and monetization has gotten worse; so not only is the game in shambles but BHVR is finding ways to pull more money for producing worse content.
Pay to Win has gotten significantly worse over the years since the Shrine of Secret provides no practical way for people to keep up with. The only way to actually get half of the licensed perks in the game is just to outright buy the DLC because some perks straight up have never appeared in the Shrine of Secrets at all... and you put this in your backlog and never really talk about fixing it.
What about throwing in cosmetics that most people dont care about just to inflate DLC prices?
You did it with the Nicolas Cage chapter, and the Alien chapter. To make matters worse, if people just bought that characters with Auric Cells they would still be paying more than the original price of the chapter, you are basically forcing your consumers, who are forced to buy the DLCs to keep up with everything (because as I said, the Shrine of Secrets is horrible) to pay more than they should compared to previous pricing.
DEEP RIFT?
Deep Rift is honestly just stupid. I was originally excited for the Deep Rift when it came out but it made the Rift, something that is already a slog to get through, so much worse. I can hardly keep up with the Rift as it is because I have to deal with college, and the Deep Rift has made that issue so much worse.
And, of course, the cosmetics are exclusive, so if you miss out, you are SOOL. And of course, the Rift itself was already used to inflate your playercount, so expanding the Rift will just inflate it more.
FOMO being used to inflate sales?
Event cosmetics are going to leave rotation after the events are over. Which is pretty bad since people will feel more inclined to purchase cosmetics before they leave since they do not want to risk them potentially never returning or having to wait a year.
To make matters worse, events are rather short. Meaning that the 3 weeks needed for Auric Cell only cosmetics to be purchasable for Iridescent Shards will never happen, and sometimes BHVR will end events right before the cut off point just to not give players the opporunity to obtain them for free.
This is beyond predatory.
Probably the worst PR thing BHVR has done...
I already made a thread about it, so I wont jump too much into it. But BHVR said they wont release P100 cosmetics because of FOMO... yet they use it to inflate their playercount and sales.
Either BHVR is lying or they are hypocritical... probably the later of the two.
What is the point of the Killswitch if you never use it half the time?
There can be gamebreaking bugs/glitches in the game and your ability to respond to the issues is often slow and half the time things SHOULD be Killswitched but never are; obviously it isnt that you are taking sides, but moreso your reluctance to use the Killswitch has really negatively impacted the game and the community as a whole.
Ghostface was unplayable with certain cosmetics and you outright couldnt stalk Survivors but you never Killswitched the outfits.
Merciless Storm was broken and reset entire Generators in less than seconds but it was never Killswitched after it was "patched" (it wasnt actually patched) and made matches outright unwinnable.
Or how about the really late response to the Wesker bug that made them invisible, or the late response to the Flashlight-Locker bug that NEVER ACTUALLY FIXED THE ISSUE (since Flashlights could still be obtained through Chests).
Im saying all of this from a place of concern!
BHVR, I really, really want you guys to just take a look in the mirror and look at what youve done. Actually reflect on the decisions you guys have been making recently. Since it feels more and more like the company cares more about profit than their own playerbase.
You guys have made questionable decisions in the past, mainly because the game was newer and you guys were not as experienced, but it is 2023 and the game feels like it is rapidly going downhill and making worse balanced decisions than anything in the past few years or so.
Im not saying the game is dying, but there are definitely a lot of issues that NEED to be addressed that just get neglected.
How come the recent Killer designs have been poorly thought out?If you don't like the Knight, the Skull Merchant, and the Xenomorph, I don't know who you would like (surprised you left off the Singularity). Knight seems fine since the end of Overbrine, Alien is a good killer, Skull Merchant is a mess.
Pay to Win has gotten significantly worse over the years since the Shrine of Secret provides no practical way for people to keep up with. The only way to actually get half of the licensed perks in the game is just to outright buy the DLC because some perks straight up have never appeared in the Shrine of Secrets at allAs far as live services games go, the amount you are expected to spend is very small. The in game currency covers a lot of the releases, and you can easily play the game without ever purchasing a DLC.
I can hardly keep up with the Rift as it is because I have to deal with college, and the Deep Rift has made that issue so much worse.Then don't even worry about it. The rift gives something else for people to play towards.
Since it feels more and more like the company cares more about profit than their own playerbase.They are a company, their goal is to make a profit. If you don't think you're getting value for what you are spending, don't spend the money.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3551464#Comment_3551464
Wonder if it had something to do with most older games having male protagonists and so people just fell into that preference? I still remember as a child playing the original Super Metroid (showing my age) and how it blew my mind when my dad told me the protagonist was female. Most of the games I'd play were generally led by males, an exception off the top of my head being Lara Croft. And tbh, their sale approach for her was more about sex appeal than anything else.
I'm not sure whether it's about caring more about female survival than male, like I think the Final Girl trope was more about the perception of women as weak and vulnerable. So they made the perfect counter to the seemingly unstoppable evil. Their fear was believable, the odds of them getting out alive were slim, but you'd see their development throughout the movie as they find their strength. I couldn't see the film industry back then portraying men like that, a sign of the times really.
Wonder if it had something to do with most older games having male protagonists and so people just fell into that preference?So the primary example back then was World of Warcraft where players could choose the sex of their character. I barely ever played WoW so I'm just going off of what the presenter did as surveys of the gaming population, but his results was that players viewed female characters as weak. At the time I disagreed with him, I think we tend to overthink these things, but like I said I know very little about WoW.
I still remember as a child playing the original Super Metroid (showing my age) and how it blew my mind when my dad told me the protagonist was femaleIt's even more of a mind blow would you find out after beating the game. Given how clunky graphics were at the time, my seven year old brain was wondering why Samus was some kind of long haired surfer dude.
I'm not sure whether it's about caring more about female survival than male, like I think the Final Girl trope was more about the perception of women as weak and vulnerableI think those two things are connected. We care more about women because as a society we've been conditioned to see them as more vulnerable, even if in the fictional scenario its not at all true.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552459#Comment_3552459
A lot of words that even if they are not untrue still ignores the main problem: The min times of gens are absurd, and need to be addressed. Again, it is not the exception of a full SWF squad trying to beat the world record what is the problem, the problem is survivors having the capacity of doing gens in less than 30 seconds even if they don't shave off all that much time in all games. Again, without any toolbox, without any perk, without doing great skillchecks, just two survivors doing a gen, they would do it in 52.94 seconds approx. This is the true problem.
And about gen speed in your control: I don't think you know what "control" means. All of the things you said there depends greatly in how survivors play and what they allow you to do. And if you don't use a killer with strong chase or anti-loop power, even less. If a survivor decide to take you to a tour around every single pallet around the map, no matter what you do, how many times you try to mindgame or how good you are in general, he will make you lose your time and you would be forced to break chase, leaving him free to keep doing gens while you look for your next chase. In what point here is the killer in control of anything?
Again, I'm not saying skill is not a factor, but that doesn't means that there isn't an intrinsic problem with gens times that should be fixed.
Again, without any toolbox, without any perk, without doing great skillchecks, just two survivors doing a gen, they would do it in 52.94 seconds approx. This is the true problem.This is not a problem. Perks might be a problem, toolboxes might be a problem, but this isn't.
At the start of the match, survivors doing the same gen, unless they are breaking up the 3 gen, is usually a weakness. If those two survivors did two gens together, it would take ~106 seconds, it would take 90 seconds if they'd just gotten on different gens. And by being on the same gen the killer can disrupt both survivors at the same time.
Your conception of the issue is off. This is like when CoH was nerfed because killers didn't like that survivors could heal on their own, but they didn't take account of the fact that some survivors would run all the way across a map to heal themselves when they should have stayed on gens. If they penalized multiple survivors working on gens even more, survivors would just spread out which would actually make it even harder for killers.
If a survivor decide to take you to a tour around every single pallet on the mapPallets are a limited resource. If at the start of the game the first survivor runs the whole map and burns a ton of pallets and 3 gens pop, its not a great start, but the killer is by no means out of the game at this point. The survivor chases should now be much shorter and you have even fewer gens to worry about.
On the other hand, if we're talking balance, if the killer gets a strong start and downs a survivor before a single gen is even done, he's at such a massive advantage that it should be a surprise if he loses.
As others have said, the first few gens that pop aren't really relevant given it becomes increasingly harder for survivors to finish a gen.
-
Yes, for the same reason I fear a survivor kobe on hook.
The absolute last thing I want is to play 3 v 1 with something like 4 gens left. The game loses all interest to me at that point, but its nowhere close to done.
-
First at all. I don't know how there is just one gamemode marked as "competitive" (there are ranks and SBMM) where 1 guy can face 4 guys on coms.The thing is, why would a killer want to play in that mode?
SBMM doesn't work. I assume i have to be a pretty trash killer, so if i'm so bad why im getting matched vs "SWFs" with +30 devotion level more than me and getting bullied over and over in the matches?Depends on your region and time of day that you play.
-
Back in 2006 (I know, quite some time) I was at a seminar where one of the presentations was on why people tend to play male characters over female, which was more common at the time. There has been a pretty sizable switch since then and I'd say graphics are the likely reason.
I'll add something that hasn't been covered: as a society we tend to care more about women then men. A story about a woman being murdered will get more attention than one about a man. Final girl is a trope because the audience gets much more invested in the survival of a female character, compared to a male (with male characters we are looking far more for an eventual turn to action, see Ash Williams). As an audience, people just have an easier connection to female characters than they do to male.
-
@caipt said:
Its absurd how quickly people started malding about how OP it is.
"Its information is too strong"
The info is fine on anyone but blight. I was able to remove bbq and lethal and use uw instead and get similar results, with pain res thrown into the empty slot with blight. same info, more regression.
"The blindness completely counters WoO and other auras for doing almost nothing"
this complaint is a minor one of the bunch, but its still there. if you are seriously getting countered by ultimate weapon because the blindness stole your WoO, then you should dequip WoO and actually learn maps.
"OP on high tiers but bad on low tiers"
only applicable on blight. I will say this perk is completely absurd on blight. My build used to be lethal, bbq, nwo, deadlock. I replaced lethal and bbq with UW and slotted pain res in the empty slot. Same if not more info with pain res level slowdown. However every other killer uses it in a completely balanced way. People commonly cite nurse, blight, wesker and sometimes oni and plague.starting with the elephant in the room:
- Nurse - worst map mobility in the game on non indoor maps, averaging to roughly 4.1m/s. Has a 24m killzone, outside of which her blinks cannot reach a running survivor without a massive time sink. UW range is 32m, and the bubble is very vague on positioning. Unless the survivor is stupid, nurse really shouldnt be able to take successful chases off survivors hit by UW unless they were within 24m when she opened the locker which... is absolutely 100% the survivors fault.
- Wesker - Massive TR gets maximum info, but its a double edged sword. massive scan, but only decent map mobility to gain those 40m. still quite strong but not broken.
- oni and plague - oni needs to earn his power so he has a right to be broken while its active. plague getting more than one corrupt purge is on you or your team. And plague being able to find you while you are all infected (denying red puke) is a sacrifice you make for being injured all game by choice.
"100% uptime/cooldown not long enough"
Somewhat true. Its cooldown is mostly over by the time you down a survivor you found with the perk. If it were to be changed, I say the cooldown should pause while in chase or something of the sort. only stealth killers could bypass this and if we're being honest they're all bad enough that we can just let them have the W.
"it has 0 counterplay"
Only for the first survivor it catches. Once you know its there, you can use lockers like with doctor. And to those saying thats an unreliable strategy, yeah, it is. and it should be. you shouldnt reliably be able to completely deny value. Besides when did perks have no counterplay ever matter? It only matters when the effect is so damn overpowered that it calls for counterplay, like the previous forms of DH. Right now there are plenty of perks many would agree are balanced that have 0 counterplay. Whats the killer meant to do against sprint burst? Or any exhaustion perk, really. Play blight? commit anyways? thats not to say sprint burst is op, because its not. Its just to say that something having low amounts of counterplay coupled with a strong effect isnt inherently overpowered. Its a part of the game and perk design. If every single strong perk had clear, relevant, consistent and powerful counterplay perks would be pointless. besides UW is an info perk; its not meant to have counterplay because all it does is start a chase. You aren't meant to counter UW, you are meant to display your skill in the chase it starts.
In short, ultimate weapon is a fine perk that at most could use a change in how the cooldown functions, and some kind of mechanic to make it less useful on blight than on others.
I was able to remove bbq and lethal and use uw instead and get similar results, with pain res thrown into the empty slot with blight. same info, more regression.I don't have much of an opinion on Ultimate Weapon, but saying it gets as much value as two other strong perks makes it sound like its overpowered. Sure, you're talking about just blight, but I don't see how blight is different from Wesker and others in this scenario.
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550410#Comment_3550410
Wow and this thing costs 4,000BP. Do any of you use it or intentionally buy them in your Bloodwebs?
It's not as good as a syringe or a medkit that can give two heals, but after that its solid.
You don't want to use it with a full medkit, but it does make something out of having only a few charges left. I'll try to use it in chase, after I make a corner of a loop pop it, let the killer catch and hit me, and then run. It's not going to save you by any means, but it can extend the chase which is pretty useful.
-
Even if its bad game design, you can't report players for making use of the things that are in the game. You can urge BHVR to change it, but that's different.
-
@kommandantlocke said:
This rework isnt gonna be good for Skull its more of alot of nerfs to counter 3 gening which i understand but at the cost of how she is to be played and how her power works now. If anything its only made her playability awful and not worth using plus that her Leverage perk is almost useless i would want the shards back for the killer.
I'd potentially feel a little bad if someone spent money, but if the example is the free in game currency, then that's just silly.
Also, the character has been out for 7 months. Even if you purchased the product with cash and have no intent to use it in the future, 7 months is quite a lot of use.
-
@Huge_Bush said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3548690#Comment_3548690
Pop was just an example for the sake of discussion. They could do a base-kit Ruin, again, just an example, that rewards the killer for pushing survivors off of gens and have it deactivate after a certain amount of hooks. They can do base-kit corrupt or come up with something new.
Okay, I understand what you mean by crapshoot. But by the very nature of the games balance, shouldn’t killers get more value out of perks than survivors? They have to worry about 4 players with a combined 16 perk. They have to constantly consider what perks each survivor has and play around it even if they don’t have it. Even now, killers have to assume that someone who hops in a locker might have DS or Head On, they have to guess if they need to count to 10 if they want to tunnel someone or wait longer just in case as survivor brought it BT to extend the timer. They have to guess on whether or not it’s okay to leave a slug or risk them getting up with Unbreakable. Both sides have to face the guessing game and both sides suffer when they get it wrong.
Yes, it’s one of multiple things a killer can do, but it is still part of the games balance. It still allows the player to express their strength and requires the survivors to come together in order to succeed.
If the devs never intended for camping to be used for securing kills, why was insidious introduced? Why does the anti-camping mechanic deactivate in endgame?
Yes, the hook timer pressures survivors, camping compounded that by taking advantage of altruistic survivors. You can argue that it was easy to just stand there and prevent bad survivors from rescuing, it was anything but easy to do so against good survivors. And no, it didn’t have to be a full SWF. This balance decision isn’t being done with balance in mind, it’s being done to appease complaints and make things easier for bad players on one side an harder for bad players on their other side.
Okay, I understand what you mean by crapshoot. But by the very nature of the games balance, shouldn’t killers get more value out of perks than survivors?Yes, generally true, but let me back up a step.
The issue here is not perk strength per se. I'll use distortion as an example of a perk that's random chance but still healthy. As survivor I could get a lot of value, or none, depending on killer build, but the game still plays out. It may or may not give me an edge, which if fine, and DbD thrives off that random chance mechanic.
The game goes too far though when the perk setup completely override strategy. If the answer to 'how do I counter X" is that you should have been running such and such perk, that's bad game design. Perks should bolster certain strategies, not be necessary requirements.
Additionally, distortion entirely impacts how I play the game. If I want to run a stealth focused build, I control that completely. While given your posts I think you disagree, I think DbD is more enjoyable when the survivors are viewed as four people randomly thrown together with a common goal to work towards, but not necessarily a team.
-
@Rivyn said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3547331#Comment_3547331
To be fair, that's also the answer to camping. See somebody getting camped, just do gens. Yet BHVR saw fit to change that by adding this new feature.
I see slugging as taking an uptick, which is going to lead to more survivors taking issue, and the anti slugging 'feature' last year coming back in a new form and further limiting killer presence.
To be fair, that's also the answer to camping. See somebody getting camped, just do gens. Yet BHVR saw fit to change that by adding this new feature.But there's a huge difference in the time required for a hook and a slug. In soloq, if a survivor is being camped and you run over, you have no way to communicate that with your team, thus potentially leading everyone to leave their gens to check on the issue (compared to a SWF that could just say they're being camped and to stay on gens). The four minutes means that even if you run over and see the camp, you have plenty of time to get back to your gens and finish them.
Not to mention, being you can't suicide on hook, the killer can't win the game by boring their opponent into leaving the match.
Also, there are more possible ways a survivor can get up from the slug then exist from the hook that don't require any prior action on the part of the survivor.
However, even if none of that turns out to be true, there are lots of ways they could address it without revisiting the unlimited unbreakable option.
-
@Huge_Bush said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3548587#Comment_3548587
The fun point? Do you mean that it’s not fun for the survivor who is camped? Sure, I can agree. But if we’re going balance the game on the merits of fun while taking away agency, when are killers going to get base-kit Pop since it’s not fun for them to have two to three gens get completed by the time they get their first hook? How about a Bamboozle become base-kit to help with strong loops like the house in Garden of Joy? By making these perks basekit, killers can have more fun and survivors can still have their agency. Better deal for them since killers get nothing for the agency lost with the introduction of the upcoming anti camp feature.
I fail to see how it’s a complete crapshoot for survivor perk selection. Please explain.
I’ll concede to the fact that players on both sides like to feel powerful.
I disagree that it’s not by design that survivors are a team role and thus, should bring in team oriented perks to maximize their chances. You can’t complete gens without depending on your teammates ability to distract the killer. You can’t rescues yourself unless you equip a perk for it and even then you have to be a team player to get it to activate. It may not have been important to be a team player in the early days when the game released, but that changed a long time ago.
How does one get good at something? By practice and watch others who are better at it than you. You don’t get better at riding a bike by never removing the training wheels.
And yes, it is accepted that killers just need to get better and survivors need help. It’s all over the forums and social media. You have to be blind to not see it.
How is gen speed a pure balance issue and camping isn’t? The ability to give up pressure on gens to try and secure a kill is all part of the balance of the killer role. If it wasn’t part of the games balance, why is there a hook timer? Why not just let survivors respawn across the map after getting hooked? Because the devs balanced the game around killers of having the option to try and secure a kill with camping.
Camping isn’t an “issue” as you try to downplay it. It is a part of the game balance just as much as generator speed is, well, at least until the Devs change it.
But if we’re going balance the game on the merits of fun while taking away agency, when are killers going to get base-kit Pop since it’s not fun for them to have two to three gens get completed by the time they get their first hook? How about a Bamboozle become base-kit to help with strong loops like the house in Garden of Joy?There's a few broken loops/maps, those should be fixed.
I'm not sure what base kit pop would do to stop gens from flying too fast at the start. I'm open to the idea that overall balance changes need to be made, but given how hard getting the last gen finished can be I think if they were going slower it would be a huge problem.
I fail to see how it’s a complete crapshoot for survivor perk selection. Please explain.There are perks to counter killer strategies, but the survivors have no idea what the killer is going to run.
Lethal pursuer and other aura reading perks - distortion
Ultimate Weapon - Calm spirit
Camping - Kindred (if camped) or reassurance (if rescuing)
3 Gen - Potential Energy/Prove Thyself
Tunneling - Off the Record/Deadly Strike
etc.
Unless its a 4 man SWF, who could hypothetically meet all of the circumstances, there's no way for the survivors to cover all of that ground. And if you bring anti-camping perks and the killer doesn't camp, they are just wasted slots. That's were the crapshoot comes from.
Killer perks pretty much always get value. If you bring aura reading perks its highly unlikely ever survivor is running distortion.
How is gen speed a pure balance issue and camping isn’t?Because camping is one of multiple things a killer can do, especially if we limit it to just face camping. Its a playstyle, an approach to the game. Survivors have to do gens, there is no secondary strategy that they can pursue.
If it wasn’t part of the games balance, why is there a hook timer? Why not just let survivors respawn across the map after getting hooked? Because the devs balanced the game around killers of having the option to try and secure a kill with camping.I mean on the third sentence there they've said that the way camping gets used was never their intention.
Lots of things in the game were never their intention, some have worked out, some they've decided haven't.
The hook timer puts pressure on survivors to go for a rescue. The killer still has the ability to defend the hook, they are just losing the ability to do it in the most obvious way possible.
-
@Huge_Bush said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3548550#Comment_3548550
Camping is only as easy as survivors allow it to be (unless it’s Bubba).
Survivors always had plenty of freedom to pick whichever perks they wanted. They could have came into every match perkless and still do good against most killer, as long as they knew how to loop and do gens. But we all know that survivors love to feel powerful, which is why they always brought in the strongest perks. Besides, the survivor is a team role, they should some perks to be team oriented.
People are supposed to play the game, gain experience and get better. But the general survivor consensus is that they should have their hand held. Even when I was new, I learned pretty quickly just by watching what my teammates did to save me. Heck, I even ventured into killer just to see what it’s like and learned how to be a better survivor by repeatedly getting my ass handed to me.
Behaviour have changed their stance many times. It doesn’t matter what their stance is on things now, my point is that there is a bias when it comes to balancing for bad survivors and bad killers. It’s generally accepted that it’s okay for bad survivors to be coddled while bad killers just have to get better at the game. It shouldn’t be this way though. If killers are expected to get good, so too should survivors.
Do you want to address the fun point or not?
Survivors always had plenty of freedom to pick whichever perks they wanted.You're totally avoiding the issue that's its a complete crapshoot on the survivor side on whether they happen to guess right.
But we all know that survivors love to feel powerful,There's zero reason to believe this is anymore true of survivors then killer.
But the general survivor consensus is that they should have their hand held.You're not even trying to make an argument at this point, you're just disparaging motivations that you can't possibly know.
Besides, the survivor is a team role, they should some perks to be team oriented.Not BHVR's design, lots of things would have to change if this was true.
Even when I was new, I learned pretty quickly just by watching what my teammates did to save me. Heck, I even ventured into killer just to see what it’s like and learned how to be a better survivor by repeatedly getting my ass handed to me.Is personal experience the standard for proof?
Great, as killer I absolutely slaughtered survivors for the first few months I played. As survivor I was in turn massacred.
The numbers have evened off over time, but I will have a lot more easy games as a killer then I will a survivor.
It’s generally accepted that it’s okay for bad survivors to be coddled while bad killers just have to get better at the game. It shouldn’t be this way though. If killers are expected to get good, so too should survivors.That's not generally accepted at all. Especially given BHVR is only now gettinging around to address one of the easiest things in gaming, standing in front of a hook and waiting.
The only thing you've pointed out on the killer side is a pure balance issue, gen speed. Survivors are pointing to an issue, facecamping, and explaining why its not fun and how the ability to address it is really reflected by experience level in the game..
-
@daffyd said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3548450#Comment_3548450
"DbD shouldn't be a game with comms. Whatever theme it has left of a horror game doesn't work if you can constantly be talking to your team."
What can I say, people use communication software and causes an unfair advantage in the game.
"Yes, SWFs use them, yes its a disadvantage to Killers, but they are a smaller portion of the player base."
Please prove they are a small portion of the player base as they are not a small portion, far from it. Also it affects other survivors.
"Once it is optional we can then have a fair fun game for all, why haven't DBD done this already like other games?Because DbD is asymmetrical."
That is not a reason, other comments after this have already been addressed including players who play solo survivors and killer are unable to opt-out of players having unfair advantage on communications rather than players have the choice to opt-out of communications which is understanable for it to be more fairly balanced for all.
Please prove they are a small portion of the player base as they are not a small portion, far from it.Please prove they are not.
I'm not aware of the devs having talked about it in over a year, but it was a small number, especially for 4 player SWFs.
-
@Huge_Bush said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3548132#Comment_3548132
Someone getting downed after the unhook would be a survivor error. Killer hits one, another unhooks, the two injured run and the unhooker takes the next hit after the killers wipe animation completes. If that was too hard for most, they could have selected to equip BT. They also had the option to equip DS (even after the nerf it’s still useful to waste time) to waste even more time. Dead hard was and still is an option to protect an unhooker.
And please, don’t tell me that was too hard. I have over 6000 hours in this game, the majority of it in Solo Queue, and I’ve seen it done plenty of times. The times when we didn’t get it done was because survivors were too scared to approach the hook.
The only time the above wouldn’t be possible was against Bubbi or someone with an Instant Down. Rather than giving basekit BT to survivors the individual killers ability to completely lock down a hook should have been nerfed, not give a buff to survivors as a whole.
Picking perks to cover for your individual weakness is part of the game. You can argue that you want to pick fun builds, and that’s fine, but you can’t expect to succeed in matches if you don’t pick the most optimal build, especially if the opponent doesn’t want to play casually.
Again, it was a much more massive time sink to bless a totem than it was to cleanse one. Survivors had no problem with it because it gave them a brokenly powerful ability to consistently reset themselves. Before it got gutted, CoH was in every match and multiple survivors brought it in and multiple survivors had no problem blessing and reblessing totems.
With the amount of times they spent blessing totems, they could have cleansed totems twice over. It really is about wanting to only loop the killer and do gens. Even now that NoED glows like a disco ball, people complain about it because they don’t want to be bothered to play carefully in endgame and spend time looking for it.
While matchmaking is garbage, there’s not much they can do. They don’t have enough players at all skill levels to properly match them against equal skill. The killers you mention can be beaten by good survivors. Not comp level, just good survivors who know the basics of looping, are able to look behind while they loop the kill and are not afraid to touch gens when the killer is occupied. The general consensus is that the game is killer sided in low ranking amongst the noobs while it becomes survivor sided the higher you go. At the very top, it always has and always will be survivor sided.
I have over 6000 hours in this game, the majority of it in Solo QueueThe majority of players though don't have anywhere close to this number of hours.
But it does show the problem with camping:
It's an easy, no thought strategy for the killer
It wipes out new players
It is easily dealt with by experienced players
That's a bad feature.
@Huge_Bush said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3548318#Comment_3548318
It’s the error on the survivor that does the rescue. If no body brought it BT, it’s the error on everyone who didn’t bring it in. Even then, they didn’t need to have BT to pull off a successful rescue. Again, it only took two people without BT to make a rescue against a camping killer- unless they had an instant down.
It’s the same with killer, is it not? Gens go too fast? What’s the forums response to that complaint? Oh it’s “you’re just bad, get better at the game, abandon chase, bring in slowdown perks”. The same should be applied to survivors.
Again, it was not impossible nor overly difficult to rescue a camped survivor. If you’ve been playing since before BT became basekit you would have seen it happen plenty of times.
I’m reading what you wrote just fine, you’re just being obtuse.
If no body brought it BT, it’s the error on everyone who didn’t bring it in.It’s the same with killer, is it not? Gens go too fast? What’s the forums response to that complaint? Oh it’s “you’re just bad, get better at the game, abandon chase, bring in slowdown perks”. The same should be applied to survivors.Because these aren't the same at all.
As survivor you have to make a complete guess at how the killer will play. BT, reassurance, distortion, calm spirit, anti-totem, etc. I simply don't have enough perk slots to cover all the potential 'you should have brought X' to the game.
Killer on the other hand, its more of a question which perks best suit your playstyle. There's never a game were gen slowdown doesn't help, it might help more or less, but it doesn't just become irrelevant.
Finally, and most importantly, BHVR wants the game to be one where the killer pursues survivors off of gens, chases them, hunts for them, they don't think, and I agree with them, that camping leads to fun games. Whether a game mechanic is fun or not is the ultimate question.
-
DbD shouldn't be a game with comms. Whatever theme it has left of a horror game doesn't work if you can constantly be talking to your team.
Yes, SWFs use them, yes its a disadvantage to Killers, but they are a smaller portion of the player base.
@Farya said:
Baffling that some people still think that communication is the main strength of SWFs
I never played the game with friends, always solo. But I really think this is the main strength of SWF. What else is it, do you think? Maybe you can teach me better, since I just know the SWF from the killers side. Always knowing where the killer is and where he goes next without having to use Perks for it (same goes for team mates, their exact position and so on..) - yes I consider this the main strenght of SWF.
If things became a problem perhaps we could have languages accepted to play with or spoken for matchmaking
That would be great. Since "developing" or "learning" languages by just playing with french or balkan people f.e is nothing I could make use of, since I don't even know the basics of these languages.
Easy (sorry just copy and pasting answer above)
np, my response overlapped with your answer :P didn't read it by then.
But I really think this is the main strength of SWF. What else is it, do you think?1: You never have to have a "bad" teammate.
2: You can build the team to do specific things. Example: a player with deliverance, an anti-tunnel, etc.
3: Everyone plays for the team.
That's the argument I've heard at least from comp teams, never played SWF.
@daffyd said:
Please can we have communications (and opt-out option) in the actual game?
We have people who don't want this, sure, and they have their reasons but throw in a mute/opt-out of comms and we have a much fairer balanced DBD game where it can be balanced around communications rather than solo as it is now. Killers can then be buffed and everyone can have a fairer time.
I know there are those who use comms and wouldn't want to lose the advantage they currently get from Discord/Console chat but is that really an excuse and is it fair?
I know there are people who dislike communications in many ways such as being shy or hearing a just turned <insert legal age> player talking trash but again that is why mute exists.
Once it is optional we can then have a fair fun game for all, why haven't DBD done this already like other games?
There are negatives and positives such as making new friends !
Come on BHVR lets see some positive action to balance this game
Once it is optional we can then have a fair fun game for all, why haven't DBD done this already like other games?Because DbD is asymmetrical.
If you are playing a 5 v 5 game and, on average, two people on your team use comms then, on average, 2 people on the other team will use comms.
Giving comms to all survivors would be a buff, but we don't know how many survivors would make use of that buff. So BHVR would have a few choices:
1: Balance around the assumption that 4 players are always in communication. If so, the players not using this feature have in fact received a massive nerf.
2: Make no balance change until they see how the feature goes. Which creates the possibility that very few players use it, requiring no balance adjustments, but actually making the game harder for killers because there is now occasional communication.
--I think this scenario is much more likely than people anticipate. BHVR has to balance for a worldwide market which, as mentioned by others, doesn't share the same language. If the feature sees very small use around the world, buffing killers wouldn't make sense, even if killers were now being massacred on certain servers.
-
It's fine and extended no collision would be silly.
The killer can wait out the 10 seconds and get a down, go ahead and hit and send into deep wound (take out the possibility of dead hard), or try to get around them. Usually trying to body block is a bad idea, unless the rescuer is on death hook.
-
@Jangles said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3547331#Comment_3547331
Thats not the point. In what world did anyone sign up for 4 minutes on the ground? I came to play a game, not afk while someone stands over me.
The point is that its likely to be incredibly rare. With hook camping the killer can pretty easily bait in soloq players into at a minimum a trade, and on some killers like Bubba can camp the hook out and still have time to go after the rest of the survivors.
Neither of those hold true for slugs on the ground. On top of that, Unbreakable, Adrenaline, and Buckle Up all could undo the strategy.
If it becomes a problem, there are ways it could be addressed, but if we're going to make predictions we need to see if they make sense or not.
-
@Raccoon said:
I'm thinking that people that like to camp/proxy camp are just going to move on to bleeding out survivors every game unless they're going for a tome challenge/daily.
Some people will always take the path of least resistance, imo.
I could be wrong, but I have already seen some 'upset' people stating as much on the game's various socials.
That's a full four minutes. Even if every other survivor ran over, saw the slugged survivor being camped, and then ran back to their gens, they'd easily get gens finished in time.
You'd be facing a really easy 3e as killer, potentially even worse given the prevalence of buckle up allowing survivors to pick up the survivor at the end.
-
Choice of target: Not feasible, also the fact that someone suggested it doesn't mean its in anyway a common request.
Choice of action: As a survivor I have to do gens, I don't have some secondary option where I can find some welding tools and cut the door open. You win the game by putting survivors on hooks, you just can't stand in front of them for two minutes now.
-
I wonder if the ability to backfill becomes more and more difficult as this goes on.
I'm curious, was it a good game at least that you eventually played?
-
@BubbaDredge said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3545335#Comment_3545335
You asked a question, then answered it by quoting my post:
If the killer is not camping, why in the world would the survivors just not unhook.
You gotta know there are tons of players just playing to be obnoxious.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the answer, right up there /\ In my post, I followed up with details, but you summed it up just fine.
As to your implying I must be a bad killer "if survivors are so skilled they can run you on this razor-thin"... Have you really never at least played with a player that knew radiuses, ranges and timers, at least on basic things? That might not be the flex you think it is.
I'll learn, so I can't have it used against me. If I'm getting dinged, I want to deserve it. New facecamping might be really fun. I know obnoxious players exist, sometimes I'm one. Killers can be manipulative, too.
Also I play nice-at-the-end quite a bit, maybe instead of watching a 3-man let a solo die on first hook, I can camp him so he can live, then go tunnel his team. I can facecamp them, too, jumps will make the tunneling faster. See what I said about manipulating mechanics? I will definitely do this, I feel a kinship with good solo survivors.
Also with the obnoxious ones, as stated.
Anyways, you seem alright, but I'll totally kill you if we meet in the fog because you called me Toast. Now I have to make a list and put you on it. Crogers. That's the list. You. I'll be the Dredge that's always there, more often than you expect, anyway.
Nobody calls me Toast without me trying to pretend-murder them, so far. If I'm not playing Dredge, you'll probably be fine, but otherwise, it's done. Only one way to come off the list.
Again, so far. It's a new list.
Unless you play under a different name, if so, I guess you should keep the list.
As to your implying I must be a bad killerNo I'm not.
Have you really never at least played with a player that knew radiuses, ranges and timers, at least on basic things?Sure.
I'll learn, so I can't have it used against me.The question I keep asking though, is how.
If you encounter a survivor who can run you for an extended period of time in this razor thin window, you're toast.
I'd be toast, any killer in that situation would be.
The point is not about you, if the survivor is that much more skilled then the killer, the killer doesn't have a chance. It doesn't matter whether this mechanic exists or not. If the survivor can run the killer back and forth on the 16m edge radius for enough time to fill the meter, that was plenty of time for another survivor to go in and unhook.
-
I've never understood why it is there.
Maybe if we remove it, it won't actually change anything. But would anything actually be hurt by removing it? The feature doesn't seem to have any benefits, so even if it makes lobby dodging 1% less common it seems a worthwhile change to make.
-
@woundcowboy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3546412#Comment_3546412
You’re talking about matches as like they are a simulation or something. It is contradictory to compare “ideal” play because if one side wins, the other one didn’t play ideally. That’s the nature of pvp games. So yes, Nurse can win if she makes 100% correct reads, but the same can be said of survivors. My point is that survivors can outplay the Nurse, contrary to what most people say on this forum.
It's a hypothetical. Presuming perfect play by both sides, who wins?
In a symmetrical game if both sides played identically you get a draw. But this isn't a symmetrical game - thus if the two played perfectly, one would have to be favored.
I'd argue that it makes sense that the survivors win in this hypothetical scenario, as there are four of them the chance that none of them will make a mistake is a lot less likely.
The question though is whether the nurse reverses this trend. It's not about whether a perfect game is even possible, even with comp level breakdowns there's lots of tiny mistakes that are spotted.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/391922/noticing-a-trend
From a killer perspective, pallet stuns are unfun.
Exit gate camping is unfun.
Genrushing is unfun.
Pallet stuns - no, they're not. If they just took away stuns with no other changes, the game would be less engaging for the killer. It might feel better at first, but it wouldn't be.
Exit gate camping - I think EGC should start the moment the 5th gen is finished, so yeah.
Genrushing - It's much harder of a thing to change then something like hook camping. There's no way to address it without making balance changes, which may or may not be needed, but that's a different issue.
-
@kisfenkin said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3546223#Comment_3546223
Why would they wait it out? Unless they are SWF they have absolutely no obligation to sit on the hook and max their boldness only to get killed anyway.
But why wouldn't they just kill themselves on the hook anyway in the status quo?
If the survivor sees themselves being camped, and they have no interest in enduring it, right now they can just suicide right away.
Even if you are right, at least with this change there would be some time where they wait until the meter is full, and then have a little bit of a chase.
-
@ArronSwarm said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3545439#Comment_3545439
this game is made to have dumb stuff on both sides in that. That fact you made that comment, means you are hoping this game will be fully balanced. It will never be, bc if does this game is done. This game doesn’t need more base kit things added. You have perks for a reason in the game.
this game is made to have dumb stuff on both sides in that. That fact you made that comment, means you are hoping this game will be fully balanced. It will never be, bc if does this game is done.If the overall objective of the game is 'fun' (which I agree on), who exactly is having fun in the face camping scenario?
This game doesn’t need more base kit things added. You have perks for a reason in the game.If you changed reassurance to allow a survivor to do a rescue from 9m away, sure, I could see the point. The problem is that reassurance doesn't solve the issue. The survivor stuck on the hook is just stuck there longer.
The way to fix bad game design is to fix the game design.
-
@DrDucky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3545362#Comment_3545362
And what is early in the game? 5 minutes in? 10 minutes? 1 hour? It is too variable to be reliably added in, and if someone does not want to play they will just simply attempt after the early game attempt block is over.
Seriously? That's the issue?
That's like saying should survivors have 2, 3, 4, or 50 hook states, there's no way to decide!
No, you start with an educated guess, then you test it, and adjust as necessary.
My suggestion: the first two hooks can't kobe for the first 45 seconds they are on the hook, barring slippery meat/deliverance/EGC activating.
If we were going time limits, I'd say 3 minutes is a reasonable time frame.
-
@DrDucky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544069#Comment_3544069
There are so many factors not tracked by stats. Was a save preparing to happen or was the guy left on hook, was the killer camping or proxying, was the person trying to leap off the hook with the luck they brought? You cant track intent its not possible and lets say they punished you for attempting on hook, people if they want to leave the match will just run into the killer then let go on second stage. No matter what you suggest or how many stats you think the devs have, the survivor who wants to leave the match will find a way.
No matter what you suggest or how many stats you think the devs have, the survivor who wants to leave the match will find a way.No one is suggesting there is a way to make players never leave a game.
The simple question to start: why do players hook suicide? If they want out of the game, why not just disconnect? That would be a lot quicker.
Well, hook suiciding doesn't have a DC penalty and players can still keep their blood points (though the latter is likely not much of a factor).
Clearly the DC penalty is something people want to avoid.
Thus if attempting escape on hook early in the game was impossible, players are back to the choice of if they want to eat the DC penalty.
Which maybe they do, that's fine, at least in that case there's still a bot in the game.
-
@ays12151 said:
I want more from BHVR. This game has a massive potential, but with this condition this game will die soon.
You know DbD is not exactly a little known indie title, right?
-
@Alice_pbg said:
they could just have trapper start with all his traps... they could have him be like thor and like, magnet pull the traps from anywhere... or both of these.
but no... he's still the only killer that needs to go around the map to pick up his power to use it, and that after using it has to pick it back up or leave it there doing nothing.
"we know some traps spawn in the corners so they are essentially useless for the entire match. so we made more spawn to compensate" is not really a buff. it's a bandaid.
you would think that being in a world where every killer(not named myers) with a limited resource type power that just has it recharge somehow... would mean that trapper would get something... but no.
freddy, hag and I believe singularity all just replace the oldest thing with the newer one. which one can argue makes sense for freddy, but how is the physical drawing that hag did disappearing all of a sudden?
clown just holds a button.
artist, blight, bubba just... wait a bit.
huntress and trickster recharge at lockers... those are usually always close by and they never need to go to the corner of the map.
but trapper? no no no... you walk over there and grab the trap back up and then walk to where you want it and only then put it down. you would obviously be too strong if you could just set the trap down right away... or if you didn't need to walk a mini marathon around the map collecting the traps...
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3545190#Comment_3545190
with all due respect... who cares?
do you think deathslinger just carries a billion bullets in his pocket at all times? his gun doesn't work on compressed gas or springs you know? how does he keep getting those?
or do you think clown has a miniature laboratory in his belly? and a bottle factory? maybe he just starts the trial with 5000 bottles in his back pocket...
huntress grabs 1 hatchet from the closet, but it turns into 5.
but oh no... trapper getting his traps without walking to them is what breaks your suspension of disbelief? c'mon
do you think deathslinger just carries a billion bullets in his pocket at all times? his gun doesn't work on compressed gas or springs you know? how does he keep getting those?I don't have any comments on the substance of your post, but its a harpoon gun, it probably would run on compressed gas of some type.
-
@BubbaDredge said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3545240#Comment_3545240
Live, uh, finds a way.
I mentioned two right there in the post, there's no part where facecamping was involved:
- If they figure out a way to manipulate it so hooks stop being effective,
- If they keep jumping off because their team knows how to keep you within the zone
So if they can keep the killer in an area where the timer is going, while somehow avoiding it themselves. For example if the radius is different, or if the timer doesn't start until the same survivors is inside for a certain amount of time, they could take turns keeping the killer inside or making him run through it. Manipulating the way the mechanics work. Getting jump-offs against killers that don't camp will be huge.
I'm talking about convincing the game I'm facecamping when I'm not and not trying to, LIKE SURVIVORS DO ALREADY. I lose points every night because some idiot made me chase him around the hook for a minute. That dings my emblem and gets on my nerves. I lose points for proximity to hook, I wanted and deserved those points.
They are making the game think I'm camping when I'm not, exactly what I said they would do. They'll do what they do, you can tell because it's what they already do. Have you never seen survivors that keep the killer near the hook? You know you have, it happens about a third of the time.
And that's exactly what will happen with this, it's hard to create a system that can't be gamed. Survivors do it now and it only hurts their team, once they have a mechanic they can mess with, they will. Rather than unhooking, they'll try to get survivors to jump off in the hopes it makes the killer mad. Solos will have to get really good at jumping off, because SWFs will make them.
You gotta know there are tons of players just playing to be obnoxious. I feel like you are cool so you don't think that way, you're assuming everyone's just playing for fun and friendly-violence and will be glad facecamping is harder. Most of us will, but there's plenty of players just here because they think being a pain in the a## is funny.
And I'm cool with it. Sometimes it is funny. It would be boring if everyone played the same way. I don't think facecamping should be easy or effective, but I also don't think I should lose points/hooks/kills because survivors know how to mislead the game. I know for a fact they'll do it, because like I said, they already do. A lot.
So if they can keep the killer in an area where the timer is going, while somehow avoiding it themselves. For example if the radius is different, or if the timer doesn't start until the same survivors is inside for a certain amount of time, they could take turns keeping the killer inside or making him run through it. Manipulating the way the mechanics work.We've got quite a few assumptions here on things that could be true, but sure, let's just say they are. If the survivors are so skilled that they can keep you on this razor thin edge for enough time that the hook meter fills and you don't manage to down anyone else in that time, you're probably toast anyway.
Also, if they are running you in circles for that long, why not just unhook? If one survivor can keep you occupied that long, a teammate can just do an unhook and now 3 people can be on gens.
Plus, even if they manage to pull that off the survivor gets to unhook. Seems like a lot of risk when there is a much more simple solution.
And even if all of that is somehow still true, you could just go look for the other survivor(s) doing gens.
Getting jump-offs against killers that don't camp will be huge.If the killer is not camping, why in the world would the survivors just not unhook.
You gotta know there are tons of players just playing to be obnoxious.There are players who enter the game just for the purpose of looping. If someone wants to try looping me close to the hook, with the knowledge that their presence slows or stops the hook timer, and they want to keep confined to a tight area, okay, it's better than just chasing them around shack again.
Nothing says you have to be by the hook. Even if all of the survivors gathered by the hook, and somehow you didn't believe you could catch any of them, they're the ones that will eventually have to unhook.
-
Why would it be lost?
The anti-camp meter takes time to build, it's not like if you are within 6m the survivors can freely unhook.
The meter also slows down when other survivors are nearby.
-
@MrMori said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544930#Comment_3544930
I have some bad news for you, grandmaster.
That made me laugh.
Good news for the rest of us.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3545088#Comment_3545088
I mean, by that logic they should.
I'm not saying it is "MY" logic, i'm saying it is YOU ALL'S logic. I think they should balance this game around the highest level players like literally every other multiplayer game ever made. But you all keep telling me i'm wrong.
So all i'm doing is, pointing out that the devs are giving you exactly what you asked for.
Can't we just all celebrate the demise of 3 Gen SM without going through this again?
-
@kisfenkin said:
Why is nobody talking about the Camping changes? All I see right there is a great way to improve tunneling. A killer that intends to tunnel has just been given a quicker way to do it. They don't even have to wait for another survivor to show up! This will also lead to an increase in hook suicides in solo. Why would the selfish individuals that already suicide when they are first hooked bother giving the potentially camping killer another hit to help the other survivors? They will leave the match like before but now they have to use those attempts up even earlier or they will have the guaranteed unhook. Expect faster suicides and many more 3v1s with one gen done.
The way to reduce camping and tunneling (and slugging too!) is to give basekit Unbreakable if one survivor has been killed. This should be what they are doing, not improving tunneling and suicides.
I really like that BHVR is finally admitting old killers need some love but their idea of buffs really aren't going to do much.
Why would the selfish individuals that already suicide when they are first hooked bother giving the potentially camping killer another hit to help the other survivors? They will leave the match like before but now they have to use those attempts up even earlier or they will have the guaranteed unhook. Expect faster suicides and many more 3v1s with one gen done.What? I don't see the connection.
-
A true anti-tunnel system, probably not. It would just be such a massive game change that I don't see how they could do it.
Making tunneling a little harder, such as increasing the haste boost off hook, or other base kits buffs when unhooked (no blood trails or moans for 20 seconds as an example), probably not, but that could happen.
-
@gnehehe said:
If I want to move on, I will move on ... and there is NOTHING you can do to stop it.
Deal with it, period!
If I want to move on, I will move on ... and there is NOTHING you can do to stop it.Deal with it, period!I do enjoy the tough guy talk with capital letters and exclamation marks to decree that you have the ability to alt f4.
Obviously you can quit a game, but BHVR can impose timeout penalties for certain actions to make it much less likely such players will be in matches or that those actions will be taken. I doubt they will, but there are lots of things they could do.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3543773#Comment_3543773
Thanks for this great reply!
About the fast vaults. I hope i understand you correctly, since i dont know any of the issue the game had recently. It seems to me that fastvaulting does not give you that much of a distance then it used to be back in 2020/21. The animation looks shorter, not really like a fast vault, more like a medium. This is a bug, correct? If so, that is something they really should fix asap, it is very game changing.
About 60% killrate. That makes some sense, i agree with you. But on the other side, how should devs know this accuratly who benefits more? For example, the killer is the only role who can determine, how the game goes. So if he stays afk, its 4 escapes. If he decides to farm, it is a 4 escape. On top of that, he can give hatch for free or let the last 1 or 2 players escape through the gate, which happens commonly. I can remember a survey where almost 20% of the killers always let the last survivor escape. I am one of them. The devs cant possible know if it not actually the way around and free hatches, farming ect actually lowers the "real" killrate more then afk or throwing survivors are.
Yes i saw that it is only like 7 or 8.000 playing this game. Interestingly enough, many of the DBD content creators i follow changed since weeks to that game and are all praising it (as far as i have seen). Same goes for those who are in my friendslist (many DBD players), i see them all only in TCM anymore.
About the Alien. Well like i said, it might be to early to fully make a statement on that killer, those were only my first thoughts. I also have the same early feelings for other "new" killers aswell. Like the Raven Birdy Lady, who can just close loops and can crossmap even better then huntress (while still be 115%, ######### is that?) or The Mastermind. Somehow he is able to do so many things at once. A passive slowdown with the exposed timer, beeing able to vault pallets and a very insane gapecloser and extremly strong chase power.
For example, the killer is the only role who can determine, how the game goes. So if he stays afk, its 4 escapes. If he decides to farm, it is a 4 escape.The thing is if one survivor AFKs, sacrifices, etc. the chance of a 4k goes way up. So if every player in the game (survivor and the killer) has an equal chance of AFKing, that's actually four times as many games resulting in a 4e then a 4k.
I also think survivors have a much higher likelihood of rage quitting then killers do before the game is actually decided, but that's just my perception on the issue.
On top of that, he can give hatch for free or let the last 1 or 2 players escape through the gate, which happens commonly.I generally let survivors go as well, but I'll say I notice this much less frequently in survivor games lately. Might be an MMR thing.
I hope i understand you correctly, since i dont know any of the issue the game had recently. It seems to me that fastvaulting does not give you that much of a distance then it used to be back in 2020/21I only started a year ago, but here's my understanding.
Fast vaults are supposed to be quicker (naturally) but also push the survivor farther away from the window. They 'fixed' this in August (Otz video / comparison video here about twenty seconds in), but male survivor were vaulting farther (video). So they reverted the fix, with many feeling that fast and medium vaults were now equal, though still kept the bug about male survivors jumping farther (another Otz video).
Hopefully they fix it soon.
-
@TerraEsram said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544049#Comment_3544049
My bad luck give me a problem with my computer, so I don't have anymore the recording system from Nvidia, next time I play, I gota be prepared, but thank's for the clarification
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544037#Comment_3544037
What BM mean?
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544043#Comment_3544043
It was... Particuliar
My bad luck give me a problem with my computer, so I don't have anymore the recording system from Nvidia, next time I play, I gota be prepared, but thank's for the clarificationMy understanding of the complaints system, unless it is something that happened in chat (i.e. racism), without a recording there's really no chance on the complaint front.
What BM mean?Bad manners
@Ayodam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3544049#Comment_3544049
Didn’t a dev recently comment something about the mountain of evidence it takes to prove that a killer and a survivor were working together? Like just because a survivor leads a killer to another survivor, that doesn’t prove intent (they were working together, it was deliberate/griefing, etc) which is why it seems that people are almost never punished for doing it. I know Peanits said that slugging and even repeatedly slugging the same person isn’t a rule violation because survivors eventually bleed out. So they can’t really be held indefinitely by that.
On the mountain of evidence: It's why I originally mentioned a recording as that seems to be a necessity.
I remember the @Peanits comment you mentioned (I think it is this one), I've also seen @Mandy talk about some of these issues, my understanding:
A survivor leading a killer to another survivor is not against the rules. Even intentionally sabotaging another survivor is not (exception for body blocking in a corner).
A killer doesn't have to kill. If the killer just suddenly decides to stop playing, its fine (e.g. you can't ban a killer for letting a player go).
However, if the killer and survivor work together to farm/eliminate a survivor, that's against the rules. One of the few reports I've heard of being successful is recordings of survivors leading killers to a location and pointing at a locker while the killer ignores the pointer. In that instance you have all the characters on screen and can see the interactions, intent doesn't matter in a case like that, because the action itself is what's against the rules.
Presuming everything in the OP's comment is exactly as mentioned, this seems to be a case. The other survivor picked him up on multiple occasions, at no point did the killer try to injure the survivor doing the picking, nor did they even move away from that location, demonstrating both working together (no attempt to hit one survivor) and griefing (forcibly keeping a player in position).
It would really depend on the video.
-
It's not up to BHVR.
If I buy a character via Steam, Valve gets a cut. If I could buy it on Playstation, but use it on PC, Valve is bearing costs without getting the revenue.
This got discussed during a lawsuit about Sony charges for cross progression
-
@C3Tooth said:
My last night were Nurse x2, Doctor, Myer, Huntress, Xeno x2, Freddy, Oni, Blight x2, Slinger (not in order).
Somehow killers main only get to play against Blight, Nurse, Wesker. In multiple posts.
Somehow killers main only get to play against Blight, Nurse, Wesker. In multiple posts.I do wonder whether its a perception issue, region issue, or MMR issue.
If BHVR is releasing more stats that is one I'd like to see, frequency of killer choice by MMR and region.
For me, I see most of the killers about the same, with the exception of Wesker and Xeno being really common.