crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
If you want more chase oriented game play, that's fine, but to compare it to a horror theme seems a stretch. Hiding is an essential part of horror. Some of the most intense moments I've had in the game is when I've crouched in a bush while the killer searches nearby and I don't know whether I'm going to be found or not. That's the closest the game actually gets to a horror feeling. Chasing and looping is fun, but its a tag simulator.
-
It never even crossed my mind that people had a problem with this. Seems just the right level to me to get noticed without being intrusive.
-
I enjoy the indoor maps, overall prefer them, but they play quite differently and can see why people might dislike them.
-
The first thing I think needs to be touched on is the distinction between core design, which is what we are discussing, and live balance, which we are notBeing we're talking about premise flaws, I think there is a flaw in this structure. Any killer concept could hypothetically work with just the right levels of balancing and you could always say its just a balancing issue. I think though that skull merchant's design intrinsically leads to bad games.
Obviously, the Skull Merchant has a more complicated core design than the Trapper,Some others have pointed this out, but I'm also going to disagree. Trapper has to think about whether it is worth the time to pick up traps, move them, and his traps actually feel like a limited resource. You click more frequently with SM, but that's much different than complicated.
It's a strategic and versatile idea, one that asks the player to create a gameplan before the match starts and craft their loadout accordingly.The whole concept of a 'strategic' killer in this vein is a bad idea (I dare say the entire concept of a strategic killer is bad for the game, but we might mean different things). The primary reason is the difference between SWFs and soloq.
Let's say you deploy a strategy that has three possible counter-plays. A SWF can instantly call out what you are trying to do and pick which option they want to attack (say for example grouping up on a gen vs spreading out). A soloq though one player might think they should take option A, another option B, and the third might not even see what the killer is doing.
If the killer can deploy a strategy that the rest of the survivors need to counter as a group, you're effectively saying soloq doesn't stand a chance against that type of killer (also, they'll probably be crushed by SWFs, because the problem with strategy scenarios is inevitably there comes to be a best type of action to solve it, which SWFs will figure out really quickly).
Chase killers are different. SWFs still have an advantage, they always will, but the players still need to do their chases.
-
I was excited for Skull Merchant when she was coming out, I thought a strategic killer would be a good idea, but I was wrong and its a bad design.
-
It's really the only way to do it. If they had an exception for game crashes when people wanted to disconnect they'd just force crash their game to avoid the DC penalty.
-
Realistically, I have no idea how to fix this issue. Do we just keep things how they are? Is change really necessary? Again, I have no idea.Broadly, no, change isn't necessary. Generally, I like Otz's takes, but when he said survivors were going to realize this is unfun, I was thinking that's exactly the thing that makes the game fun. Not knowing what the killer has actually creates the impression that they are strong, something to be scared of. The randomness of each match is a huge part of what makes the game fun.
On top of that, there is the whole strategic layer to the game. Taking coup means you give up some other perk. The fairness of the game shouldn't be judged on whether each chase was a perfect display of skill, but whether the overall trial was (and even then probably not, more whether over many trials the game averages out to fair).
-
Whatever has the BP bonus, mainly because I don't want to wait around for a game. That means I play a lot more survivor, though the Cage DLC gave me a lot of time to play killer.
The thing that makes me a survivor main though is how long I play. If I play killer I'll probably only play one or two games and then go play something else, but I can spend hours on soloq survivor.
-
Pigs slowdown once she has the traps on is so powerful that if there was a way you could make her early game strong she'd suddenly be a top tier killer. If you are only losing two gens by the time you got a hat on, you're doing okay.
I find that I can get a few successful uses of her ambush per game. You're using BBQ, I find a useful strategy is after a hook look to see if anyone is running for the unhook. Take up an ambush spot between where they are and where the hook will be. Likewise if a gen gets popped, try to find the next most logical gen the survivors will head toward. You don't always have to chase, you can wait and actually ambush (though this is risky if you misread where they are going).
Both strategies drop if you think you are hitting 4 person SWFs as someone might spot you.
-
I'll will die on the hill that survivors lose because of their teammates way more than the killers skill.I don't think people really disagree with this, the difficulties of soloq are often attributed to chance of a really bad teammate, but I don't know why it would be more true now than in the past.
-
@MB666 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3518807#Comment_3518807
buddy u forgot that things like styptic on medkits , or even a syringe play can happen on shack if someone loops that , drops the pallet , get fully heal and keeps running around shack , and because of the anti-camp stuff they might be able to even get a free unhook on those cases. which is something am worried , because yeah on solo Q it might not happen that often but on SWF is gonna be annoying as hell.
thats gonna be a nightmare mostly on RPD - Garden of joy , etc.
the thing is that they are adding an anti-camp mechanic first when survivor had reassurance instead of fixing the problematic maps first which is bad , also knowing that MFT are making those maps even more broken.
buddy u forgot that things like styptic on medkits , or even a syringe play can happen on shack if someone loops that , drops the pallet , get fully heal and keeps running around shackSo a survivor has burned through all of their resources to get an unhook. Okay, still sounds like a risky play that might be impressive if pulled off. But there is a strategy trade here - in this case the survivors have burned their resources, at risk, instead of just sending two survivors to unhook or one to do a hook trade.
Though it's worth pointing out this would be even worse if no one was on hook. They could do the same looping structure with the medkit resources and it would be even worse for the killer as three survivors could be on gens. In both situations the killer has to make a decision on whether or not to commit.
@MB666 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3518779#Comment_3518779
if you are bad at survivor you know that intentionally looping next to the hooked survivor is a bad play , yeah some killers can abuse that by intentionally playing bad , but what if as killer someone decides to do that to you and run to a hooked survivor on purpose to IDK trying to use a strong tile and if that guy has a lot of second chance perk or soo your only options becomes.(DH, styptic , Syringe)
i should let them unhook someone for free or either be punished anyway by a mechanic that instead of focusing on prevent camping seem like more like cheese mechanic that rewards survivor for doing the bad play of looping close to someone hooked.
YES a killer should be totally punished when facecamping intentionally and not even trying to go for someone else , but not the ones that are forced to stay because a guy is just playing poorly and leading the killer into hooked survivors , which is pretty common.
i should let them unhook someone for free or either be punished anyway by a mechanicYou don't have to let them do anything, but you do have to make choices. This is like saying survivors shouldn't be able to go in different directions because the killer can only chase one of them.
that rewards survivor for doing the bad play of looping close to someone hooked.It's still probably a bad play. If you lead the killer right to the hook and don't have the ability to do amazing looping, you're still going to have to do a trade and/or get downed. It's not if the killer enters the hook radius the survivor gets a free unhook, the killer has to be in the area for some time (we currently have no idea what amount).
-
@MB666 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/388220/promised-anti-camping-mechanic
while i do want that mechanic to finally do not allow people to just face camping with deadlock and stuff over and over.
I rather prefer that to be delayed a bit more untill other topics get fixed like the current unhealthy MFT situation.
as far as i know that mechanic if it is the same we heared on the anniversary stream , its gonna be terrible and easily abusable for survivor on many maps with gens near to hooks and forcing the killer to lose when the survivor is the one doing a bad play.
best example lets see if I hook a guy in the shack (NOT BASEMENT) and another guy loops that area intentionally, it means that as long as I keep chasing that guy , the other guy that is hooked is gonna be able to unhook themself for free?
(if "YES" thats gonna be awful)
best example lets see if I hook a guy in the shack (NOT BASEMENT) and another guy loops that area intentionally, it means that as long as I keep chasing that guy , the other guy that is hooked is gonna be able to unhook themself for free?(if "YES" thats gonna be awful)So we don't know the time a killer can be around the hook, or the range, which will impact this, but as @EvilSerje said I don't see the problem.
1: If there is a survivor that can loop you for that long and in that small of a space, you are probably in trouble anyway.
2: It's a risky play on their part. If the survivor trying to loop gets downed their team is in a lot of trouble.
3: Even if you run into a situation where the survivor could loop you in that small of space, you don't have to stay there. There are two other survivors out there healing or doing gens that you can go find if you are in a bad spot.
-
@pizzavessel15 said:
but survivors are able to switch to their best loadout at last second so it kind of contradicts itself
Conceptually, each killer you have has a different MMR. Which should make sense, you might be great with one killer and bad with another. So MMR needs the killer to stay consistent. However, every survivor is exactly the same.
This is different than loadouts, which don't affect MMR at all. Both killers and survivors can switch their loadouts last second.
The only real issue is that the killer can see the survivors, which is a totally different issue. If BHVR wants the killer to be able to tell what they are going against and make adjustments, the current system is a failure with survivors trying to play a fake out game, but that's a totally different question.
also would like to know how come survivors can use event addons at any time but killer event addons are flat out disabled at the end of the event?Probably because the killer add-ons tend to actually create new powers (blight serum), while survivor items generally are just slightly different versions of already existing yellow/green items
-
The problem with quality of life discussions is that different players like different things. Some streamers seem to love singularity because he's not as straightforward as some other killers, which after 1000s of hours of playtime is probably a welcome improvement.
-
@Evan_ said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3516346#Comment_3516346
Conspiracy theory time:
Many perceive slightly better players than themselves as a comp-SWF-squad, and slightly worse players as troll baby-survivors. Maybe because of the game's snowbally nature, maybe because we can't imagine how much better and how much worse players are out there besides those we usually face.
I think a lot of this is true and goes to human psychology. If MMR works players should get to a point where they feel like they hit top tier competitors, regardless of whether it is true or not.
In addition to the snowballing, I think people don't really grasp the probabilities. Example: let's say I'm using huntress and I have a 50% chance to hit the survivors with a hatcher based on our skill levels. One out of four times I'll hit the first two shots and be doing great, one out of four times I'll miss the first two and potentially be way behind. But people tend to think in the first scenario that the survivor was just really bad and in the second that the survivor was really good, when its more of a case of randomness. Given how important the early game is, early good luck/bad luck can be a deciding factor.
@saym said:
I'm surprised so many people say this game is a casual game. If it's a casual game, why are so many people commenting on balance changes? I think it's because people want the game to be fair. So what does the game look like when we seek fairness? The answer is simple. Makes the game more competitive. In other words, it can be said that many people are really looking for competitiveness in their hearts. Fairness⇄Competitiveness
I'm surprised so many people say this game is a casual game. If it's a casual game, why are so many people commenting on balance changes?If you took everyone on the forums, reddit, etc. posting about the game, we'd still make up well under 1% of the player base.
Also, a casual game can still have balance changes, things can be broken, those two aren't really related.
-
@Beatricks said:
I hate threads like this with a passion.
The narrow minded focus on the ad hominem completely undermines the critical point that will be completely overlooked because everyone is just mindlessly spamming that developers usually don't play their game.
Meanwhile, the real problem, the fact that the people who actually DO play the game and understand the balancing issues, are completely ignored with the blanket statement of "every voice is as important as the other". I'm sorry, but if Magnus Carlsen has to say something about chess, I will actually listen to him as opposed to some rando 1300 ELO player.
It's so infuriating and disappointing that BHVR is sitting atop an absolute goldmine of stats and data and they just...do nothing with it, because they must release that 2-3 Feng skins every 3 months or people won't open up their wallets.
Meanwhile the map designs are beyond horrible and every lesson that should have been learned like 2-3 years ago are just completely forgotten.
The problem isn't that the devs don't PLAY their own game. The problem is that the devs don't UNDERSTAND their own game.
And people whiteknighting for them isn't going to get you free bloodpoints folks.
Meanwhile, the real problem, the fact that the people who actually DO play the game and understand the balancing issues, are completely ignored with the blanket statement of "every voice is as important as the other". I'm sorry, but if Magnus Carlsen has to say something about chess, I will actually listen to him as opposed to some rando 1300 ELO player.The problem is what exactly you are asking the expert about. Bobby Fischer grew bored with chess, but the amount of time he put into the game is not reflective of what most people will experience even if they play the game their entire lives. Likewise, strategies that work in professional athletics are not always the best fit for high school teams.
This is especially true of DbD were those playing 4 person SWFs/comp level are playing under a totally different game style then the majority of players.
-
Theory that hasn't been posited, fixing hug tech would mess up other parts of the game's code and would be a massive investment to address, so it hadn't been done, and thus addons aren't touched because it would look weird to fix those while leaving a bug in play.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3517773#Comment_3517773
When i do some some code, i do for sure test it before i hand it to others, even when the code i do is just simple batch code.
Perhaps testing/playing the game should be a part of the work? - in the working hours.
I would not expect them to do so in their free time.
It might also be good for "team building" that they get to have fun together, in their work hours.
So I think there is a misunderstanding: when we're talking about whether the devs play the game, no one literally means the devs never actually enter the game. During work I'm sure they look at it, as Mandy mentions, but that's a very different type of playing. What we're talking about is whether they go home and in their free time are playing the game like the rest of us.
-
The proposed anti-tunneling mechanic was that if a killer is too close to the hook for too long, the survivor can escape freely, and this turns off during EGC. Just want to clear that up off the top.
I really hope they get the anti-camp mechanic in: primary reason, its one of those things that devastate soloq but SWFs handle without a problem. SWFs can communicate to just stay on gens, who goes for the reassurance, and when to do a hook trade and/or team rescue, while against soloq an early game hook camp can just basically decide the game.
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3517332#Comment_3517332
Because there are situations where the survivors give you every reason to camp someone out. If I hook someone and all 3 survivors swarm me around the hook, then guess what I'll do?
I'm not going to run across the map and wait for them to reset and remove any pressure I have on them. The same is true when even 1 survivor is obviously near the hook. 2 survivors are not progressing faster than I am in that situation. When all survivors are injured and I have someone on a hook, then why wouldn't I camp them? Before they can even attempt to get an exchange they will need to heal.
By nerfing tunneling and camping you also make the survivor role more forgiving for mistakes because you take away any possibility for the killer to capitalise on their mistakes, which incentivises them to play even more reckless. This is already a problem. I've seen a lot more Deliverances over the past couple days. Why could that be? Surely it's not because they can simply rush the hook, get an unhook because I can no longer stop them and get their Deliverance for free, is it?
The funny thing about tunneling is that right now it's stronger than it has ever been. Because instead of healing, they'll rush gens with Resilience, which also takes away the possibilities of a safe bodyblock. Instead of running DS and OTR there are a lot MFTs and WoOs. Basically survivors try to progress their own objective as fast as possible and completely ignore any defenses they might need. 1 year ago before 6.1.0 killers actually had a risk when tunneling someone. That risk is no longer there. And that is to a degree on the survivors themselves, that make it so easy and so much more necessary.
If I hook someone and all 3 survivors swarm me around the hook, then guess what I'll do?I'm not going to run across the map and wait for them to reset and remove any pressure I have on themThis doesn't make sense given what they are proposing. It's not like you lose the game if you spend too long around the hook.
In the above situation with the anti-camp mechanic, you chase the survivors. Now, if they manage to keep you there for an extended period of time, the person on the hook gets free. But, if three people are truly there then they probably could have just freed the person anyway.
And while we don't have the numbers, in the new set up you can still camp, there's just a timer for how long. If a survivor is about to progress to the next hook stage, it makes perfect sense for the killer to go and face camp. And with an anti-camp mechanic we now have a structure when and when not camping is abusive.
By nerfing tunneling and camping you also make the survivor role more forgiving for mistakes because you take away any possibility for the killer to capitalise on their mistakes, which incentivises them to play even more reckless.Right now, the math on camping is simplistic: take two wounds to get the person free (presuming no insta down abilities). With an anti-camp mechanic it adds more variety. One survivor could try and run the killer near the hook, potentially allowing an escape with no injuries, but it now creates the possibility for the killer to get an additional down and hook with no escape.
-
I don't think people would like the results if the devs played the game a lot just for fun. Whatever circumstances they tended to run in the most in their games would get the attention. The game varies not just by geography and MMR, but each individual has elements that they are better or worse at in the game.
Also, things like ranked and casual mode ideas have been discussed. The implication that just because they haven't done what you think should happen means they don't play the game is a bad presumption. Just look around the forums, people disagree on lots of game elements, the devs are aware of ranked and casual mode ideas, they just don't think they are good ideas.
@BlackRabies said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3517544#Comment_3517544
Wait for things to get better.... yeah. Took them 7 years to add a search bar, 1 year to change 1 digit for mori from 1 hook to 2. Sure they do eventually improve the game, but it takes them unacceptably long to add any QoL changes the game needs.
The search bar is actually a good example of why they should listen to the community more than themselves. The devs don't need a search bar. They've spent time designing, discussing, programming, and fixing each of the perks. I imagine the devs could find whatever perk they are looking for very easily, its the players who need a search bar.
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3517544#Comment_3517544
I do expect my mechanic to test my car after fixing it.
That's an interesting comparisons, but three points
1: I only expect my mechanic to the test the car, it will likely be a small portion of the time they spend working on it.
2: I would never expect them to test it outside their working hours.
3: Test driving the car is very rarely down by the head mechanic.
I think BHVR would meet all comparisons.
-
Like Hope, it's an end game perk. You might not make it to end game, or you might make and not need it, and thus it was just a wasted perk slot. It certainly feels powerful when it activates at the exact right time, but if you aren't in chase with a killer feels kind of pointless.
Overall fine. The major survivor objective is getting the gens done, opening the doors is not the game's challenge, if the survivors want to bring perks to ensure they get away in that last stage, that doesn't seem a problem.
Lots of people point out how it can be abused in 4 person SWFs, yeah, but that's basically the whole game.
-
This gets brought up every now and then and yeah, I agree. They wouldn't even have to go that far, they could just disable hook suicides for the first 30 seconds after getting put on a hook for the first and second survivors hooked - you could still have end of game attempts that way.
-
I'll start by saying that I don't think any perks should be able to double up as it makes things really hard to balance and advantages the game to those who've put in time/spent more money to unlock everything. So on that ground I wouldn't have any problem doing away with the combo.
That said, I think it appears more powerful from the killer perspective then it is. As a survivor doing gens it becomes more obvious just how much time is consumed pulling this off. That's both all the time following the chase, and time spent mending/healing,, with the risk that you don't even pull it off instead of doing gens.
I mean its not bad, but as a survivor I've been in situations seeing others using this perk to eat up killer time, but if they'd been on gens we would have escaped.
-
Every time this topic comes up, all I want is the ability to self police if this is true. If we're all playing for our own fun, and you hard tunnel, bubba camp, 3 gen skull merchant, etc I want the right to hide in the corner of the map and do the bare minimum to not attract crows. Let's open it up to both sides, as long as its in the game, you can do it. The game version of mutually assured destruction.
-
@Mushwin said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3508781#Comment_3508781
No, but it would be a good thing to experience and whitness, ripping a face hugger off! lol
Design elements like that might be cool for a couple of games, but if it doesn't work mechanically people will stop liking it really quickly.
The Xenomorph seems to be a fairly direct, chase focused killer. That seems to be the communities preference.
-
On perks: yeah, there are a lot of them, but its not like you can release characters without three new perks now. I imagine if they had any idea how long of a life the game would have, they would have probably tried to only do two perks per survivor/killer.
-
I saw that video earlier and it felt like it didn't live up to the title at all.
It was a close game. He made some plays that didn't work out. Some could be called mistakes, some were guesses on what he thought the survivors would do. That's how games work.
-
When I started playing I saw that Claudette was a recommended survivor to start with given her perks. I just kind of stuck with her.
-
There's not enough new players to be casual as a game. If you measure your hours in the hundreds, much less thousands, any game will change. While I wasn't around for the 'casual' days, I think people confuse casual with new. You can't replicate that 'new' feel. Both sides, especially at anything above low MMR, know the loops, where the gens are, and basic strategy. Even if you are playing 'chill' you are going to be more optimized than when the game was anywhere close to new.
-
@dbdthegame said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505469#Comment_3505469
You're literally arguing against the ghosts of Christmas past. At no point did I infer that the devs needed to take action, nor is the thread even directed at them. I already stated this was a SWF, and evidently, the James was coordinating with the rest of them until endgame. This was by no means a 3v1. The message of the thread should be quite obvious to anyone not attacking a strawman; I am directing this to survivor mains who are constantly complaining that they only face strong killers, and giving photo evidence as to why someone like me; a killer main; would only play strong killers.
The thing is, and I've already stated this many times in this thread if you'd bothered to read it, the only reason I got the result I did is because these survivors were atrocious at the game (not just average, straight up atrocious). I would have stood absolutely no chance against halfway decent survivors on the same map if they were completely perkless and itemless. The point is specifically that survivors will often go out of their way to put all the chips on their side (map offering, broken items, S-tier perks, 4-man SWFing) and will still complain if they play against a killer that's above B-tier. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.
The thing is, and I've already stated this many times in this thread if you'd bothered to read it, the only reason I got the result I did is because these survivors were atrocious at the game (not just average, straight up atrocious).This is going to be a crazy idea, but maybe MMR is working?
Let's take everything you say at face value: maybe you're at an MMR were an even game is bad survivors with items or good survivors without items.
One game doesn't prove anything, especially a screen shot, but its just stunning that you shared a game of you winning playing a killer the devs have basically said they don't mind being weak and you seem surprised people are pointing it out (though @Sharby is probably right that this is bait meant to flex).
-
@BillToLast said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3505661#Comment_3505661
Bro, if you don't believe me, even Otz recently said that any mediocre killer can easily reach top MMR in a short amount of time.
Just think logically: If you win more games than you lose, you will inevitably hit the MMR cap regardless of your skill.
That's not even what the discussion is about. I am simply asking around about good tunneling builds with different killers.
That's not even what the discussion is about. I am simply asking around about good tunneling builds with different killers.The problem is that your posts don't go together. People at "max MMR" aren't asking for build tips.
-
I see this strategy fail more than succeed. If I down someone in that corner unless I'm playing with Iron Grasp I don't even touch them. Depending on the killer in the game, that basement area can be hard to get out of after you are picked back up and you risk the rescuer also getting injured.
Also, because the person going down wants to be downed, they frequently give up the chase earlier than they would otherwise, saving the killer time there.
But yeah, if the killer wastes time trying to get you out, it will really quickly swing the game.
-
Back when Overbrine was common I felt that having 4 gens would have helped, but now its not a big deal especially being they've announced they want to rework to make tight 3 gens less common.
-
@NerfDHalready said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3503565#Comment_3503565
yeah sorry i just realized it looks like a brick of words, might edit it
i think i never faced a killer that wants my teammate while playing survivor, but from now on if i do i'll just stand and be afk while they try to find the teammate so there will be no working together. not progressing the game isn't a violation for sure (wish it was) but as killer i'm hoping to get a solid answer to what i'm supposed to do in such scenarios.
meanwhile by the way i'd also be wasting the other survivor's time so isn't it understandable they want to get this done asap?
idk how much sense this makes, promoting selfish play. are they smarter for being selfish in an "already lost" match? what happens when both remaining survivors decide to hide? this is where the hiding becomes taking the game hostage, hence an "attempt".
That I think is an explicit violation. You can target survivors for whatever reason you want, but survivors cannot work with the killer.
if it's a violation only on survivor's end then my question above would be answered.
There are so many things on both sides on end game that I wish they would fix. Killers hate the hiding survivors, survivors hate getting slugged and bled out while a killer runs around looking for the others, I wish they would fix both at the same time.
i really hope so. the fact hatch is the root of all these problems... i made and reinforced posts about the removal of hatch but i don't really believe anymore we'll get any improvements on this aspect of the game since as you said selfish play is promoted, mind boggling.
if it's a violation only on survivor's end then my question above would be answered.The things I think they see as clear violations - killer picking up the survivor and letting them wiggle free and then leading to the other survivor, the survivor pointing out the hiding survivor location while the killer makes no attempt to attack the helper.
The trickier layer is that they have covered it is not against the rules for one survivor to lead the killer to another. However, I think they see it as a line cross when either it is clear that the killer had no intent of attacking the helping survivor or rewards the survivor for their behavior.
-
Line breaks, please, especially with questions if you want an official response.
My understanding:
as the mighty killer themselves, do i have the right to decide who i am willing to kill and who to spare?Generally, yes.
to making an agreement with the other survivor who would still be tryingThat I think is an explicit violation. You can target survivors for whatever reason you want, but survivors cannot work with the killer.
can i refuse to kill the survivor i keep finding because they will still try to do gens and go after the other one?This I think is fine, because you aren't working with the survivor and the game can still be brought to an end.
isn't the hiding useless survivor attempting to take the game hostage, which also is a bannable offense?It's a contradiction in the game design. The developers want survivors to be able to play for hatch, and they don't want survivors to have to work together, but also don't want survivors to be able to drag the game out. I wish they'd do something to limit the hiding, but I don't think they actually penalize it (maybe with the exception if a person does it from the start of the game).
I believe the official answer on this is that they aren't holding the game hostage because you as killer can still technically find them (compared to say body blocking someone in a corner).
is there a path i can take to avoid violating rules to not reward being useless because i don't want them to be majority of survivor playerbase?Unfortunately I think the only answer is find them. Devs seem generally cool with the idea of survivors playing absolutely for themselves, even if that creates an incredibly boring scenario.
-
There are so many things on both sides on end game that I wish they would fix. Killers hate the hiding survivors, survivors hate getting slugged and bled out while a killer runs around looking for the others, I wish they would fix both at the same time.
-
Back in the days of Overbrine, I played a roughly 45 minute match to beat a 3 genning Knight. I swore off after being in that situation again so I have no interest in playing with a 3 genning merchant.
-
Hit and run is one of the better elements of the game and unfortunately only really available to a few killers. As killer it adds an interesting decision making element, do I pursue that survivor for a down, or go after another easier to hit target but risk that survivor getting healed up. As survivor you now have to be aware of where the killer might be, healing becomes extremely important, but risky.
The only real downside to hit and run as a gameplay element is it becomes much easier to deal with as a SWF.
So I don't agree and don't get how people who seem to want the game to be a chase simulator are able to keep playing.
My only real problem with Wraith is his breathing, some players pick this up easily, others can't seem to hear it at all.
-
@biggybiggybiggens said:
If the licenses are as "BIG L" as they made it sound, they'd have to be something that most people know of even if you're not a gamer..right? When they said "BIG L", if I'm not mistaken wouldn't that narrow it down to 5 or 6 licenses? I mean we don't have many "BIG Ls" even left to put in the game. I'm curious to see what they reveal so I can judge for myself if I think it was worthy of being called a "BIG L" license.
Putting an emphasis on these licenses being "BIG Ls" straight to our faces tells me that they really are BIG BIG BIG licenses. Like Jason or Pennywise. Something that 9 out of every 10 people can just glance at and immediately know what it is. Alien is another one...or even Chucky. Those would scream "BIG L" to me anyway. There are people talking about the most random stuff like Until Dawn and Danganronpa?? The hell is Danganronpa?! Even Bioshock, The Evil Within, and Dead Space don't meet the "BIG L" license imo, because you have to be a gamer to know what those things even are..
Stranger Things perhaps?? That would for sure fit the bill. We'll know in just a few days if they said that purely to hype people up for no reason or the supposed "BIG L" isn't Chapter 29, and is Ch 30 instead , which would be fine, but I swear they said BOTH licenses were "BIG Ls". For me there are only a handful of franchises that come to mind when putting emphasis on that "BIG L". Should be pretty easy to narrow down if they really are that big.. What do you guys think?
The hell is Danganronpa?!Over five million copies sold worldwide and adaptations into other media forms.
Remember that DBD is a company that exists in many markets and the Japan/east Asia player base is quite large.
That said, it's not going to be Danganronpa. As @Man_of_triangles said, every license gets pitched as big.
Wouldn't it be amazing if it was another character from Texas Chainsaw Massacre? That would be hilariously confusing marketing.
-
@jamally093 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3499857#Comment_3499857
If you mean what they do for Singularity I do find that valid but I think when it comes to that is that Signularity can simply be on one side of the map and camp while other killers just stand there.
No, what I mean is they announced an anti-camp mechanic they are working on (announcement during the 2023 livestream, date they are going to try it is unknown). The rough basics as outlined were that when a survivor is hooked they get a meter, the closer the killer is to the hook, the faster the meter fills. Once filled, the survivor can get a guaranteed self unhook, even during second stage.
I'm not saying it's going to create a utopia, but its something I'm looking forward to seeing be tried.
-
@jamally093 said:
I know someone will say "how can you prevent killers from camping" simple just have it so they can't use their power or have it be if their camping aka standing still for way to long if they hit someone rescuing the get a longer hit cool down as punishment for camping. Now I know there's going to be "Well camping is a very hard thing to do or simply it's a strategic thing to do" your saying standing still waiting for someone to die on hook is strategic...how? I even tried camping and I don't get the fun in it? How is it fun camping your just standing their doing nothing I know some people will say well doing gens isn't fun at least when your doing gens there's some kind of pressure having to be aware of your surroundings and such. I don't know if the anti-camping thing will ever happen but I would want BHVR to at least test it they did it with anti-slugging and tunneling(even though it's live it barely helps) why not camping.
I know someone will say "how can you prevent killers from camping" simple just have it so they can't use their power or have it be if their camping aka standing still for way to long if they hit someone rescuing the get a longer hit cool down as punishment for camping.BHVR's idea I think is superior to this. If the killer is around the survivor too long (with staggered increases based on how close), the survivor on the hook can freely escape.
-
@Wahara said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3498401#Comment_3498401
The intent behind the rule is to make sure people have enough time to learn how to play against new content, i.e spirit of the law. While it says "survivor" I think that's clearly a case of redundant verbiage. If I say "No running, sprinting, or jogging!" through the hallway and you take a bicycle, you've misunderstood the obvious message which was "don't go fast" The obvious message here was "don't play with an unfair advantage"
You can make the argument from potential bugs but I think that's seriously reaching and not what they had in mind. It's just redundant wording that wasn't analysed too closely, a salty player is abusing it to reverse a completely legitimate victory, and getting away with it.
If I say "No running, sprinting, or jogging!" through the hallway and you take a bicycle, you've misunderstood the obvious message which was "don't go fast"But if you say don't take a bicycle, and you take a bicycle, you've broken the rule.
You are arguing the inverse. You are giving an example of where something is not specifically banned, but the intent of the rule makes it clear it should be. However, the rule clearly bans new survivors. If the rule said something like "after something new is introduced, it may not be used for two weeks" and you argued new survivors were outside the spirit, sure, that would make sense. Maybe its a mistake on the part of whoever wrote the rule, but the rule clearly lists survivors as a new thing that cannot be used.
-
I doubt bots "see" totems at all.
-
Yeah, that's a ban and BHVR does actually come through on that.
Though as a just an in case note, to get to work with the killer, it must be the killer and survivor working together. A survivor just leading a killer to another survivor is generally not considered against the rules. A survivor has to be deliberately trying to sabotage the game or working with the killer, which means the killer refuses to hit the survivor or otherwise rewards them.
-
Love to see a demo when I'm playing a survivor. He's generally fun to go against, but also nice because he's so rare.
-
@nars said:
Once the last gen pops you lose. Killer is completely helpless in endgame without a NWO or NOED. I get that endgame being survivor sided is a reward for finishing the gens but thats another thing, they only even finished the gens because I actively chose to play fairly and not tunnel. I'm being punished for playing nice.
If you are playing fair on all but 2 killers in the whole roster, survivors equal to you in skill are making it to endgame with at least 3 alive. Meaning thats 2 survivors to take protection hits and bodyblock you, 2 survivors to go 99 both gates, etc etc. im not gonna get into details.
Essentially what im getting at is that endgame is just a loss for the killer. Which is stupid because playing fair will always get you to endgame against good survivors. Its completely unfair for endgame to be this unfair to killer, to the point that things like protection hits have 0 risk involved once it begins. In fact, NOTHING has any risk in endgame!
- Unhooked survivors have basekit BT, meaning if the gates within 44m they escape. Moreover, if theres a pallet within 44m then they will very easily be able to get distance from that to the gate. Combine this with the inevitable protection hits and that survivor is guaranteed to escape.
- Any strategy you use in endgame is void. Camping? 2 survivors rushing the hook guarantees they get free, unless their incredibly dumb. Which loops around to the first bullet. Tunneling? You arent gonna be able to start and finish a chase without them making enough distance to the gates to escape on almost every single killer. Then coordinated teams will be taking hits constantly since those have 0 risk anymore.
- Protection hits become a ggez. Normally the counter to protection hits is just to hit them. The downside being they are now more vulnerable and give great slowdown for later. its a risky tradeoff you take to help your buddy out. But not in endgame! Simple spend the measly 20s to 99 the gate then rush over to take as many hits as possible. They are not going down before they reach the gate. One hit guarantees 25s of distance before they can m1. Granted thats a 4.6 m1 based calculation, but it holds true. Not every single killer can use their power on every single loop. Even wesker can easily be dodged by just running behind stuff at long range. and since 25/4 is 100... if their healthy at the start of the chase then if the gates within 100m they escape. Throw in protection hits and adrenalines and MFT+hopes and its just unwinnable
- MFT HOPE. THIS COMBO IS JUST NOT FAIR. Nobody with these two perks is dying in endgame. Sure with other survivors there was a chance at the very least, you could severely outplay and get an early down etc. MFT hope just guarantees that if you are alive when the gens pop, you are escaping. Adrenaline shares this issue a tiny bit... but adrenaline pops once and thats it. a big chase extender, even better if you are injured etc. But thats it, the effects over. MFT hope guarantees you just win the entire game in endgame. As if MFT didnt do enough of that.
Theres a reason killers love NWO and NOED so much. They are the only things making it possible to comeback in endgame. Any hook you get in endgame thats not a kill is worthless. If theres 2 others they all escape. If theres one, you get your 3k by camping etc. But even thats only IF you can catch them. Horrendous map RNG, mft hope, protection hits, 99ed gates, basekit bt and many more make doing just that extremely difficult.
Why do survivors get hatch and 4% for clutch mechanics when their being stomped but killers have nothing? Thats not rhetorical its actually kind of confusing. Pretty much everything about killer falls apart in endgame. Pressure? useless. Hooks? near pointless unless you already have a 2k. Chasing? near impossible thanks to a certain combo. etc etc the list goes on. the game breaks down in endgame.
I get that endgame being survivor sided is a reward for finishing the gensOkay, good start here, once the survivors have the gens done and the escape phase is underway the game does radically swing in their advantage, which is what should happen.
they only even finished the gens because I actively chose to play fairly and not tunnel.If the survivors are that good, go ahead and tunnel if you think it will make it easier.
If you want to play an extreme not going to tunnel game, good for you, but that's not what it's designed for. Unless they change that radically they aren't going to redesign the end game.
If you are playing fair on all but 2 killers in the whole roster, survivors equal to you in skill are making it to endgame with at least 3 alive.Kind of sounds like MMR is working for you. You stipulate survivors equal to you in skill, getting three alive to endgame should be a common occurrence especially, as you said, if you're not tunneling.
Are you saying you never have games that you 4k on?
-
I'm not a fan of the end game in DbD for either survivor or killer victories, but its meant to end the game, not be a new stage (I think EGC should start when the last gen is popped for example). Getting 1 more kill after the gens pop is far from impossible. Sure, if you can only hook them near the gates, they are probably getting free (as they should), but there are lots of other possibilities.
If they are on death hook, they're out.
If you are able to get them away from the gates, it becomes much riskier.
The survivors usually won't know for sure if you have an end game perk or not, so their actions can be risky.
Most killers have some chance of making the attempt to rescue the hooked survivor a risky play.
-
The thing that is surprising about your post is the match up - at low MMR (starting players) Billy tends to be one of the easiest killers to go against as learning to use his chainsaw can be quite tricky. Getting matched up against the same one three times is very surprising. Though getting matched against any player 3 times is really weird (are you by chance in a portion of the world where the servers might have a smaller player base?). Even on days where I've played for hours its extremely rare for me to run into the same player twice.
Starting off as survivor is hard, and, if you play soloq, it's probably going to be hard for a very long time. In addition to learning how to play survivor (looping, maps, strategy on saves), you need to learn each of the 32 killers and look for signs of the more common perks. Killers have lots of aura reading perks (way to see survivors through walls) and it's important to figure out during the game whether the killer is using them.
-
That's the generally agreed upon action.
-
-
I wouldn't have a problem with increasing DC penalty times, but I'm not sure what bots have to do with it. At least it will be an improvement over the game suddenly becoming a 3 on 1.
-
@Awsmdad said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3414254#Comment_3414254
I can't say I agree you can't make a balanced game that will work for both. I believe BHVR released a game and it evolved to something more and at this point all they are doing is bandaiding an inherent flaw in the game. Remember sbmm, rankings, trying to balance perks, making perks basekit for survivors? Yes all have been introduced to try to balance the game. In the end they decided to cater to the SWF and good players of the game which is why soloq is horrible. You can't outplay a killer with the way the game is balanced unless you have 2 things. 1 is players that are good at least at all the mechanics of the game. The 2nd is great communication.
The way they can do this and create a great experience for all is to split the game rooms for experienced and non experienced play levels. You see it in all other types of multi-player games where the regular group is for bad players, new players and no mic communication. This group is dumbed down and allows you to balance that play style to meet the needs of the group.
The 2nd group is the SWF group and it will play as we currently play now. The upside is it will allow people who don't want to communicate or can't to be able to play this game and enjoy the idea that you might be able to survive more than 28% of the time. Which we all agree can be demoralizing. The only downfall is it will divide the amount if players in your player pool.
Did not expect to see this topic resurrected, but here goes.
The way they can do this and create a great experience for all is to split the game rooms for experienced and non experienced play levels. You see it in all other types of multi-player games where the regular group is for bad players, new players and no mic communication. This group is dumbed down and allows you to balance that play style to meet the needs of the group.The problem with this idea is that most other games aren't asymmetrical. If you play a 'ranked' mode in another game, your team is using comms, so are the opponents. The killer player is always going to be in the same boat. Many killers on here have talked about dodging survivors if they look like they are SWF, so most killers would just avoid that group.
-
This isn't exactly a work of prophecy. The meta has changed, certain perks have become stronger, it's perfectly normal that some people would think they are now too strong.
My problem with devour hope has always been the randomness of it. It can be cleansed instantly or win the match on its own. In that sense it's just not a great perk design
-
The DC penalty cannot be based around the type of disconnection. If for example, it didn't count DCs when the internet connection went out, people would just deactivate their internet connection to avoid the game.
The vast majority of players don't have issues with the game crashing. If you do, contact support or try a different forum section, but if you're actually looking for help on the technical side this isn't the right place.
@santabyebye9610 said:
Your all speaking as true killer mains and I never just dc if I don't like the killer I go against I just kill myself first hook
Not exactly going to get sympathy for your plight.