crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
Then I'd go bad luck on RNG. Shelter Woods is a tough map to encounter it with, it's really easy to miss a nearby hook without the highlight, and there are lots of bushes/trees you can get wiggled into.
I usually run some form of Iron Grasp/Agitation on Trapper, but generally speaking if I don't have those and I think Boil Over is in play, I always find the hook I want to take the survivor to before the pick up. If I don't see one in a comfortable range, I move on.
-
I'm trying to get a couple of points about the idea.
So it starts on, like a hex. However, the only way it gets out of the game (if I read you correctly) is if the survivors cleanse it.
So it would be a hex totem that gives the survivors a disadvantage, which becomes an a bonus once they clear it?
Alternatively you could be talking about the idea of a totem that gives a killer a disadvantage until the killer cleanses it.
Conceptually I don't think it sounds dumb, the question would be implementation. It would be a very strong version of a perk, but players don't get it until they find it. Balance wise it doesn't inherently create a problem.
However, there is a huge mechanical problem. Hypothetically 4 survivors could bring it, plus the killer could bring hex totems, and now you don't have enough totems.
-
Not able to hook anyone is a bit extreme. Were they running the offerings to also space out the hooks?
-
For nightlight stats: We don't know if the sample is representative. I think it's logical to presume that most of the submitters are mid tier or higher (the type of people who would have heard about it), but we can't be certain. I don't know if there is a way to view the individual submitted data so I can't tell the average prestige of the killers.
On the killers - one thing to note, I suspect the majority of forum users have every killer/survivor unlocked (or at least whatever side they main), but I suspect that is pretty rare for the player base as a whole. So when considering the killers we need to also look at what perks they commonly have available to them.
Onroyo - Has a powerful form for both low and high MMR. You mentioned the Iri tape, but Merciless Storm is very powerful against a lot of players. If I understand their stats correctly, 23.35% of Onroyo's are using it (though 42.36% are still using Call of Brine, even though that perk has taken a massive dive with other killers).
Skully - I wonder how much this is players just saying 'no thanks, I'm out' and sacrificing on hook.
Freddy - Over 20% of Freddy's use Blood Warden, and 19% use NOED, so I think what you are seeing is players who have the game won losing it at the end because they get stuck in the gates/trying for a 4e. Black Box + NOED + Blood Warden can result in a surprise massacre at the end.
Freddy's teleport and dream pallets are also not bad abilities until they get destroyed by SWFs later on.
-
It's a tricky question. There are a few killers I actively dislike (Doctor, Skull Merchant), but for the most part I like the other killers equally, I just like to get a variety and hopefully a 'fair' game.
In terms of relief I feel during a game, any killer with a predictable terror radius: Wesker, Blight, Oni, Demo, Billy. Soon as I see one of those killers DbD feels much more like a normal multiplayer games.
In terms of killers though I enjoy the most because they get that tension feeling DbD goes for: probably Ghostface. As a soloQ player I can rarely be certain if I'm safe or not, so the post game feeling is great.
-
@Piruluk said:
Skull Merchant isnt even very strong, but survivors love to complain about everything.
Every killer must be the same, and has no powers, only allowed which can be taken away by survivors.
The reasoning of your posts doesn't make any sense.
You start by saying survivors just complain about everything.
Then you talk about looping, but the person you are responding too isn't discussing looping at all.
Then you say they actually dislike her because of her design.
Then you say Knight is more beloved, even though that disagrees with your survivors complain about everything.
As you say you don't understand survivors, let me explain:
Skull merchant is not fun to play against.
Can she be beaten? Yes. Is her 3 genning strong? Not particularly. Is it fun? No, it's a slow annoying battle of move in, retreat, move back in. Much better since the last patch, it no longer is going to eat up an hour, but still a drawn out mess.
Does every survivor have certain killers they dislike? Yes. However, that doesn't change the fact that far more survivors dislike skully than any other.
And yes, lots of people dislike her design. While I don't have a problem with that, nothing wrong with people saying that her design ruins the immersion of the game. Just because someone says they don't like something doesn't mean they are automatically talking balance.
The one thing you are right on is she's probably not going anywhere or getting any major changes, but that shouldn't stop people from voicing their dislike.
-
@Boons123 said:
It seems like a more profitable way to make skins for the thirsty to buy than to make skins that fit their story, and this is evident in the latest killer we got.
And what next they might make a killer who wears nothing but ripped underwear and with a sexual appearance and then call him "wild - ruthless - and others" and this is the worst way to explain the horror of any character
Well, the majority of the community was clear, "We want more terrifying killers," and in my opinion, they should be terrifying in their appearance as well, and the way they move is frightening, and not just their story.
This is absolutely not an attack on the developers
I want to show how much I resent thirsty people who change the identity of the game to satisfy their desire
It seems like a more profitable wayWell, the majority of the community was clearThese two parts don't agree with each other. What you are saying is that while the community bought the sexier designs, a vocal group doesn't like it.
As others have said, sex appeal and horror are really closely tied. If anything, BHVR is being more inclusive than the material they are drawing from, with more female killers and eye candy males.
-
@HarlockTaliesin said:
The wording of this is odd. If the killer is running Franklin's, you're not going to be able to use the medkit on anyone including yourself. You can try to pick it back up right after you're hit, but you'll have lost a chunk of distance you could've had and you'll likely just get downed/hooked. And you'll still need a heal if you get off the hook.
Yeah, I was confused by this as well.
Franklin's is one of the few reasons that I would use a medkit on another survivor. If I see that the killer is causing survivors to drop items and I haven't been hit but come across someone injured it makes sense to burn through the medkit and get some value out of it now.
The other two reasons I can think of - end game and I haven't needed it or someone is being tunneled and I want to get them healed as quickly as possible.
-
Going to agree with the idea it will be this version until the game dies. I think that is years away.
There's no way they could release a new DbD while you still have active DbD players unless you transferred all of their cosmetics, prestige, etc. However there is two problems there. A new engine would require new cosmetic designs, which would cost money, and so they would expect to sell them again, but the player base wouldn't accept it (mostly reasonable on both sides). Secondly, it presumes that cosmetics, prestige, etc work in a similar manner to the current game.
Plus all the license issues.
Additionally, the risk. They are making really good money with the current game, no need to risk rocking the boat.
Also, if they were going to do a DbD, I'd want more than graphic updates. I'd rather have a whole new game. Reimagine/redesign it from the ground up even if it looks completely different from current DbD.
-
@Wilx said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3417713#Comment_3417713
The Devs do play the game though, they've talked about it before. I don't think it's too much to ask for them to show us the most optimal way to play solo. It would also settle a lot of "get good" and "it's a skill issue" arguments.
As others have mentioned, game play is most likely within their own group, not general public matches.
But even if it was: why do think they are good at the game (optimal way)? Being a game designer does not necessarily translate to being skilled at the game.
-
I've been playing video games since the atari and multiplayer games since the first Warcraft.
No game has ever filled me with as much tension and excitement as a 'good' game of DbD does.
I'm a soloQ survivor. A tight game where we work together, get gens done, rescue from hooks, and make an escape (perhaps barely) is amazing. As those minutes tick by a feeling of 'is this actually going to happen?' and I get more and more nervous about something going wrong (which frequently happens) is remarkable.
The problem is those good games are surrounded with a lot of bad games. Skill mismatches are one thing, and kind of inevitable (though more common in this game than others), but I feel that there are bad game elements that could be fixed. The face camping (especially bubba). How easy it is too hard tunnel. How long the end game can take to play out when the killer has already won. How much a game comes down to correctly guessing the right perks and items.
Basically, I'm chasing the rush of when the game is great, but there are still a lot of problems that I think could be fixed.
-
@LuthirFontaine said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3416234#Comment_3416234
O bollocks to that, if survivors could stop the killer from doing anything for 4 straight minutes the forums would be on fire
This.
I wish survivors had an option to get into all of the camping fun that seems to exist. Like a perk
Noble Sacrifice: You grab onto the killer and tackle them to the ground. They are immobilized for two minutes (one minute if you have one hook state). They must make skill checks or the time is lengthened. At the end of the time period you are sacrificed.
You could even give the killer perks that countered Noble Sacrifice (though they would be useless in a normal match, and it would also be nerfed after the PTB).
It would be a boring game filled with rage quitting, but it would capture the feeling of being just left on a hook.
-
dislike going against Demogorgon on account of how annoying he is both to be chased by and to engage with in a 3-gen scenario.No one can tell you what you find fun or not, but most people seem generally confused why you would find Demo unfun given the other killers in the game.
Others have asked this and I don't think you've answered: what killers do you find it fun to play against?
-
Demo is one of my favorite killers to face while playing survivor. He has options on how he plays, but none of them seem overpowered.
-
USWest - I tend to encounter strong players during the day and evening. After 1 AM I tend to see a huge drop in play quality/intensity.
-
@LuthirFontaine said:
Dear Behavior,
I know you love your little moles, sluggers and campers so very much and are never ever going to do anything to stop them.
However its kind of bummer to get like 5k blood points cause you couldn't do anything because said little ray of sunshine is currently hitting your body on hook.
Can we get some "Hey sorry about that guy, he likes to pull wings off of bugs and this is the healthiest outlift for his behaviors." points it would make the sting less painful for solo.
Your Friend,
Luthir Fontaine.
Can we get some "Hey sorry about that guy, he likes to pull wings off of bugs and this is the healthiest outlift for his behaviors." points it would make the sting less painful for solo.That was hilarious.
I absolutely agree with the overall concept, how they would implement it could be a little trickier, but it would be nice if ideas were at least discussed.
-
Sloppy is a strong perk, one I almost always use, but it has downsides. Especially with Inner Healing being more common.
The three listed perks though should have an additional power to either counter or delay hemorrhage.
-
I don't think there is anything about the recent patch that impact Pig that much, she was a weaker killer before the patch and that is where she still is.
The problem with balancing her is that her traps are so heavily luck based. If the first person you trap ends up having to run around the entire map to get it off, you've got immense value out of it. If they get it off on the first try, it was basically useless. Sometimes with pig I dominate just because the early downs are out of the game for so long, sometimes I have no slowdown.
I'd drop her terror radius and maybe boost her dash, though things like an instadown would be going too far.
-
@xEmoGirlxAlexisx said:
Damn i was so Happy to finally See a positive Knight since i Love Knight but then i just Reading the 2nd Part of ur Post and i was Mad because u just want to kill him whit Heavy nerfs he didnt Need
Knight is fine as he is Killer arent meant to be Fun to play against for Survivors Gen Rushing isnt Fun for Killer so we should nerf it ?
Its Funny that ppl Really think that Killers are here for the Survivors Fun and should make für Game Fun for Survivors
Its Funny that ppl Really think that Killers are here for the Survivors Fun and should make für Game Fun for SurvivorsYeah, it's a game. It's not strange to ask BHVR to design elements that are enjoyable.
Knight is fine as he is Killer arent meant to be Fun to play against for Survivors Gen Rushing isnt Fun for Killer so we should nerf it ?Yeah, gen rushing probably should be weakened, especially BNPs and a few perks. I don't get why killer mains think most of the survivor players would have a problem with that.
-
Compared to others, I don't actually mind playing against Knight (especially when he is just an occasional encounter). Facing him is a unique experience and now that the ability to three gen is weaker, not nearly as big a problem.
Also, skull merchant is so much worse that he looks better by comparison.
-
I'm all for perk buffs that encourage killers to get multiple survivors on a hook. Not sure this would make a huge difference, but would like to see it tried.
-
@hermitkermit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3409747#Comment_3409747
I see the point in playing as if it's not a team game but I don't think it's the right attiude to have nor the way the game was intended. People that only play for themselves who leave their team to bleed out for 4 min, letting them die on their first hook, or hiding in a locker the entire match and waiting for hatch are not good for the overall health of the game. Now you can play the game how you want, sure, but playing like this makes you a really bad teamate and you're definitely not playing the way the game was intended. If you were meant to only focus on you and you alone then you wouldn't get rewarded for protection hits, saves, heals, distracting the killer etc. Playing as a team is how the game is meant to be played. I may still be relatively new to the game but even I know that playing for hatch every game, refusing to get saves, refusing to heal others and going out of your way to sandbag other people is not the way to play the game. It's not a battle royale. I think if people want to play that way then DBD isn't the kind of game for it, or maybe they should only stick to killer since there's no objectives focused on helping others.
To answer your fyi, I don't unhook people if they're clearly trying to get out of the game. I myself will try and get out of the game via hook if there's only one other person left so they can get a chance at hatch.
Anyways, thanks for the feedback. GLIYN :)
I see the point in playing as if it's not a team game but I don't think it's the right attiude to have nor the way the game was intended.Going to focus on the 'intended' part of this.
BHVR likes the idea that the 4 survivors aren't a team. They've put in perks and designs that are clearly meant for people who want to play ignoring the others. They've even had tag lines about 1v1v1v1v1 and the like. They also had the game Bloodharvest which was explicit about the idea that players didn't have to work together (in that game's case it went really, really poorly).
The problem is that's an impossible design: you can't balance around the idea of some people working together and other times everyone is doing their own thing. If you don't play as a team you're pretty much doomed. Maybe with an exception for once the gens are powered/two survivors left, it is a lot more fun if you treat it as a team game.
-
@EmmaFrostyEyes said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3414147#Comment_3414147
I just dont get why people get so much enjoyment out of making people have an awful time
It's disheartening for sure. Facecamping/slug bleedouts mean the killer is also trapped in the game (the survivor variation is the two players hiding for 60 minutes). I don't understand why a person would even want to play this game if that's the way they feel they need to play.
-
The amount of times I have died from a survivor killing our entire team with it is ridiculous.In ~500 hours I've seen two games where a survivor has worked with the killer to eliminate the other people in the game. You've had a lot of bad luck if this is occurring that frequently. If this was something I went into games expecting to happen I'd probably stop playing survivor.
Your only option is to report them. It's not like hiding in a locker is going to really change anything, if the killer and a survivor are working together it's not like there is some way you can play the game (unless you want to see how long you can draw it out).
-
One of the best pieces of advice I got that kept me in the game, and one of the worst things I can say about DbD, is it helps to have something else prepared for games like this. Have some youtube videos ready to watch, podcast, music, etc. Lots of games (especially in soloQ) are going to be garbage and the best course of action is to mentally check out so you don't become angry.
-
How is it that this thread got resurrected?
-
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
What you're talking about is just the nature of how human beings operate. There is no survivor 'community' with the same set of opinions. Some people want quick fast games (in which case tunneling fine), some want longer, slower games (in which case old gen regression was fine), and some want strategic games (3 genning fine). People want to pull the game in different directions and given BHVR's general attitude that people can play the game how they want, DbD is a bit more susceptible to it than other games (though not unique).
Additionally, lots of survivors, though by no means all, are asking BHVR to make changes, not complaining about how a person played a game. As an example, I have no problem with killers hard tunneling or survivors bringing 4 BNPs, but that's different from my opinion on what BHVR should do in game design about those tactics.
Finally, lots of the complaints have to deal with the difference between soloQ and SWFs. Take 1st hook facecamping for example: in a SWF the person on the hook just says 'stay on the gen, the killer is right here'. The team can work out when they are going to go in for a rescue and potentially have a player with deliverance to do a hook trade. And even if they never get a rescue, it's a lot easier to share a victory when you are playing with friends.
That's really different for soloQ. Survivors run over to the hook and see the killer is standing there. Then they have to figure out whether to go back to the gen or do a team rescue which they have to organize without comms. And if they decide to leave the person on the hook and do gens and get a 3 person escape, it doesn't really feel like a victory for the person on the hook.
-
US West
Three days ago I escaped one out of five games. Also saw two facecamping bubbas and an artist who after an early game DC let the rest of us bleed out right until the point of death, then picked us up and threw us on the hook (playing at night).
Two days ago I had a 5 escape streak. (playing in the afternoon)
Yesterday I played for three and half hours and lost every game. (playing in the morning)
One game played today, one escape. (around noon)
That's my general experience. Playing during the afternoon/evening really increases the skill/intensity of survivors I tend to get matched with.
-
Thing is, with matchmaking being such a problem, you'd think that both sides would have equal complaints about matchmaking, but at least I personally see much more complaints from survivors than killers. For every survivor team that is completely outclassed by the killer, you would expect a killer that struggles immensely with a survivor team.There's 3 reasons for this
1: Killer is relatively straightforward. You know where the gens are, you are giving paths to follow to survivors via blood and scratch marks, etc. On the other hand survivors have to learn the maps to figure out where gens tend to spawn, what strategies to prioritize, etc.
2: Killer abilities are 'easy' to use in comparison to survivors. Survivor abilities require hitting skill checks and things like BNPs aren't common enough to see a lot of use at low MMR. However, killer perks like Merciless Storm, can be devastating to low level MMR and require no skill on the killer's part.
3: The killer doesn't have to rely on anyone else. With 4 survivors there is a chance one of them is not taking it seriously, sleepy, drunk, scared, distracted, internet problems, rage quit, etc. One bad survivor can easily bring down the whole team.
-
The fact that we're even discussion whether or not the game should LET people get to this level is dumb as heck. If the player plays well enough, then they deserve it.This is a problem, because this isn't how games work. Human beings make mistakes, have bad luck, etc. Over a series of games there should be some variance on who wins.
We can talk about how powerful/balanced Blight it, but that's a separate discussion entirely.The 1,000 win streak is just the most extreme example of Blight being overpowered with certain builds. It's not like this player got a 1,000 win streak with Freddy. In that case yes, the player would be a true anomaly who somehow has mastered the game in a way no other player has.
-
@SeaFlower said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3410729#Comment_3410729
I’m not aware enough on the specifics of those matches, but that sounds more like a show match or an honorary thing. Wouldn’t exactly be a show for anyone if the NFL team just stomps them.
Maybe, but there were blowouts among the games. You could argue that the pros didn't play as seriously because it being an exhibition, but could also say that the college players were at a disadvantage because they were an assembled team while the pros knew how to work together.
There are a few examples of American baseball teams losing to college teams, but that usually occurs in spring training when the pros are warming up.
The closest other example I could think of is tennis where you'll see players at the very top lose to unknowns on occasion, though in that case everyone is a pro.
-
@SeaFlower said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3410620#Comment_3410620
I don’t agree. Even if the college team overperforms and the pro team underperforms, the gap is naturally far too big. Even besides actual performance, there are many other factors that a pro team would trounce college teams in, like endurance, overall game knowledge, height, etc. A pro team could realistically run a college team ragged or never let them actually manage almost anything with the ball for the rare occasion they manage to actually get a hold of it/start off with it. Also, by nature of what pro teams are, they have far more experience and knowledge and total games played, they’re also going to be the ones more used to less optimal circumstances, the college team probably isn’t. Also, even with making mistakes, the difference in level for a college team and a pro team is realistically insurmountable. Pro players will make far less mistakes than a college player ever will, and will also take far better advantage of any mistake because that’s what they’ve literally received professional training to do and are good enough to have made it to a professional setting as compared to the college player that hasn’t.
It's an academic question, though the only real example I can find that comes close is the college all star game (American Football 1934 - 1976) when a team of college all stars would play the winners of the NFL. College players won roughly 1 in 5 (0.238 percent).
-
Competitive games need win conditions otherwise there is lack of clarity on how to balance/develop the game. The win condition could be something different than kills, but a game needs something.
-
Reasons
1: BHVR considers both soloQ and SWF. This is why the CoH change has been argued about a lot, it's a massive nerf to soloQ while potentially beneficial as a SWF.
2: MMR. Survivor skill has much more of an impact on the game than killer which is a straightforward role most of the time. Example is DH - at low MMR 4 survivors all running DH still aren't going to get much value out of it, at high MMR it totally changes the game.
3: Killer gameplay. Do you balance around the idea that the killer is going to tunnel or play around and try for hooks.
-
I'm going a bit back in this thread, but the argument was brought up whether a college team could beat a pro team out of a thousand matches.
It depends on the sport, but generally speaking, absolutely. In many sports considerably more than 1 out of a 1000 times.
There are 3 elements to consider:
Statistics: A pro team is going to statistically be much better than a college team across seasons, but that doesn't mean each team plays their average. Take basketball and 3 pointers - if a college team and pro team meet a 1000 times eventually you will have a game where the pro team randomly hits well below their average while the college team hits way above their average.
Luck: Lots of games have elements of random chance. With sports an example could be weather, eventually something will happen that is bad for one team and good for the other (one team better prepared to play in snow for example). This is particularly notable because DbD has tons of random elements.
Human fallibility: As human beings we make mistakes. In addition to that sometimes things just go against a person outside the control, even the best mess up.
I think this what makes a 1,000 kill streak stand out so much. Lots of people like to point out how much of DbD comes down to luck and setup (which I think is true). In a game with a high level of variance you would expect upsets to occur with relative frequency (as they do in most sports), but we don't. We see win streaks.
I'm not here to say - here's how to fix this issue, just that the numbers really make it look like there is an issue.
-
Thrawn's is right, I was rushing, so it is the last formula you put up Caul.
-
I don't understand why BHVR does such massive game changes. I'd prefer more frequent updates, but not quite as wild swings.
CoB to 175%
Circle of Healing split into two perks, one for self healing, one for healing bonus (maybe this is coming)
Purple and green kits needed weakened, but didn't think needed to adjust the entire system.
Weakening DH was needed, but right now it seems a bit too far. Maybe try it out like it was, but DH doesn't activate for anyone until one survivor has been hooked. Alternatively, allow it only to be used after being hooked once, but now DH can be used while in deep wound.
Then if those changes weren't enough, push them a little more.
-
@CaulDrohn said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3409565#Comment_3409565
Ok, so Botany was the culprit. I incidently checked the math yesterday, with botany you need 34.04 charges for self healing with a medkit. Madkit has base 24 charges, with green addon for extra charges, it's 34, so a tiny fraction too short. Don't know if the game still lets you heal full with it or not.
Instead of self care, you could run bond for finding others to heal you.
I'm not 100% certain on the way BHVR does the math, but it's not 34.04. I think it's 28.8.
-
Modding: not viable. BHVR makes quite a bit of their money off cosmetics, they aren't going to touch that. It would also really split up the player base/make it harder to introduce new killers/survivors.
How long will they keep the game going: They could lose a pretty big chunk of players and still be profitable. Though if they lost a large portion of the player base they'd probably slow down the rate they release new chapters/etc, but not abandon it.
What could they do to increase player count?: Bring back the Covid lockdowns?
Serious answer: This is inevitably going to decrease. All games die off over time. DbD has already had an amazing run and likely has a number of years left. Big licenses will bring back players from time to time. Other than that, they could try a complete overhaul, like a fundamental game redesign to make the game feel substantially different. I highly doubt they will try that though because it would be incredibly costly and risky, and if they were going to do something like that they'd probably start designing DbD2.
-
Best of luck in whatever you pick up next (not sarcasm, seriously, I hope you find a game you love as much as you've loved DbD).
-
Because they are two different things. If a survivor runs to a corner and/or you have any other tactical reason for slugging them, okay. While it's anecdotal, I've had a recent increase in games where the killer after an early game DC/suicide has gone on too slug the rest of us and just leave us to bleed out
-
At 2 survivors left you are basically in panic mode. Can 2 gens be done? Well, if they have progress on them or one of the survivors left is an amazing looper, yes. But generally, no.
-
There's no chance it will happen, but if I had full power over it: delete. Don't mind the appearance, but hate to go against her and the lore is very silly.
On a positive note, probably the only killer I feel that way about, maybe with nurse being the other I'd choose delete over rework.
-
@burt0r said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3409296#Comment_3409296
And would that supposedly be defined?
0-1k/3-4e => you lost/your team won
2k/2e => draw/draw
3-4k/0-1e => you won/your team lost
Or how would be the cut there? Because I can assure you people still wouldn't be happy with what i proposed here.
You could do it that way if you wanted. Sure, not everyone would be happy with it, but it's also how a lot of people are looking at matches already.
I really don't care what the metric is. You could put a timer in or reward hook states. You could have major and minor victories. That's not my desire. I think the game would be easier to balance and there would be less toxicity and easier player communications if there were clear win conditions.
But I also understand that's not BHVR's design philosophy so I really doubt anything like that will ever change.
-
In addition to bloodpoints, I've thought it would be a good idea for the end screen to give 'you win/you lose' messages based on the overall result of the game. I thought that would make it more likely for players to accept being camped as it is clear they are contributing to the team. The OP though might be the first clear example of that idea, but is perhaps an anomaly as far as this forum is concerned.
-
Bad manners aren't bannable. The only things that can incur a ban during the game (not chat, not cheat) which can get a ban are completely refusing to progress the game or a survivor and killer working together. The main example of refusing to progress the game is body blocking a survivor into a corner and refusing to hit them and just letting the game timer run out.
I think some BHVR mods have said that refusing to pick up downed survivors (ie 4 slug bleed out), never leaving a 3 gen, or the survivors never attacking a 3 gen, are things that could be examples of refusing to progress the game, but I highly doubt anyone has ever actually been banned over that.
-
Get rid of it. Lots of killers complained that the thing they didn't like about DH was having to run right behind a survivor and not hit them. Same logic for hook grabs, it feels utterly ridiculous to just stand there with the killer breathing done your neck trying to bait out a swing.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
The thing is that as soon as survivors get a nerf, they will complain, review bomb, start cheating and be toxic toward killers.
This happens almost every time, and the argument is always "but the nerf isnt fun"
This happens almost every time, and the argument is always "but the nerf isnt fun"Maybe for the people leaving the reviews its true.
-
DbD thrives on knowledge for the survivors, more so than other multiplayer games. In other games teams can communicate general info, where the enemy seems to be pushing, who needs support, etc. And while that is an advantage it is nothing compared to the ability to let the team know where the killer is so they can focus on gens or if a hook is being camped. Also, planning out your perks together is much more useful than most games.
-
@pseudechis said:
So more and longer DBD is a bad thing?
Same way chases are the most fun part of the game but getting chased all game, aka tunneled, is a bad thing?
The same way sitting on gens all game is boring but not hyperfocusing on the objective and doing anything but sitting on gens all game is letting the team down?
The same way trying to achieve you own objective by any means is good but when your opponent does it its sweaty and bad?
The same way bringing the best perks yourself is good play but not the same as your sweaty take it too serious opponent who brought the best perks because they're bad?
The same way laying on ground for four mins is too long and bad but waiting out the endgame timer till the very last second for three mins is ok time use?
The same way that getting eliminated early is bad but having to stay in game for too long is also bad and pretty much any scenario in between?
This community is interesting sometimes, they really hate this game, they hate playing it, they hate investing time into it, they hate everyone else who plays it, they hate anything that might happen in game... yet they keep playing it. Its fascinating.
So more and longer DBD is a bad thing?Yes, game relies on tension and rush.
Example: professional sports - tripling the length of games would not triple the fun.
Same way chases are the most fun part of the game but getting chased all game, aka tunneled, is a bad thing?Just because something is the most exciting part of the game does not mean it should be the only part of the game. Also, many people who talk about loving chases don't mind being tunneled, but that does not mean they represent everyone.
The same way trying to achieve you own objective by any means is good but when your opponent does it its sweaty and bad?Saying game elements should be changed is not the same as criticizing how someone plays.
The same way bringing the best perks yourself is good play but not the same as your sweaty take it too serious opponent who brought the best perks because they're bad?Saying game elements should be changed is not the same as criticizing how someone plays.
The same way laying on ground for four mins is too long and bad but waiting out the endgame timer till the very last second for three mins is ok time use?Neither is okay.
The same way that getting eliminated early is bad but having to stay in game for too long is also bad and pretty much any scenario in between?Same response as the top. 4 minutes of DbD is not a lot of fun, neither is 30, sweet spot is found in between.
This community is interesting sometimes, they really hate this game, they hate playing it, they hate investing time into it, they hate everyone else who plays it, they hate anything that might happen in game... yet they keep playing it. Its fascinating.Not really fascinating, fairly basic. When things line up DbD is great. Probably the best multiplayer game I've ever played. But on many occasions its also been the worst game I've ever played. Now whether it is possible to cut down on the bad games while still keeping the good games is an open question, but shouldn't really surprise anyone that people want the good and not the bad.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3407076#Comment_3407076
Let me copy paste this reply with some slight edits
Here are some facts for you.
- A Generator requires 90 charges to be completed, with the standard Repair speed set at 1 c/s: (this is without perks and items)
- This means 90 secs repair time, in total.
- Kicking a Generator is causing it to immediately lose -2.5 % Progression and to start the Regression process.
- Generators regress at a default rate of 0.25 c/s, taking a maximum of ~360 seconds to regress from 99.9... to 0 %.
So you loose 2,5 secs on a kick, and then 1 sec of repair time for every 4 secs after that.
So for each second the killer stays at one gen after kicking it, they looses 4 seconds on the other gen.
This means that the killer have to stay at this gen or walk all over the map to the next one, So even if the killer is patrolling 3 gens close to each other, he will loose 4 secs at one gen for every 1 second hes not guarding it,, if people are wkrking on the other.
And again you only loose 2,5% on a kick, so unless the killer have less than 2,5 secs travel time between the gens, then you will be gaining on them.
If the killer commits to a chase, it gives even more progress to the other gen.
All info i provided can be confirmed here - https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Generators
Also, if this would be such a big issue as you claim, everyone would use potential energy, and its rare that i see that.
Also, if this would be such a big issue as you claim, everyone would use potential energy, and its rare that i see that.That's because almost no one plays Skull Merchant. Yes, PE is a counter to it, but the idea of taking a perk for the chance you hit the annoying killer is not going to happen.
Also, here's where your presumptions go wrong:
Let's say a 3 gen where there is a 10 second gap between the ends, 20 seconds for a loop.
Let's even assume we still have 4 survivors left and they've split off to work on either side of the 3 gen. We'll go with the argument that survivors should just ignore the drones and take the exposed.
So yes the pure math looks easy - with 2 survivors you get 37 charges from the time the killer leaves to when she return.
But here's where the problems come in.
Being the survivors are exposed they are going to need to leave the gen before skully gets to them. Probably quite a bit sooner or else they suffer a quick down. They also aren't going to be able to just run back to the gen because of possible mind games/backtracks, etc.
So survivors rush off the gens, wait for it to be clear, move back to the gens, but pretty soon skully is headed back for them. So maybe you get 10 seconds of time fixing the gens - lose 4, gain 17, net 13.
Okay, that will take a little bit, but doable. But throw in soloQ and lack of coordination. That ten seconds probably drops down to 6 or 7 seconds on average of time. At 7 seconds that's 11.9, lose 5, net ~7.
Of course any mistake significantly resets the process.
-
I highly doubt anything is happening with jolt or deadlock.
I doubt lethal pursuer as a basekit, I feel like it would be considered too fundamental of a shift to the game's concept.
If they did basekit corrupt intervention I imagine it would have a much shorter timer. Like 15 seconds, something that stops survivors from jumping on gens right away, but still gives reason to take the perk.
PR is fine where it is.
BNPs have to be on the nerf block. They'll probably try to do toolboxes at the same time, but they should just do BNPs and take some time to adjust before moving onto toolboxes in general.
DS to 5 seconds should happen.
OTR instead of BT might have been what they should have done anyway back when they made the change, but being they didn't I don't think they are going to change it.
Prove Thyself, probably not. Grouping up comes with a lot of downsides.
Resilience, we'll see how it goes.