crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
@bazarama said:
Why bother having killers at all? Let the survivors play in a land of unicorns and pretty flowers.
If a killer camps etc it's their choice. It might be unpopular but trying to enforce survivor "rules" doesn't wash.
You pay your money. Play how you want
I propose a new perk for survivors: grab hold.
The perk works like dead hard but instead of ignoring the hit the survivor grabs the killer. The killer and the survivor are then both stuck in place for 90 seconds. At the end of the perk time the survivor suffers an automatic hook increase. If the killer leaves the game because this is boring it counts as a disconnect. If the killers complain about it being boring, well, play how to want.
The above perk would be awful, but that's kind of what camping is like, especially if we throw in Bubba. It's just two players sitting and the logical counter is for survivors just to sit at a gen. Is it something that could be done under the game design, yes, but its boring. We could add lots of other boring elements to the game, but we shouldn't.
That said, "fixing" camping is a difficult question because too far in the other direction would give a huge advantage to survivors. But I never understand when a response to a complaint that something makes a game unfun is just 'well, do whatever you want'. By its nature a game has things that can and cannot be done (survivors can't build a ladder to climb the wall, killers can't take apart a generator).
-
@Piruluk said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3258393#Comment_3258393
It wouldnt.
At start at the game, they voting for a killer to be banned, then killer player can switch to other killers, which of plenty to play.
Like we already have over 30+ killers, why is big deal to play other than 1 killer?
This isn't how the matchmaking works. To my understanding, killers have their own MMR. So my Nurse and my Trapper might be hitting very different groups: it matches a selected killer against a group's MMR. That's why it would make ques take longer: it would first have to form a group of roughly the same MMR survivors and checked to see who they had banned and then find a killer to match.
Now I guess you could say we get rid of that concept, but that's another step.
@Archvile said:
The simple matter of fact is that DbD does not try at all to be a competitive game.
Also this.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3258156#Comment_3258156
its the only way he can win, he needs to spend way too much time to go and collect hes power around the map, while survivors are free to do gens. Imagine if survivors had to collect metal scraps around the map before a gen could be repaired past 25% 50% 75%.
There are so much wasted time.
That beeing said, i walk in the trappers traps in the most stupid places because im too busy looking where he is instead of where i walk.
The original post was about the Trapper being predictable and thus boring; I was commenting because I thought the OP was missing that Trapper has a lot of possible options on where the traps go. Whether he is good or not is a totally different question.
-
Plague has a lot to do with the survivor builds. For example, she basically makes medkits and heal builds worthless. But if you hit a squad not using those, she becomes comparatively weak.
-
Windows, pallets, exit gates, basements: you left out tall grass and doorways. That kind of seems like a lot of options for where the traps might end up. Everything but just laying in the open.
My problem against trappers is more that they play from the beginning for the 3 gen, so that's another strategy they could pursue.
I think all killers are boring if you face them too frequently. The game gets its appeal from that different feeling each killer brings to the game. I run into trapper so rarely that it's a nice change of pace.
-
@Shartley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3250116#Comment_3250116
Wanna know whats fair? Playing killer, I'm tired of you survivors brining RNG into this equation with garbage players being on your team in solo Q. That's BHVR's attempt at preventing decent players from having a bad time due to garbo allies on their team? A get out of jail free card via hatch? The bias towards pleasing survivors is so blatantly obvious to anyone paying attention.
So you don't really have a response to how the game rewards killer when it is going poorly for them by shrinking the map. Your argument is that hatch is unfair and shows a bias, while ignoring how easy the map shrinking makes it for the killer.
Incidentally, I was just playing Killer. Doing pretty badly off the start, only had three hooks by the time they got to 1 gen left. I still won because I had so little map to defend (3 kills, 1 hatch escape).
tell me how I know you aren't and were never a competitive athleteSoccer, wrestling, and running (though not the 100, long distance).
-
@Bardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3252915#Comment_3252915
Sadly you'd see a large amount of survivor teams consisting of 4 clones so the killer has even more trouble keeping track of how many hooks each survivor has.
This rarely comes up in games I play so I always forget its a thing. I'm actually somewhat surprised its allowed. I'm not sure why there isn't a system that if two people have identical outfits one of them gets a part changed to something else for the match.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3253511#Comment_3253511
The alternative is that we should never bridge the gap between solo q and SWFs by giving solo q more information, because that means the unfair parts that killers hate are going to happen way more often.
Maybe that's true. More likely I think you give soloQ balance changes, survivor win rate improves, BHVR makes balance changes in favor of the killer, the win/loss rate remain about the same, except now soloQ and SWF are more roughly on the same playing field, meaning SWF is not as unique an experience for killers - everyone's game improves.
-
@WesCravenFan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3253292#Comment_3253292
Weirdest post I've read in weeks.
You use data. Actual data.
If they make a perk called Overwhelming Power, and Killers that use it win 99% of their games, that perk is OP and needs to be fixed. BHVR collects loads and loads of data they can use to balance the game.
If they actually listened to every complaint whining about something, the game would have imploded by now.
Who said they should listen to every complaint whining about something? This is literally a "general discussion forum" for people to discuss various topics on the game. A common such topic is back and forths on what could be done to make the game better. A lot of that may end up being individual complaints that are not shared by the community, but BHVR also does surveys and testing to get people's opinion on what is fun. You know, data. If the data indicates that the player base is unhappy with a certain element then, if there is a superior alternative, it should be changed.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3253292#Comment_3253292
It’s fairly agreed on that SWFs are so unfun for killers, that BHVR can never let killers know which people are in a SWF on the lobby screen, or there would be mass lobby dodging and SWF queue times would go through the roof.
According to you, that means SWF should be changed.
You have two points
1: SWFs are unfun for killers
2: BHVR can never let killers know which people are in a SWF on the lobby screen, or there would be mass lobby dodging and SWF queue times would go through the roof.
Fortunately, I already answered you in the quoted text
If a mechanic is making the game less enjoyable than an alternative for the players it obviously should be changed.If SWF actually made the game less enjoyable overall for players than an alternative, it should be changed. The key phrase is 'than an alternative". While this element may have some drawbacks, it is superior than any proposed alternative.
-
@WesCravenFan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3253122#Comment_3253122
No, it shouldn't. Because that's too subjective to take seriously. That slope is so slippery it's covered in butter.
"I think facing medkits is unfun - remove them."
"I think flashlight saves are unfun - remove them."
"I think Lethal Pursuer is unfun - remove it."
"I think being found because I tripped a crow is unfun - remove it."
Literally anything the other side has that helps them win could be swathed with that paint job.
If not based on player enjoyment (fun/unfun) how in the world do games ever make any changes? If a mechanic is making the game less enjoyable than an alternative for the players it obviously should be changed. Now trying to figure out what the overall player base thinks/implementing a change are trickier questions, but I'm not sure what other metric than "fun" you would use for improvements.
-
I think there is a lot of problems with this idea, but if I was going to try and implement it I'd do it like this.:
Give the killer an entity counter to fill up, needs to get to 100. The first time a survivor is hooked it gains 15, the 2nd time they are hooked it gains 10, then 5 on the 3rd, then 3 on 4th hook and subsequent. So you could win by hooking each person twice (4x15 + 4x10), but if you just target the same person again and again, it grows in lesser value. Now a team might still be tempted to leave someone on the hook, so for every 15 seconds they are on the hook, the entity counter gets 1 point.
That's just a rough guess on the numbers, but the would be the idea as just straight teamhooks would absolutely target the easiest person if they existed on the team.
The problem with it being a new mode is that it would inevitably create problems with perks that only really work for one mode and so need alternative powers (ie reassurance). I do think it would decrease camping and tunneling, but might decrease the individual tension.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3250124#Comment_3250124
You're not grinding your opponent down! You're just winning! You're simply performing to the best of your ability. Feeling an obligation to give up your hard-fought advantage is up to personal discretion. I'm so tired of this fake virtue signaling/talk of sportsmanship, because it's always emphasized on the wrong areas of playing the game, and it's used to make people who are successful feel bad about themselves. I should know; being humble has always been the perennial virtue to me. It doesn't mean that confidence and gratification are these great evils to be avoided.
I mean all forms of sportsmanship are personal discretion; that's why it's good behavior and not a rule.
And really, how is it not grinding your opponent down? How is lengthening the game via slugging to maximize the chances of a 4k different than a basketball team that is up 30 keeping their starters in to rack up even more points. If you think such situations are cool, just say so, some people do, but don't pretend it's something different than it is. To me slugging in this situation just comes off as inappropriate behavior. The Killer has won. To use the basketball analogy it doesn't matter whether you win by 50, 30, or 20: you clearly won the game, it's realistically impossible to change that: that's the same situation as slugging at 3 gens left.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248667#Comment_3248667
So on the hundred meter dash, which is also just a game, you just slow down at the end and settle for bronze, because otherwise you're doing something wrong? Why not take the whole thing when you've done everything right, up to that point, to do so?
If I was running a hundred meter dash and realized I was somehow 50 meters ahead of my opponents, yeah, I'd slow down. I've won, this talk of Bronze is silly. Especially if I was just in a casual race and not some professional competition, though even in professional competitions it's pretty normal to put in backups/slow down when you have a giant lead. Playing to win is great, once you've won just grinding your opponent down is ridiculous.
-
@Shartley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3248658#Comment_3248658
Um excuse me, did I forget to mention that I killed 2 survivors (and likely scored at least 1 or 2 hooks on the remaining 2 survivors) before 3 gens could even be completed? Where the ######### is the entitlement? You people are absolutely delusional, do you even play killer bro? If I can kill 2 people before 3 gens get completed then YOU HAVE LOST. GG. NO RE. You have been completely and totally outplayed - I played an outstanding game. And its dogshit that once I have dominated in a game, it just gets thrown back in my face. For what? To make one survivor feel good about getting owned? They deprive the killer of their earned victory so someone who objectively lost gets to feel like they won? Where does that happen for killer? Where does killer get their feel good points when they get two hooks? Where is my safety net for that? All I get is people t-bagging me at the gate. Entitlement? ######### outta here.
Where does that happen for the killer? Not only does this exist for the killer, it is the entire basis of the game. Every time the survivors complete a gen the map shrinks. I've seen killers get stomped for 75% of the game and then turn it around at the end. Not to mention you still have the opportunity to get kills post gens. Really until the doors are open even against a 4 man you have a chance to get at least 1 survivor down and on the hook and camp them while you wait out EGC.
It stuns me that killers don't realize this. As the survivors play better, the game becomes more and more difficult for surviovrs. If the killer plays well, it gets considerably easier. Killers don't need anything else because they already have it, they are always 'in the game' until the survivors are in the exit gates. On the other hand, for survivors to have something to play for they need an additional element, the hatch. Your solution goes in the wrong direction, far from making it easier for the killer at 2 survivors, more should be done to give them a chance to keep the game going.
@Shartley said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3249206#Comment_3249206
I feel your pain, I feel bad for the person that is slugged which is why I almost always hook them anyway - at my own expense. But that's bullshit. I played well, why should I be punished? People in this thread are talking as if I'm the one who is wasting peoples time. THE GAME is wasting your time, that's why I'M trying to change it.
Let's turn your logic around that around:
Why should I be punished as survivor just because the killer managed to find a weak survivor on the team and tunnel them out. Or what about the situation where the survivors suddenly have to play without a teammate due to disconnects. I don't know the other survivors, they were just thrown into a game with me. I may well have played the best game of my life but am going to lose because my team was garbage.
It's not always fair, but you're going to play hundreds of games, it averages out. Lots of people just don't see when the odds fall in their favor, then they call it skill.
-
So I'm going to take a different tact, when I'm on the hook in this situation I'm hoping for my teammate to leave.
Had it happen recently against a Deathslinger. The killer wasn't great, but we had one survivor who was really bad and got eliminated pretty easily. Then we got worked down into a 3 gen and another one of us was eliminated and I and the other survivor were on death hook.
Well the other guy and I played really well. We went at the gens and when the Deathslinger chased us we made sure to lead him to the dead zones of the map. A few times he turned and rushed back and we had to retreat, heal each other, then work back in.
I finish the gen, but get put down by the killer. As I get picked up I see the gates pop open. And then I see him running toward me. I was begging him in my head to rush out, we played so well, at least one of us should escape.
Well, he got hit, got to me, pulled me off, then got put down. I dodge the grab gun and the killer turns back and finishes the other guy off as I get out.
I told him thanks, but I actually wished he had just left. 1 survivor trying to rescue 1 is just way too risky. More than that? Yeah, let's go try a rescue, but if it's at 2 I want the other guy to leave.
-
Well, this post didn't go in the direction I thought based on the title.
The solution to: survivors are put in an impossible situation is - make the situation more impossible.
Honestly if it's that bad the solution should just be if there are two survivors and 3+ gens the game just ends. Or do you need to joy of stomping the last two who have no chance?
You also seem to misunderstand the idea of a 4k (talking about what you've earned). A 4k should be harder than a 3k, which is harder than a 2k. The survivors main strength is numbers which means they have to be given something to compensate to make the game still interesting as numbers decrease (in this situation, hatch). Something should be done when the survivors get to 2, but it should be survivor sided to give them a chance.
And yes, I suspect the Devs rarely play the game with the community (likely play it a ton in testing). They'd probably be a lot more biased if they did. While this is something we do for fun, it is their work. I highly doubt after a day of working on a game they want to play that games for hours and hours in their free time.
-
@Kosturko92 said:
I don't know who came up with the idea that deliverance pairs with off the record, this should be removed asap
The SWF team at high MMR is impossible to beat most of the time.
Please buff killers.
1) Make gen 100 sec
2) Nerf MedKits and Boons ( make that you can apply boon only once per tottem )
3) Give us old corrupt intervention basekit
I love the sentence: "impossible to beat most of the time." Is it impossible, or just uncommon?
The killer role is straightforward, the survivor role is difficult. As survivors get better/work together the balance of the game is going to shift. That's really the only way to have a chance at balancing it. Deathgarden was kind of the opposite and was a disaster: if the hunter was bad the others survived with ease, if the hunter was great it was a bloodbath (kind of like nurse).
You can't really balance the game around SWF. Even if we throw out the idea of it being bad to balance for rare occasions, it's impossible to force. If I understand BHVR's reasoning, it's pretty easy for players to just enter and leave a lobby until they end up in a group. If you put some type of penalty on SWF you just get back to that situation.
I do wish they informed both survivors and killers of who was SWF though, even if only at the end of games. If nothing else would have more clarity.
On your solutions:
Increasing gen time is irrelevant. SWF are always going to be able to target gens more effectively than soloQ. If anything increasing gen times just makes the difference more stark. You could make the gen times 2 minutes and then SWF would be the only ones with a chance.
I get the boons point, but really what items are supposed to be available to survivors. Tool kits for gen rush, flashlights for saves, even medkits? You'd have to completely reimagine/rebuild elements of the game to address coordinated survivor item teams.
-
Your evidence here is almost of the rarest type: high level, full SWF, playing with a strategy from the start - and even with all of that, the best situation the survivors can possibly be in, the killer still got a 1 kill?
Going off your example it sounds like the game is extremely killer sided if it takes all of that and still only get 3 out.
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3240826#Comment_3240826
They are comparable. Both are only done with the intention of wasting time for the bm. It doesn't matter if one has a shorter duration than the other.
If you don't like the killer slugging you for 4 minutes, you should also not like survivors standing at the exit gate just to get a last teabag in. Both are poor sportsmanship when they could have just ended the game without getting the last bm in.
If you don't like BM in video games, you should dislike all forms of BM. Picking and choosing what bm you find acceptable is just being a hypocrit. Either all bm is acceptable or none is.
I mean, there is a pretty big difference that isn't being covered. Unless I'm the last survivor/all survivors are with me, for all I know getting the killer to chase me out is giving the other survivors time to heal/open the other gate/etc. A killer actually knows the state of the other survivors.
-
Presuming any other survivors are left alive, I'll wait around in case they need help/to distract the killer.
-
@SOULWARRIOR71K said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3230700#Comment_3230700
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3230768#Comment_3230768
I'll give you the TLDR since you didn't take the time to read: The gate was open.
How do I "manage" where I hook survivors if there are only 2 hooks near by and I have downed 3 people? According to your logic, I guess I should figure out a magical way to teleport the third survivor to a hook or just give the free escape. lol.
I'll jump into this because I'm honestly confused.
You've lost the hook nearest the gate, the gate is open, the survivors are down.
It sounds like the survivors won. I don't see where the problem is.
-
The question about tunneling is how much time does it take. If you get to a generator and there are two survivors on it, one with 2 hooks, one with none, going after the one with 2 hooks (presuming they are equal loopers) is the "right" play. If the survivors on the other hand are using this time to break a three gen, spread out the map, trade hits, etc. it's not going to be effective.
Removing a survivor is a big advantage. It doesn't mean it is the only thing that you have to consider.
-
The blood web is a great concept for maybe the first 10 to 20 hours, than it just becomes an annoyance. I've only been playing for months and I have so many items I don't know what I'll ever do with them.
I think the idea of the blood web of having some things come up only occasionally and thus making them rare and special sounds good in concept but is awful in execution. It means in soloQ survivors never run their best gear (unless they have an endless supply of it) while in SWF people load up powerhouse teams.
A store would be an improvement. So would a button to just randomly purchase stuff at this point.
If we're just soliciting ideas I'd rebuild the whole system: instead of having set point totals they would be increasing, though everything would be permanent. By increasing I mean your first yellow perk costs 2000, your next 3000, and then 4000, 5000, 6000 etc. Items, addons, offerings would be treated like perks and be permanent purchases, though with increasing costs. The system would allow for new players to quickly acquire perks/gear, while maxing out a survivor/killer with everything would take increasingly higher amounts of work. Once you got to the "end" of the bloodweb the system would allow you to turn bloodpoints into shards/cosmetics/etc at extremely high costs.
-
The connection/hit thing is not a one way or clear thing. I've been hit as the survivor after not just making a vault, but being a good distance from the vault. I've been hit while falling through the air after a 2nd story vault (once had my graphics suddenly change to the grab animation). Also had instance of dropping a pallet, it completely dropping, taking a step away, then getting hit.
-
I was under the impression this was intentional.
The large black blob (and sound effect) gives the killer time to move away from the hook and toward survivors (reward for doing objectives). Much like how completing a gen gives the survivors a partial vision block as they move away.
-
What do you define as a win, how do you play, and when do you play?
How to play: I hate it, but as killer I've imposed rules on myself unless I'm pretty sure I'm hitting an SWF. I avoid the more powerful add-ons and during the game I act like when a survivor is on the hook I pretend they don't exist.
When to play: during the evening (US West Coast) I find I hit much harder teams than other hours.
-
Yeah, it's awful. It's so slow and also usually pointless. When you are first learning perks it actually has choices to make. Now it's just like 'more brown medkits, yay'.
-
@cburton311 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3218023#Comment_3218023
It's so easy to de incentivize camping. Give a large reward to gen repair speed while the killer is the only player near the hook. This encourages survivors to do what they should be doing, it punishes killers for camping before end game, and it doesn't change the endgame at all since all the generators are done! So simple.
I remained befuddled that camping just continues and BHVR is kind of like 'oh well'. The solution seems incredibly simple: if the killer stays within X meter of a hook for Y seconds Z occurs. We can debate/play test how many meters/seconds/what occurs, but it really feels like something should.
I just had a game with a basement Bubba. Sat there for two minutes just staring at each other. Fun game.
Of course it could have been more fun, someone could have had Reassurance/Kindred and we could have had an even longer staring contest.
-
If you've ever played a video game, killer is pretty straight forward. Chase and hit. You have strategy decisions to make, but if you're familiar with video games, or DBD already, that shouldn't be too difficult.
On the survivor side it is much more of a unique gameplay. Additionally the strategic decisions you make have to be done without all the info available to the killer, so learning map layouts and remembering where certain things are is important. On top of that, you have to hope that 3 other human beings are into the game (ie goofing off, distracted by something in their house, falling asleep, internet problems) or else it is going to quickly become extremely unbalanced.
At the lower MMR for killers the chance of hitting teams that have at least one player who for whatever reason is a hindrance on the team is pretty high. My thoughts on my first few hours were here. Killer gets harder, but still generally feel like I have a healthy advantage
A big thing, far bigger than MMR from my personal experience, is time of day you play. Playing in the evening radically increases the chance of hitting organizing and focused teams.
-
The first time this happened to me I was confused. Crushed by a Huntress hitting throws from long range, we could barely even touch gens. The wp was so weird, like you just massacred us, what part of it is was well played? A simple gg would have sufficed.
-
Communication is a big part of it, but the fact that items/addons increase so substantially in power makes the game really hard to balance.
Like tonight I was playing killer and I usually stick with brown/yellow addons. Got hit by a couple of good teams running purple gear and maybe communicating. So I switch to the best addons. Next game is against a group running browns and nothing gear wise and I crushed them. The gear can have a big impact on the game, but unless everyone comes on the same level it creates a clear mismatch.
-
Let me also take a crack at the sports comparison
1: DBD is inherently tricky as a asymmetrical game. In soccer each side has 1 goalie, 10 field players, 3 substitutions, etc. If you made the goals 3 feet (1 meter) wider people would complain it was going to ruin the game, but at least it would be a balanced change. All changes in DBD impact one side or the other more. I think this is where a lot of the bitterness in the community comes from.
2: Just because something is an effective strategy doesn't mean its fun. Basketball used to have a 4 corners strategy where, to simplify, if you were winning the game you basically played keep away and made no effort to score unless it was a guaranteed bucket. It was incredibly boring both as players and fans. To solve this they introduced the shot clock and a rule about how long you could hold the ball.
3: So maybe you are looking at the above and saying the change is on BHVR, not the players. I can see that argument. The problem is how you treat DBD. If I was playing basketball with some friends, or just a casual pick up game with people I never met, yeah, I'd be pretty upset with them if they played keep away instead of trying to score. While I'd like BHVR to make changes, until they do its on the community.
4: While it is certainly possible to target a weak player on another team in sports, it's bad form in casual games. Example: I was playing pickup indoor soccer after having not played in almost 15 years. I was by far the worst (and oldest by over a decade) player in the game. No one on my team knew me, we were just thrown together. If the other team singled me out would it have been a good strategy, sure, but my teammates would be right to be pissed at the other team. We were put together randomly it's not like we were a professional, or even organized, team (comparing SoloQ to SWF).
5: The goal of sports is to win, but winning in DBD is poorly defined. If a killer wants to camp a hook survivor because he is happy with a 1k it's going to become a pretty annoying game. It would be like if a team in soccer went down 1-0 and then switched to total defense even though they were losing because they would rather have a 1-0 loss than a potential blowouts (which does happen in soccer sometimes because of tie breakers for advancement). While it can be situationally understandable, it again makes for a bad game.
Why is a killer sitting on a hook, getting sure the surv dies unfair, but 3 Survs sitting on a gen, getting sure its being done as fast as possible not unfair?The survivors have to make a choice on the gens: focusing on one gets it done the quickest, but spreading out is more efficient to get 5 gens done more quickly (not to mention the danger of something like a Bubba). It's a strategy decision that may be right or wrong depending on the circumstances.
Camping a hook is basically stopping the game.
Instead of making it harder and harder to tunnel and camp, just make other tactics more valuable... Give killers something like Grim Embrace BasekitIf current situation was that survivors had a 60% survival rate, sure, we could talk about addressing the unfun elements of the game by giving the killers more. However, one side is currently in the weaker role, so any changes to core gameplay, if not neutral, should be buffing that side.
-
@squirtinq said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3211572#Comment_3211572
I hope this doesn't get sent twice.
Unfortunately, I can't show it until a match is done because DBD doesn't have a report of players and stats after a game is finished. When you get the chance, look at the troll report section.
If I'm following what you are saying, you are confusing that body block is used for two different actions.
Body blocking the killer to take a protection hit and/or slow them down is very much allowed. There are even challenges about protection hits.
Body blocking a survivor as a survivor to prevent them from moving (or as a killer when not attempting to down them or otherwise improve your objectives) is considered sabotaging the game and is banable.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/348952/why-is-camping-supported
Grabbing should go away for sure, and certain killers with instadown capability shouldn't be able to use their power near a hooked survivor but beyond this...how exactly do you 'nerf' camping in a way that survivors wouldn't be able to abuse the hell out of?
AFAIK, this has been the big hurdle for the devs. They don't like facecamping, but all the stuff they've prototyped internally has been exploitable.
How about this:
Create a zone around anyone who is hooked. When in that zone the killer starts to gain charges. If the killer hits a certain threshold the killer is revealed to everyone and stunned. Call it the Entity is Disappointed mechanic. The killer does not gain charges while in a chase and loses them outside the zone.
This way the killer could camp for a little bit if they thought someone was nearby, or rush back to a hook right as it was about to change state, but would be forced to push away from the hook over time.
If you want to make it more detailed.
Create a narrow inner circle around the hook and a second broader zone. In the inner zone the killer gains charges at 2.5 rate, while only 1 charge in the broader zone.
Then you wouldn't have to do away with grabs or the powers.
That's how I'd change it. No idea on the technical feasibility.
-
@fake said:
I think it's an interesting discussion. May I present other points to consider? Because game balance and emotion are two different things.
The developer has already said that the line of draw is 2kill-2escape.
Since half the survivors are dead and the other half are alive, I think that is numerically true.
But this is for the killer, we are talking about.
What about for the survivor?
Similarly, let's assume there were five games.
0k4e, 1k3e, 2k2e, 3k1e, and 4k0e.
Now in 4 games at least one survivor is sacrificed.
Now what if the dead survivor player in all four games was the same person the whole time?
The kill rate on the game is 50%, but the kill rate for him is 80%.
In other words, the balance is not taken on an emotional level.
This is even more so if it is a solo queue. Why is that?
Next, let's keep this assumption and assume that the survivor is SWF.
Likewise, identical players are sacrificed, but if we can consider the survivors to be a team, then the kill rate is 50%, both numerically and emotionally; a 4-person SWF, even at 3k1e, can be fun and exciting with voice chat and spectating. "We win!" In other words, with emotion, the kill rate might be 20%.
Especially for solo survivors, the outcome of the game is whether you live or die. In other words, you win or you lose, so there is no tie.
But as a game, Survivor is a team of four, and the 2k2e line is considered a draw. This discrepancy between numbers and emotions may make the balance difficult.
I was curious to hear someone else's opinion on this idea.
I think you are absolutely correct.
My feeling as a survivor: if we get the gens done/doors open and single survivor gets out, we won. Anything beyond 1 is just degree of victory.
-
@adsads123123123123 said:
Kill rates aren't as useful or accurate as win rates. Killers typically interpret 0-1 kills as a loss, 2 kills as a draw, and 3-4 kills as a win. Kill rates can be misleading. For example, say the results for 3 matches were:
1k
1k
4k
This would result in a 50% kill rate but only a 33% win rate. If only kill rate was shown, it would make a certain killer seem balanced when in reality that killer was losing most matches. The kill rate will likely be higher than the win rate because when a killer wins, it's typically a 4k rather than a 3k. A 3k usually only occurs through hatch escapes or when the exit gates are too far apart to patrol. This theory is supported by data from NightLight (https://nightlight.gg/killers). It can be seen that on most killers the 4k rate is almost double that of 3k whereas 0k and 1 are about the same. This would result in a higher kill rate than win rate.
Additionally, I think that mmr should be based on wins rather than whether a specific survivor is killed or not because DBD is a game based on objectives. A survivor that dies could contribute more than one that survived. Awarding mmr for surviving is like awarding mmr for kda rather doing the objective.
Finally, games where any player disconnects should be excluded. If the killer disconnects, it's 4 escapes for survivors. If a survivor disconnects, it's usually a free 4k for the killer. These games aren't representative of a normal game.
The problem is right now the game treats it as 4 individual matches. So a 1k is a loss for one of the survivors, a single win for the killer, three losses for the killer, and each other survivor gets a win. So in that sense the overall win/loss is reflective of what has occurred.
Peanits has mentioned that they are looking into more team based rewards/impacts, which I hope they do. I'd rather be judged on the overall team performance than just my own as I feel the game is much more enjoyable when treated like a team experience.
-
@DyingWish92 said:
Rotten fields, playing survivor. Started the game uninterrupted on a gen next to cow tree for 50 seconds or so. Killer comes by. I loop around the cow tree twice, drop the pallet and lithe to a jungle gym. Killer drops chase. Chase was 27 seconds without the killer landing a hit. I go back to my gen which is 60% or so. As I'm finishing my gen 3 generators go off before I finish mine. I finish my generator, 4 generators done within the span of 20 seconds. Killer goes AFK.
Gen speeds are still an issue. I also had 2 other games with very fast gens today. I'm not great at looping but the game seemed to put me with very efficient teammates today and the games are a joke, can't even pip due to how quick the games go with the killer getting 2 hooks before endgame.
If the survivors are much better than the killer, or the killer much better than the survivor, it's probably not going to be a long game. That's not a flaw, no need to draw out mismatches.
If the killer didn't find you for 50 seconds that means he probably chased a different survivor first and also lost that chase. Or given the fact that all of the gens hit at the same time, a sign he found no one. Either completely new or missed the start of the game.
Also, the killer now has 3 untouched gens to defend. Even if his chance of a 4k is extremely low, he can still get someone as the map has narrowed a lot.
-
@Gahbage said:
Add a new status effect, Blood Drenched.
"When the killer downs a survivor that has been recently unhooked(30-45 seconds) they become Blood Drenched, the killers view is filled with dripping blood and a red hue for a time(1:30 to 2 minutes is ideal).
The survivor being healed or performing conspicuous actions will cause the killer to not be blood drenched."
This mechanic would put anti-tunneling out of the hands of the survivor, giving no way for them to abuse it. A killer can still tunnel if they want to, but they will suffer when it comes to visually tracking survivors, it could also be tuned to make scratch marks harder to see,
Eventually tunnelers will learn that they don't want to be annoying by a red screen, training them to play more fairly.
While thematically I like the idea, practically I don't think it works.
The problem with penalizing tunneling is that, even we say a killer should avoid it for whatever reason, some times it just happens. Sometimes I just happen to run into a survivor again and again without seeing others, sometimes one survivor is just considerably worse than the others (that's not even taking into account suicide rushers). Being forced to intentionally avoid a survivor seems like a bad mechanic.
I think that if tunneling is too powerful/ruining the game, there's an easier solution: Increase the haste effect power/duration. Want to target a specific survivor? You can, but they are likely to take a good deal longer to catch.
-
1: I don't know why they are getting rid of the current Mori system, seems like that could still stay with the new addition.
2: I think it adds on a good, quicker finish to the game. Lugging the survivors to the hooks when they are all down is a pointless excursion.
-
Taunting the killer is a valid idea if you want to get their attention and take it away from other players. Even taunting at the exit gate if the goal is to give the other survivors more time is fine. Likewise moris are a strategic idea because it removes the dangers of flashlights/sabotage hooks.
Anything though that just draws at the game for no reason should be viewed as toxic. Waiting at the exit gate for no purpose, allowing survivors to crawl toward a hatch and then mori at the last second, that's toxic.
-
@shalo said:
Escape rates: The average SWF group, which makes up the vast majority of SWF groups, has little to no discernable difference compared to solo players.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3189788#Comment_3189788
So Survivors, please stop whining about soloq, it doesn't need buffing and Killers, please stop whining about SWF it doesn't need nerfing.
Why do people act like 15% is a small number? Would you rather have a win rate of 40% or 55%? That's a pretty big difference.
-
Presuming the gates are really far apart: try a double back. Pick whichever gate you think is more likely that the Survivor will head to, go to check it, leave, and then double back to see if you catch the survivor by surprise.
-
@Seraphor said:
These changes are NOT going to prevent slugging:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/348083/basekit-unbreakable-is-a-cursed-wish
In addition, it essentially renders 'the dying state' a dead mechanic. Any and all interactions with survivors in the dying state are now pointless. An entire facet of the game loop has been deleted.
No more clutch saves at endgame when all survivors are downed but you have DS/UB/SG/BO/Adrenaline/Deliverance.
No more giving the hatch to survivors you've downed.
No more slugging a freshly unhook survivor instead of tunnelling them, if you down a survivor shortly after they've been unhooked you have no choice but to hook them again.
SWF bully squads are now even more untouchable, so expect more teabagging in your face as they know they're invincible.
And to a lesser extent but still sad to lose; no more slug races, no more cinematic mori's that you can position yourself, no more dicking around with friends having fun, just serious gameplay.
So many fun gameplay options will disappear because of this.
Imagine having Adrenaline and Sole Survivor when the killer slams the hatch closed? Never going to happen now.
No more clutch saves at endgame when all survivors are downed but you have DS/UB/SG/BO/Adrenaline/Deliverance.Imagine having Adrenaline and Sole Survivor when the killer slams the hatch closed? Never going to happen now.The situation you are discussing involves:
1: A survivor who has unlocked those perks and brought them to the game
2: Being the last survivor alive
3: Having the events happen as described (compared to say the survivor finding the hatch first or the killer finding the survivor before the hatch)
Doesn't seem like that big a loss.
No more giving the hatch to survivors you've downed.Good. Mercy is not something that should be a part of the gameplay.
No more slugging a freshly unhook survivor instead of tunnelling them, if you down a survivor shortly after they've been unhooked you have no choice but to hook them again.See above on mercy. Also, good. If you've outmatched the survivors that much they should be eliminated from the game quickly and MMR can be more accurate.
These changes are NOT going to prevent sluggingPossible. If so, the update will be a failure.
-
The major element the game needs is to speed up the end game when the killer is looking like he'll get a 4k.
You will be stuck on the ground for even longer, unless you give up and refuse to pick yourself up off the ground. Because every time you get up you're pausing your bleedout timer, and the killer knows exactly where you are because they downed you, and you recovered instead of crawling, so they come right back and smack you down again. You will be stuck in this whack-a-mole game for much longer than 4 minutes.But you'll be up, which means you can play the game again.
Yes, if the killer can tunnel out two survivors and do it before the survivors are down to 1 gen, the killer can really draw out the game. That will stay true and I wish they would implement other changes to address it. Something that makes the killer drawing the game out for a 4k a risky proposition (much like survivors have to frequently takes risks in the game to recuse someone).
Mori offerings will now be even more toxic, because if you see a killer has one, you know they're going to slug for the 4K.Let's say you are correct, and I don't see any reason to doubt the possibility:
Just change mori offerings. Remove it as a BP bonus if players use it too much. I like the new Mori mechanic, but I don't understand why the old one needed to be removed as both seemed like they could exist at the same time.
-
1: Twins
2: Freddy
3: Oni
4: Clown
5: Demogorgon
6: Not sure, probably deathslinger, though the five above definitely the rarest to hit.
-
Combined a few responses
1: Being on the hook is unfun
The hooks state is defined, 3 and you are done, compared to a 4 minute bleedout. One minute on the first stage of the hook is an issue, which is a big reason face camping should also be addressed. The second stage throws up a mini-game, simplistic yes, but something that makes that time seem more tolerable.
2: Not being happy with the mori changes
Fair enough. I'm interested to see how it plays out, but certain elements of it seem weird.
3: There are some other things they should be addressing
Yeah, I can see that. Slugging is probably not the first thing I'd address if it was my call, but doesn't really impact whether this patch improves the game or not.
-
One other things I'll add: the slugging abuse focuses on the 4 minute bleedout. Yeah, that's a big problem, but not the only one. The problem I encounter more is when the killer tunnels out one players and then just keeps putting everyone else down. So the 1 down, 1 chase, 1 heal becomes a permanent loop.
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3202273#Comment_3202273
1 slugged, 1 chased, 1 pick up becomes 1 slugged for longer and 1 chased. I'll grant that makes survivors stronger, but it doesn't seem to be the level people are saying.
22 seconds to pick yourself up is not "slugged for longer." Recovering from 0% takes 32 seconds, this is actually faster than someone coming to pick you up.
If this change goes through, UB will be effectively required meta like DH was. You will see all 4 survivors running it every match, especially since old DH required at least some skill to use effectively; UB requires no skill at all.
And if you want the 1/1/1, take the risk to throw them on the hook.
Tell me you don't play killer without telling me you don't play killer.
The amount of time required to hook someone gives the other survivor right on top of you a crazy amount of distance, and it takes mere seconds to unhook vs taking 30 seconds to pick up. Slugging can actually generate more pressure than hooking under the right circumstances. Instead of slugging being sometimes the right play when the survivors are caught together, basekit UB makes it pretty much never the right play. It takes away a huge tool the killer has to punish survivor mistakes.
Survivors will be able to throw the match and still get 2 or 3 out. This already can happen with UB as it exists today and people are claiming that it won't happen with basekit unlimited UB.
Top Levels of Play: Slugging is abused at low and mid level of play ruining games. Even if everything you say is 100% correct and unfixable, its a worthwhile change to make the game better for, to my understanding, the vast majority of players and worry about how to fix the issue with the minority occurrences later. BHVR would be crazy if they had any other type of strategy.
If you mean bleeding everyone out for 4 minutes, there are other ways to address that short of giving everyone one of the strongest meta perks in the game for free, with unlimited uses.
The survivors' primary resource is numbers: spreading themselves across the maps and pressuring gens.
The killer's primary resource is time: knowing where to spend their time is key.
This change removes one of the primary mechanisms killers have to buy themselves a little more time. I pretty much never run 4 stacked slowdown perks because I think other perks are more fun, but if this change goes through then it may become necessary because BHVR is removing a play style that can be used to naturally slow down the game.
Balancing around the low-to-mid MMR range is a mistake many other games have fallen into and it winds up killing the game in the long run, because the devoted players who are at high MMR leave. I'm not saying you can't give buffs that help in the lower brackets but you have to consider how it's going to affect the higher brackets. If it makes them borderline unplayable then you have a problem.
Tell me you don't play killer without telling me you don't play killer.I don't play killer outside of archive because it is embarrassingly easy starting out as Killer. I have no problem believing there is some threshold/time period of the day were killer becomes a challenge, I'm just aware that is not the experience all the time. And while I don't have access to the data, I doubt coordinated 4 player SWF is a common experience across the player base.
The amount of time required to hook someone gives the other survivor right on top of you a crazy amount of distance, and it takes mere seconds to unhook vs taking 30 seconds to pick up.Sure, there are trade offs. Now the trade offs are different than they were before. Players will adapt.
I pretty much never run 4 stacked slowdown perks because I think other perks are more fun, but if this change goes through then it may become necessary because BHVR is removing a play style that can be used to naturally slow down the game.I mean, it sounds like to accomplish your goal you are going to have to use perks, which is what survivors are constantly told they need to do to counter killer play styles. The advantage for killer is you don't have to coordinate with anyone else to actually do so.
-
@FriendlyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3202222#Comment_3202222
1. If I suck at War-zone, should the devs give me auto-aim? Can't hit the timing for a combo in MK 11, should it be patched in for me? This is the only game I've ever experienced where the player base feels entitled to a win without actually putting in the effort to earn it. I'd be really interested to see a pie chart of killer vs survivor mains who play Elden Ring, for example.
2.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/XOWWAMYHQTBF/screenshot-20220916-110730-ps-app.jpg
Look to the top-right of this screenshot. Myers doesn't hang out here. You have interesting ideas about balancing the game, would you care to share with me which level you'd like to balance at?
3. This goes back to the tone set by my hag story. Ever been losing as survivor? Like really, REALLY losing? And then with maybe two survivors left someone takes the killer on a chase that let's you finish the rest of the gens?
An uncommon escape? You just go in the zone, tap into the matrix, whatever? Those are the most thrilling moments this game has to offer, and they're about to be erased. In favor of a bland experience where even the most mediocre survivors escape against neutered gimped excuses for killers. To claim what, victory? Certainly not over your fellow gamers. Just a hollow victory over the marshmallows who "balance" this game. It's happening somewhere out there in the Fog, right now you know?
With survivors who refuse to hit that concession button.
And I can only take your final point to mean if you're not winning a game you lose interest in it completely. Your prerogative of course. But as I said, we'll have to agree to disagree.
At least you have the devs on your side.
1: The difference in your examples is the asymmetrical nature. In those games the changes either go to everyone or no one. Here both sides complain about the difficulty of the other. I find Killer an incredibly simple and straightforward role, while Survivor requires figuring out multiple elements while the game is going on.
2: Balance changes should primarily be made for wherever the majority of their player base is (as an oversimplification, lots of caveats if we really dug into it). If for some reason they were rebuilding the game just for me, there would be a lot of conceptual changes. But I understand they are trying to appeal to a lot of people who are not me and that future changes may turn me off from the game.
3: I guess you would have to define really, really losing. Have there been games where I thought 'we barely have a chance' and pulled it off. Yeah, a few. Take your two survivors example: can a survivor fully repair a gen while the other loops. Absolutely. Two gens? Seems extremely unlikely presuming they haven't been touched, but I'll grant its possible. More than that? Unless the killer is really new and the two players were eliminated via disconnects/being even worse, seems impossible. I've definitely been in games where we got knocked down to 2 and we did our best to loop, hide, heal, and support each other - the end result being really drawing out the game but nothing actually changing.
And I can only take your final point to mean if you're not winning a game you lose interest in it completely. Your prerogative of course. But as I said, we'll have to agree to disagree.That one I'll ask you to read again.
I lose interest if I'm not winning and winning is impossible.
I loathe, absolutely detest, being in a position where my victory is inevitable.
When I play Killer, I'm begging for good survivors. By far the most enjoyable games I've had as Killer have been when I lost and hit a SWF and/or flashlight blind squads. That's great. Hitting a group of survivors I massacre is what makes me want to uninstall the game.
-
@TheWheelOfCheese said:
Before, slugging occupied three survivors: 1 slugged, 1 being chased, 1 coming to pick up.
Now, especially with Unbreakable, nobody needs to come pick up. The pressure of slugging at vital moments has been nerfed approximately to 66% of what it was before.
This is a huge nerf and it deserves all of the backlash it's receiving.
It is just a PTB, but how many times in the past has BHVR released a PTB, the community has pointed out huge problems, and they are set live anyway?
Remember Boil Over? This is that, but worse.
A lot worse.
And I have little faith in BHVR to change course at this point.
At least with 6.1 they did address endurance stacking and Reassurance being busted before it went live, so there's a glimmer of hope. But the track record thus far gives me significant cause for worry.
BHVR doesn't seem to ever consider how stuff they introduce will be (ab)used at the top levels of play, at least not until people show them after they've already released it.
We need to start making noise now, and I'm glad people are.
1 slugged, 1 chased, 1 pick up becomes 1 slugged for longer and 1 chased. I'll grant that makes survivors stronger, but it doesn't seem to be the level people are saying.
And if you want the 1/1/1, take the risk to throw them on the hook.
Unbreakable: It still takes a perk slot and is useless if you never have a situation were you aren't just picked up and thrown on the hook.
Top Levels of Play: Slugging is abused at low and mid level of play ruining games. Even if everything you say is 100% correct and unfixable, its a worthwhile change to make the game better for, to my understanding, the vast majority of players and worry about how to fix the issue with the minority occurrences later. BHVR would be crazy if they had any other type of strategy.