dezzmont
dezzmont
About
- Username
- dezzmont
- Joined
- Visits
- 967
- Last Active
Comments
-
The big issue with DBD is there is a lot of focus on power, or which side wins, or whatever, and not about the actual flow of the game.
A good example is stuff like survivors complaining about tunneling, when making tunneling too weak neuters the threat of the killer because you feel too safe at hooks, or when killers complain about genrush, when in reality survivors who aren't being pressured have nothing to do with gens.
DBD is a delicate balance of interacting gamestates where both sides are struggling to engineer a result under pressure from each other preventing them from freely acting: Killers have an almost 'absolute' power to block objectives by design, be it a hooked survivor or gen, but can't be in more than one place at a time, and thus if they aren't clever about pressure in reality they are leaving multiple objectives undefended rather than really defending. Likewise, survivors are forced to capitulate to the killer's pressure, even if they don't succumb to their attempts to down and remote them from the game. A survivor, outside of specific circumstances, can't 'force past' the killer's attempts to block them, as all their tools to survive require them to do nothing but utilize them. In exchange for being so vulnerable to pressure, survivors have more map presence and pressure. An individual survivor can't force jack through the killer's attempts to defend, but they can always win if they correctly predict the killer, run good loops, and never play into the killer and do things like feed hookstates on sloppy rescues or refuse to back down.
Anything that messes up this dynamic is generally extremely toxic. Classic example is old DS and old BT, which both, in attempt to save survivors from the 'bad feelings' of being tunneled, utterly destroyed the killer's ability to play defensively on an objective correctly. This was such a bad design it resulted in the longest Q times ever when the devs just refused to back down and the Civ meme was born. We don't live in those times anymore, as it actually threatened the survival of the game, DBD was at the risk of pulling a death garden and just having one side entirely fall out of the game. It turns out that while it sucks to die 5 minutes into a game not doing anything, its WORSE for you to be playing a game for 10 minutes unable to do anything because mechanics keep screwing you over for doing well and blocking a sloppy unhook or whatever, and without the negativity of being hooked, survivor play actually became EXTREMELY BORING because there was absolutely no tension in losing chases, meaning stuff like having to make hard decisions on taking hits to save pallets or having to track the killer didn't matter anymore and the game became 'gen simulator.' DBD just was frustrating for killer, and boring for survivor, it just sucked.
Keys completely demolish this intricate balance in a way even moris, or old BT and DS don't. They are less powerful, but one interesting thing about game design is that its often not the most powerful stuff that is the most toxic, but the stuff that aggressively messes up the negotiated relationship of gameplay, AKA the way players interact with each other. Keys are, in fact, probably one of the worse mechanics I have seen in a game, because ultimately they are a mechanic that rewards survivors for doing poorly (Which is fine, you actually want comeback mechanics in the game, hatch ON ITS OWN is a really healthy mechanic!) but in a way that doesn't just not feel super great for them (A duo key-win is hardly a survivor victory) but feels AWFUL for the person who got the script flipped on them.
Keys are mega toxic because killers lose the game for doing well in a way they have almost no control over. You basically don't pip in key games simply because the survivors decided to bring an easily obtained item. This is unlike Moris, where good play generally still works and the change is more subtle and simply accelerates the game rather than actively punishing the killer. So while moris are more powerful, and did deserve a nerf, in many ways they were better mechanically because they amplified tension in the game rather than draining it. A killer, somewhat rightfully, has every reason to say 'Why should I even bother?' when looking at a key, because it anihilates both the in game scoring method and violates the entire concept of a skill based game outside of it (not because its op or easy, but because the promise of a skill based game is that good gameplay is rewarded, but keys... punish good gameplay quite heavily, so you almost paradoxically are punished for doing well in chases and consistently downing surviviors). Keys are beatable for sure, but losing to a key is sorta unnaceptable to the entire gameplay loop of DBD in a way that losing to a mori isn't.
TL;DR: Keys are not only unbalanced, but they completely destroy the entire reason DBD is enjoyable as a skill based negotiated conflict between two groups trying to engineer gamestates by anihilating the gamestate a killer is meant to be powerful in and just removing any real win condition from a role.
-
Tunneling is an intentional faccet of the game, rewarding killers for survivors making sloppy rescues, or for correctly defending the hook.
DS as non basekit also helps with perk asymmetry. Survivors should have more of a 'perk crunch' due to having a collective 16 slots to play with, and not comfortably fit all the capabilities they want.
-
The killer should be allowed to punish bad unhooks. Any change that prevents this breaks the gameplay dynamic between killers and survivors and causes slugsville.
-
I don't mind the Mori changes, because moris always felt excessive.
However, you now see a truly INSANE amount of keys in red ranks, which is very frustrating because 2 survivors escaping by the hatch just completely tanks your game.
It isn't like moris kept keys in check 'per-say.' Survivors knew if they brought a key a mori was likely of course, but the bigger issue is that they didn't telegraph the mori change at all but telegraphed the key change well in advance, which was honestly an awful, scummy move that someone should be seriously talked to over, because this result was inevitable.
Keys, for people who don't really know, are both less powerful than moris (they don't create a massive tempo swing in the game when it matters most) and more powerful (Unlike Moris, a key that isn't quickly removed from play basically ensures the killer can't pip unless they snowball stupid hard). So seeing a lot of keys is super frustrating in a way a mori spam week isn't: Moris merely reduce your hook states by 1, which isn't fun but isn't 'Ok so this game is over before it started' tier.
Keys sincerely remove my desire to play a match on load in, in a way that seeing the killer has a hidden offering doesn't when I am survivor. Moris actually increase tension, which is kinda good because DBD desperately needs more tension for survivors (even if, again, Moris are super unhealthy overall). Keys reduce it, and just make the entire match feel like a chore.
TL;DR: I wouldn't mind if they had nerfed keys at the same time. But as is it just sucks and really shows that the devs took a lot of steps backwards from the super survivor sided, borderline abuse encouraging design of 2017.
-
@dspaceman20 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1835570#Comment_1835570
Ok I see what you mean. Balancing perks is hard.
I still think the perk should be changed to make it more usable to the survivors but fair for the killers. Would what your suggesting also won't make it toxic or impossible to deal with?
I think the key is that the perk is less about giving wiggle progress and more making actually navigating to the hook more of a pain, opening up opportunities for a clean rescue.
In that scenario, I will reiterate a longer missed attack slowdown penalty (not hits, as you want the killer to still be rewarded for smackin a body-block correctly), and a penalty to dropping you on purpose, would do a lot. It makes it so in addition to having a harder time controlling themselves, if someone interferes the stakes are higher because if they miss the hit they probably lose ya, and if they drop ya that means they are, unless they had a lot of spare time, committing to letting you go or at least slugging you.
It forces the killer to make hard choices, but choices they are still making, and they can still 'beat' the perk by playing well, which is the ideal case for any 'carry nerf' perks: The killer should be the one in a position to beat it if they respond to it correctly, rather than it merely requiring the survivors to set it up well to automatically work. "Ties go to killer" basically, but it doesn't mean that it has to be trivial to tie as long as its also not trivial to use right: body blocks are hard but when your being body blocked landing hits without losing a lot of distance can be hard too, so increasing the stakes of failing to land hits is significant.
-
@Rydog said:
The wiggle mechanic isn't there to give you a serious chance of escape, it's there to prevent every hook from being a basement hook.
Exactly. Any mucking with the carry mechanic is basically creating conditions where the killer is literally unable to score points. Not 'Ways to block them from scoring points' but actively like... preventing scoring from being possible, because the carry mechanic is one where the killer has really no control over anything and its purely a binary function of time and distance, baring some bodyblock/sabo stuff.
Bodyblock and sabo is deliberately weak, requires setup, is counterable by the killer ahead of time, highly punishable, ect, specifically because, again, its denying the killer the ability to 'score a point' in a scenario where they already scored it. Its fair when it happens because the killer has to make a big mistake to 'undo' their score that a very coordinated team of survivors needs to exploit, but you shouldn't expect to have a single perk and two randos body blocking undo a lost chase anymore than the killer should expect to be able to undo a completed gen by winning one chase. It just isn't good for the game.
Again, there is an argument to be made that these perks are bad for the game as weak as they are because they are deceptive or unfun, but that isn't a good argument for making the overall game worse to make using these perks less of a joke, because that hurts every other perk as well. If you have the option for an 'immortality' perk, suddenly every other survival perk sucks, and your back at square 1.
Instead you want the option for diverse builds that do interesting different things that have different 'plans' for how they win. Could a reworked boil over be part of that? Maybe, but it won't be by making it actually realistic to wiggle out. Because it should never be realistic to just wiggle out without the killer making a series of very big mistakes like wiffing carry hits or not noticing a saboer in an area with isolated hooks.
-
@dspaceman20 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1834797#Comment_1834797
Ok well there has to be some change that be made in order to make it good if not more usable then a second chance perk.
What about if the killer is carrying you struggling will obscure any and all hook auras and not other effect? Is that change more balanced?
It is better but still not good.
This is just a super delicate needle to thread, because you absolutely positively don't want the killer to be unable to hook unless they run iron grasp or something. Big no-no. Can't stress enough we see where this leads, and its slugsville and hour long survivor Qs.
Again, this is THE most delicate point in the game to mess with a killer's ability to act. The 'transport to hook' phase is sorta where the killer should be the strongest and everything should have to be perfect for it not to work. This is why this phase has the least exploration perk wise too: A perk that increases wiggle speed is kinda obvious, but there is a reason it never was created.
Boil over wasn't a buff to wiggle speed, and wiggle speed indirectly got nerfed by the killer speedbuff for non-4.6's because the carry distance of killers just needs to be X distance minimum. Suffice to say we will NEVER see a perk that reduces killer carry distance generically.
No auras plus maybe an increased penalty on wiffed attacks plus a drop penalty may work. It just won't make the perk meta. Its just... fundamentally not realistic for a carry nerf perk to be meta without becoming toxic.
@ItzPixelYT said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1834563#Comment_1834563
There's pretty much no point in running perks like Breakout and Saboteur at this point. Even Flip-Flop. The hook RNG in the game is ridiculous, i'd rather we started to see some wiggle out plays than what we have in the meta now. The game struggles to allow people to use more than 10% of it's perks. Sure you can argue that Killers should get the hook after winning a chase. At the same time, it's going to require another survivor to come over to help that one wiggle free which is also a pretty dangerous and time consuming act because that's taking off gen pressure...
To me I think killers should feel the pressure of having to run things like Iron Grasp, Mad Grit and Agitation because i think it' pretty pointless to use those perks unless you want to do some basement builds. It would also open up to changing the survivor meta and probably would force the game to be more interactive on both sides instead of this chasing 1 survivor till they're down whilst the rest do gens because that's what we've had for the past 4 years and we should be looking at ways to try and force survivors and killers to interact more and making it beneficial on both sides.
Having perks like Ruin, Undying, DS, Unbreakable, Noed, BT, Adrenaline. They just aren't healthy for the game going forward imo.
Again, we saw what happens when killers are too disempowered on the carry phase and need to run perks to support it: the game withers and dies.
You should not need perks to engage with the super basic mechanic of 'down survivors and carry them to hooks' which is ultimately what happened when SWF groups realized they could permanently block nurses without agitation from ever hooking.
Furthermore, NO survivor perk should EVER pressure the killer to be forced to take a perk, ever. EVER. Like EVER. Unless your talking about giving 16 perk slots to the killer, in which case I would say that is likely to lead to some problems. Killer perks can pressure survivor's usage of perk slots or nullify them, but not the inverse in general, because the game is asymmetric and the way killers and survivors value perks is different.
You may feel those perks are unhealthy, but absolutely gutting a core feature of killers in the form of the basic function of how they score is completely not a viable way to address those perks. It would be akin to killers having a perk that made it so if you didn't have prove thyself you were unable to repair gens except at a 10% speed: its just a fundamentally unhealthy interaction because it just limits the options of every player involved and ends up being a nothng-burger for everyone besides the people who don't play into it, who instead just auto lose a lot of games over it.
@TheButcher6641 said:
I like this idea, Boil Over is a practically useless perk and needs to be changed. What about: You obscure the Killer's ability to the see hook auras by 25/30/35 meters. Your struggling effects are increased by 75%. Your wiggle speed is increased by 5% for each survivor within 6 metres of the killer.
I think that 25 metres is viable, especially when combined with the 75% increased struggling effects. The third ability is just a little bonus that can help you in specific scenarios. I think that this is quite strong and when paired with something like breakout, flipflop or power struggle could be quite powerful in certain situations. I don't think that it should increase your wiggle speed without some sort of trigger as that would be unfair towards the killer. Decreasing the killers' movement speed is just not fair. Killers are already slowed down enough when carrying survivors and if paired with other effects is simply biased towards survivors.
This will never happen, because carry distance for the lower end distance killers had to be buffed specifically in the context of body blocking. So creating a perk that re-introduces that in that specific context is not going to happen, as the entire problem with killer movespeed nerfs/wiggle buffs for survivors is if you have 2-3 survivors bodyblocking and chain healing to make hook phases literally impossible.
Again, can't stress enough:
**We will never see a generic wiggle increase/distance decrease because it creates infinites. This is the phase of the game where survivors are plain old helpless, and this perk, while bad, represents about as much power as you can give to survivors 'generically' in this phase.**
The fact other wiggle perks are also (generally) bad isn't a flaw. Maybe those perks shouldn't exist, but the solution isn't to buff them on principle, if the buffs make the game worse they shouldn't happen. And, again, these perks were effectively nerfed due to the core mechanic of carrying being buffed to make body blocking and sabo harder recently for good reason.
Survivors should not generally plan around escaping while being carried unless they are planning to do a wacky meme combo. It just is unhealthy.
-
@dspaceman20 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1834563#Comment_1834563
I see what your saying but with the current perk its really bad. Its not helpful at all. Of we ever have hope in changing the meta we need to make perks with strong effects. Maybe we can lower the speed to make it more fair but in its current state It needs to be changed.
'The current perk is bad' isn't a valid reason to change the perk into something that is fundamentally toxic.
You can't make reducing the killer's carry speed fair, pretty much flat out. It just has too much of an effect on body blocking. In fact, they literally buffed carry speed recently on slower killers specifically for this reason: It made it effectively impossible for some killers to hook on certain maps vs coordinated survivors. So a speed reduction almost certainly will never ever happen without some super extreme downside.
Carry reduction is a bit more possible, we have seen a few perks of this nature, but its always done in a way that makes it have really obvious counter play and a more limited effect. The reduction in distance would have to be so small for this to be a generic effect that you would almost never notice or care, making the perk still bad.
The implicit fallacious assumption you make is that the perk being bad means that it needs to be fixed by changing the killer's carry speed or distance, but in fact that assumes A: Bad perks NEED to be changed (They don't, but it would be nice) and thus any cost is worth it and B: That this is the only possible change to the perk, when that isn't true, and C: This would make it a generally good perk, which it probably wouldn't, it would just allow extreme toxicity.
For example, really simple change that may make it 'better' but non-toxic, and thus solves issue B, is increasing the penalty to carry distance when dropping the survivor, and the cooldown for MISSED attacks when carrying. This helps solidify the perk in the 'I want to make it easier to sabo for me or bodyblock for me' without actually just applying a big penalty to the killer in a moment where you are intended to have no control and them all of the control.
That said, the core issue is the niche of the perk isn't very healthy. If its too useful it becomes a 'new old DS' where it is just too easy to get second chances and killers are forced to constantly slug again. If it isn't useful enough even if it works why spend a perk slot on something that only kinda helps when you get downed when you can use perks to avoid getting downed? So viewing this perk as a 'It will prevent me from being hooked' perk is probably a bad idea overall, and it may just be a design that has to languish because its so anti-fun, like Unrelenting or Slippery meat: It isn't a 'do nothing' perk, but its just not very good.
-
There is a reason that the devs do NOT mess around with killers being able to quickly and cleanly hook things. A killer finishing a chase is meant to be a high point moment for them, and, barring few exceptions, survivors should be *utterly powerless* when being carried.
The last time they added generic anti-carry perks to the game it literally caused a killer strike that drove Qs to 2 hours long at times. You can't balance the concept of making it harder to hook or easier to wiggle out generically. It is just way too toxic to the killer experience.
Like... MAYBE if it also increased carry time, so you don't get ANY additional time alive, you just make body blocks worse and eat a bit more killer time going down? But even that is probably way too much, as bodyblocks are meant to be mega rare because, again, anything that makes the killer feel powerless on pickup is EXTREMELY bad for the game and is so frustrating it actually causes killers to quit. It literally is what killed Deathgarden, for example.
A slowdown even with a time increase is problematic because any amount of slowdown makes it so the killer literally can't hook if you have a SWF bodyblocking. The margins on hook distance are already super thin on many zones and you would create 'carry infinite' spots pretty trivially.
-
Ruin-Undying is what a 2 perk combo with one of those perks doing nothing but supporting another perk should do by default. It is also probably the gold standard in 'fair regression.'
Ruin undying kinda... fixes a major problem with killer. Killers are very poorly rewarded for correctly pressuring the map and doing well. Ruin fixes that, but its very unreliable. Ruin undying is very 'stable' in that while its upper bound of effectiveness gets no better than plain old ruin (the best case scenario is still just 'they never break ruin and spend lots of time trying to do so') the lower bound does get better (You force 2 survivors to spend about a gen's worth of time on ruin and undying, meaning you effectively are in a 7 gen game at least). So it allows ruin's 'You did good, have a cookie' effect to be run without allowing the mega-lowroll of ruin going away only adding about 30 seconds to the game, which is a worse effect than most semi-stall perks like sloppy.
Ruin undying does nothing if the killer can't pressure, or survivors keep someone on gens at all times. It can be removed, though its harder than just ruin. It doesn't work with scaling killer totems which tend to REQUIRE removal to play around like DH or Lullaby, and it means the killer can only run one other strong perk-combo. It is a bit too good on Freddy who already has so much innate stall it becomes oppressive, but Freddy is low key a problem in that domain already. It combos well with Tinkerer, but I wouldn't even say that is oppressive because that only is a problem if your silly and stack on gens rather than grinding down 3 at a time at least anyway.
-
Some grind is desired to maintain an artificial game longevity, and low key in addition to its beneficial effects on retention some people do legitimately like progressing through the web, even if right now its ridiculous.
Removing tiers would cut the web's duration down to 1/3rd its current length, ignoring teachables. You would go from 258 survivor perks per-character per-prestige to only 86, for example. That is a huge reduction, and arguably 258 is completely ridiculous and way too much, and 86 means there are still 36 levels to go after prestiging, but they may feel that is still too sharp a reduction, especially for survivors who have little reason to prestige every character or even level them past getting teachables, and may risk the retention effect of long grinds a bit too much.
I think its a fine idea, but there just is an active disincentive on BHVR's side to do this. Perhaps a middle ground might be making perks you know upgradeable at 10k BP rather than found again on the web, which still adds an extra 1,720,000 BP required to max out a character currently, but at least removes the need to go through an entire bloodweb to get at em.
-
I tend to run 'non-immersed stealth' and often seem like I am the only person in red-purple doing so. Once got accused of hacking using quick and quiet+lightweight+SB+fixated to do an oldschool 1.0 style hard LOS break on a killer in purple-red ranks, which was kinda funny, because they said I didn't have dance with me and insisted lightweight doesn't do anything.
Another time I got accused for hacking because I was running nurses back when self-care was super meta.
-
Sloppy Butcher, especially if I am running someone like Pig who already has good innate stall.
Adding 4 seconds to a normal heal means basic medkits can't full heal, advanced metkits generally only can heal once, team heals eat up 40 seconds of gen time (almost a full solo gen!) rather than 32, and healing exposes the survivor for longer. Survivors are less likely to heal, meaning further downs are easier, and even slugging is improved, making it harder for other survivors to do a quick pickup unless the victim healed already and making it way more dangerous. And this is before how it massively improves tracking.
It also does stuff like amplify the effects of other slowdown/regression perks: If they heal instead of finishing a gen its a few more ruin ticks. If your running pop you often get more downs more quickly to really punish them. Injured survivors often also let go of gens faster if the terror radius moves on by. In a tri-gen situation being injured is a non-option so you force even more time off and more ticks of your kick to the gen.
Those little seconds just tick tick tick up and your really rewarded if your constantly able to pressure the survivors and make them afraid to not heal. I know it isn't thought to be weak, but I think its significantly better than most think.
-
Twins are deceptive. They aren't really a 4.6 killer, save the fact they have a 4.6 movement speed. They are designed way more like a 4.4, in that their power is so unique that you kinda need to devote a lot of time getting good at it in a manner that will make most killer players bounce off them.
Having double the map presence in a game where the killer's defined weakness is poor map presence is huge. Already a giant advantage. But Victor is in most situations just flat out better than a normal killer (tiny loops do counter him but you can do some stuff to break em).
Their power has a lot of unique dimensions: Kindapping is less bad than it seems because the entire goal of chases as a killer is to get people off gens and I dunno about you but a survivor signaling they are totally fine with not doing gens for 40 seconds is FANTASTIC. Its like they are sitting in a bush self caring through sloppy.
There is stuff like bluffing getting off victor to bait someone to try to kick before waking up. Placement of both of them when idle. Corralling people into the other. The detection aspect. The fact that Victor is a 'skillshot' power that requires you to master its execution like a ranged killer, billy, nurse, ect. There is just so much about this killer that allows a good twins player to just wreck shop, but also makes good twins play really hard. Because there is no *one thing* you can do to be amazing with twins, just like there is no one thing you gotta do to be good with deathslinger or huntress: you just have to be good at twins.
They can absolutely run loops like a 4.6, but they demand way more mastery to get utility out of them than a ghostface or a doctor. But their power rewards you extremely heavily.
Don't get me wrong, they are cluuuuuuuunky and could definitely use some QOL. Its so annoying how BHVR makes killers play like molasses and has you fighting animation locks or artificial slowdowns or what have you every 5 seconds, they are phyically unpleasant to play, but way less than Nurse or Blight or DS in that regard.
But there will be moments once you start getting good at twins where you realize "Hey this is the strong long loop on the map" and leave Vic there, and then push someone in there. Or you will delay a latch on vic for juuust the right time to come out of your trance for your target to turn the corner and you to drop smack them on asylum. Or when you do stuff like bait people out by switching off vic pretending not to see someone, then switching right back on em. Or using vic to watch someone you won a traditional chase with so you can start another with an injured survivor, switching to him instantly the second you hear a heartbeat to punish an attempt to kick.
-
@SkerpiTwitch said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1830264#Comment_1830264
Having bad teammates is where the rng comes in, if your teammate(s) suck at something, its up to you to step up to something else. So it balances out
Right, and that is normally the case.
But the entire problem with Thano is that it actively makes it harder for anyone who isn't the bad teammate to do anything. Normally bad teammates are a self contained problem. Thano makes it your problem, which is a bad experience in SWF.
Other perks have similar issues (like BBQ), but that mostly self corrects by playing around it. You kinda just can't play around thano, it doesn't even really affect the game as much as your emblem rate because often as a solo if things are going badly you are counting on lightbringer, some small evader or benevolent, and then the hatch. Real feels bad.
Killers have a LOT to complain about, but Thano needing to be base kit is just a bad take for many reasons (staying injured isn't actually a problem because good killers will make the survivors pay way more time than the 30 effective gen seconds it takes to get healed by a friend or 15 with a kit, it doesn't solve any actual problems killers have like a lack of ways to meaningfully slow the game in their base kit to allow more build diversity or to make them winning chases feel actually good rather than just satisfactory, it wouldn't feel good for survivors in the solo experience, and SWF literally would laugh at this nerf).
-
@JPA said:
Imagine if injured survivors could actually RUN FASTER (I dunno, adrenaline kicks in with the fight or flight instinct), but they could perform all useful actions slower. No more tunneling.
Also no more downs ever because even a 10% movespeed boost would make downs practically impossible on most maps.
Being injured is intended to make it much easier to kill you, not harder. Tunneling is an intended gameplay feature with innate counterplay in the form of A: it causing a lack of map pressure, and B: the killer suddenly having to go do something else after getting the hook or losing.
The penalties for being injured are: 1 hit away from down, leaving a trail that makes many evasive tactics not work, being unable to safely do many pallet jukes, making noise, and survivors not being able to use the injury speed boost to massively extend a chase between two safe zones. If the killer can't penalize staying injured, then yeah they kinda aren't the best killer and deserve to lose.
Being injured is already plenty bad, its just most survivors don't heal because killer just lacks a lot of threat in chases right now, so nothing you do will really incentivize survivors to heal if they aren't actually worried about spending a lot of time in contact with the killer, which they just aren't.
Killers probably need more stall in their base kit mind. Its just that thano is also low key a bad design for a few reasons: It punishes teams for having bad teammates, it is a 'binary' mechanic because either its worth it to heal or its not and when its not (which it currently isn't) people just don't change their behavior and its a very minor invisible slowdown, and it depends heavily on the killer already applying enough pressure they sorta don't need it (which is fine, win more stuff is a thing, but its too minor of an effect to be worth building around to 'earn'). Outside of weird niche builds it is tuned to be bad, which is a good idea.
If the killer gets any innate regression perk, it should absolutely be Pop, or some weaker version of pop.
-
For killers, I think a 'mini-pop' combined with the BP boost could make a good base kit addition to both create a 'carrot' for not camping (as the devs have said many times, the game LITERALLY can't get more anti-camp than it is now or else the game utterly breaks: the killer ALREADY isn't rewarded for having one person watch the hook without repairing, they need 2 for it to be worth it) so that killers feel a desire to be more active. Regression needs to be stronger in base kit. Killers often compain about gen times, but that is more about how killers can't out-pressure survivors just tapping gens and running over and over, which is kinda dumb. The killer doing like an instant 5%-10% regression would help discourage those moments and make them feel good about landing hooks (which honestly don't feel very good atm) without seriously affecting gen time: That is an extra 4 seconds in reality.
Obviously there is a problem where some tri-gens can be too strong (Ormond has one where all 3 gens are in direct LOS of each other) but I think gens don't need to so much be slower as much as there being more cost to the killer interrupting your gen to reward good killer pressure.
Another option is the movespeed boost from DH could also be base kit. So the killer is a bit faster, wants to hit a gen, and gets BP for hooking everyone once. REALLY strongly encouraged to try to find another chase instead of being territorial unless the survivors make it SUPER clear they will punish that.
That said camping at this point is an entirely survivor behavior created problem. So I am not sure how much this would help, but it would make playing around the hook incorrectly as a killer feel less devastating (Because you get so many inherent rewards for a hook that aren't related to player elimination) and might stop the 'mindless' campers who camp as policy rather than a tactic.
On the survivor side: Team aura read perks were a good idea before SWF was added to the game, but honestly don't make a ton of sense and just exist to allow a gap between SWF and solos to exist. I actually really LIKE that gap myself, I enjoy having to try to track not just the killer but my teammates, but it probably makes sense from a game design standpoint to either make 4 man SWF its own special thing where you get baked in downsides and then a solo/duo Q, or try to elevate solos, and that would mean stuff like giving team wide aura read either all the time (reworking bond, empathy, kindred, ect) to emulate callouts, or just during 'critical' situations like when you get hit, when you are doing a gen, when your healing, ect. Also would involve making bead on map base kit.
-
@Maelstrom10 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1828869#Comment_1828869
Never said once that it should be affected by enduring...? And it could make it worse for those charecters, but your also making the same exact distance? ie the stun is shorter, but the survivor gets a speed boost to compensate and make the same distance as default.
the result is to make the stun feel less punishing, even though it effectively has the same effect, and less like your waiting you know. 5 whole seconds.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1828874#Comment_1828874
I mean, i didn't even think of that, but yeah i completely agree. Just stuns in general feel horrible gameplay wise. I mean sure, they should be balanced and it shouldn't be "instant" but at the same time, it does feel really odd, switching between the two.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1828893#Comment_1828893
I mean, i was refering to it in reference to decisive strike and maybe head on. The survivor jumping off the shoulder would get a speed boost. and even if it did effect head on, i'd suggest only lowering it by a second (which would really only reduce the chances of chaining head ons due to the 3s charge up, meaning two survivors wouldn't as easily be able to get into two lockers next to each other)
Wraith would be uneffected. thats a flashlight stun, and i specifically said at the start of my post not including pallet or flashlight stuns. why would it effect that? im talking about perks that are like decisive strike (and any others they choose to add to the game.) also wraith being able to be broken out of stealth by a flashlight always felt horrid to me anyways. he's massively punished for it, and it seems rather unneccessary in the state of the game atm.
if a survivor pulls off a flashlight stun, they should be rewarded (and the stun is only 3s, compared to ds which is 5s.)
And it wouldn't be a minor quality of life upgrade, it would be rather major tbf.
My point is that enduring would be worse because negating a shorter stun in exchange for the the faster speed is a worse deal.
The reason it would make those killers stronger is because chase distance matters significantly less to them, and preventing them from using their power is the important part of a stun. Like nurse doesn't care if you got a speed boost.
One potential solution to the power issue is to instead of full stunning these killers in this hypothetical change, making it merely lock out the power for the same amount of time. So if you stun a nurse (which is hard and SHOULD be rewarded) she both can't blink for 1.whatever seconds, AND you speed boost away, to simulate the stun.
Inevitably though, this is an instance of limited camera controls (which I think SHOULD be reduced on killer, especially in the case of pickups which don't need them at all because flashlight saves while your anim locked are a bad mechanic) are important, as the camera control loss when stunned is important for jukes. Perhaps it could be emulated by having you get the slowed sensitivity effect for slightly longer than a stun makes you look down, but not as long as the full stun?
-
This would have a significant effect on how useful Enduring is, in that it would make it far worse. Conversely, it would make these effects much worse vs Nurse (yikes!), spirit, slinger, huntress, and kinda Blight and Billy. It also hurts the ability of these perks to allow you to make creative jukes to break chases and pushes the game into more of an eternal looping mindset.
However, I agree that the main issue with these effects is the loss of control. I think this is a very insightful read on why people dislike these perks, despite the fact some of them aren't even really that good right now! A lot of the problems killer face are more 'gamefeel' than 'power level.'
-
Rank 1 pig who basically always 4ks here:
The traps are an absurd level of mid-match stall and pressure that allow you to play more agro, but they are often misused. Players often talk about things like slow release toxin saying 'why would I want to tunnel someone with the trap when I know they aren't on gens?'
This is true, you shouldn't be too gung ho about actually killing trapped survivors, but you should be doing EVERYTHING you can to force OTHER survivors to assist trapped survivors. You down a trapped survivor and just walk away to pressure gens more? Someone has to get their ass OFF gens to get em up, which takes LONGER than a hook rescue generally.
The purpose of Pig isn't to get kills with traps, or to stall by making people search the boxes, prevent people opening exit gates. Its to be a huge pain in the ass!
Once you get 2 traps on head? Start patrolling boxes in addition to gens. Once you get 3? Patrol boxes, not gens. Slug the hell out of trapped people, its THEIR job to pick em up, not yours. Keep people injured, break off chases very willingly to go back to objective lockdown. If you slug someone off a box their box progress is GONE.
Slow release toxin is great because it makes slugging people crazy easy, and slows down how fast they can search traps. Blinding traps are fantastic because they prevent affected survivors in a non-SWF scenario from assisting each other when downed. Obviously trash in SWF.
Everyone goes gaga over straps and tape. I literally never use them. Ambush and crouching aren't why you play Pig. You play pig to be cruel, not to be a lame version of ghostface. I don't place much faith in increasing box count (it increases the number of boxes you need to patrol even if it makes it less likely the first box has the key) or the 'remove to reveal aura' (because your goal is to keep the hat on forever and just grind away at the survivors with it). Bag of gears is great, extra traps are great, tampered timer can be surprisingly good, and slow release is fantastic. Make life as bad as you can for the survivors when they get trapped.
The beauty of the traps is they extend the midgame out a LOT if you use them well. Your job as a pig is to make life agony for the survivors, but in a way that is way more fair than Freddy. Its why I don't think the gate nerf really did much to Pig: if your waiting to trap till late your kinda missing the point. I think ambush and stealth could be tuned up, but she actually just has a great gameplay loop, because the point of her mechanic is that the RBT kill is not a thing that is intended to happen, its just a mechanic that forces the survivors to do something to avoid death, which is a subtle and cool mechanic. It should realistically never fire unless you can tell someone's last box, or if you got a tampered timer on a big map and slug someone once or twice. But that is fine, because the fact that the RBT lets you control survivor behavior is so huge.
-
@tt_ivi_99 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1827635#Comment_1827635
I havent tested that add-on, I use both boots just to be able to get more mobility middle curve.
You dont have to be attached to the wall to curve, if you stand like half survivor away from it you will still be able to hit the survivor and not bump into anything, even if they try to juke you they wont have enough time get their body out of your way.
But the biggest advise I can give you is this: Dont focus on how you have to move your camera, focus on how much time you have to move your camera. What I mean by this is; lets say you have your E key to turn right and your Q key to turn left, and you gotta curve to your right, what most people do is they start to curve and press a little E, and again a little E and again a little, or they press too much E so then they press a little Q. Just dont do that, if you gotta go right, hold that ######### E key like your life depends on it and just measure the time. You have like 2 seconds to curve, try to allways start at the same distance from the corner, that way you only have to focus on how much time you have to press the key in order to get to the survivors options, pallets or windows, that way it'll be easier for you to not bump into anything because you only have one thing to worry about, timing.
The boots help you change a little your direction if you see the survivor is trying to juke you, but if you moonwalk they wont expect the curve and they'll go to their savest option, which makes them very predicable.
12 hook is actually kinda boring though and really shouldn't be the default. It would require survivors to be so absurdly anemic in chases for it to be a realistic standard goal.
Besides, the devs have said, many, MANY times, that they don't wish to punish killers for defending hooks any further, nor punish tunneling any further. Deathgarden (rightfully) spooked them away from that path.
-
@TicTac said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1827660#Comment_1827660
Which tech under the docks do you mean? I think this tile is too strong, but is there a tech?
Vs low movespeed killers the dock has at least a pseudo infinite due to having multiple windows in close proximity with long walls.
It doesn't really matter to nurse, but it is pretty devistating spirit because its multiple back to back windows combined with plenty of sharp turns and the ability to get on top of the dock basically instantly from the bottom, as well as lots of places to fake scratch marks, so it isn't even really a 50/50 scenario so much as a 'Once you phase they can literally end up anywhere. Obviously good ears can help out, so it isn't a 'true' infinite but its a combination of a powerless infinite (Which to be fair aren't uncommon) and conditions that make phasing basically not work.
I haven't tested if its a true infinite but it is oppressively strong and definitely needs to be looked at.
EDIT: OhTofu also found a literal definite infinite on the map. Lovely.
-
@Yamaoka said:
Blight.
PH definitely has 0% winning chance against good survivors that split up and do gens and manage to run him for a while using the popular "hold W" strat. Obviously things may be different with Ruin/Undying/Tinkerer.
I faced Excelite's tournament SWF team yesterday and played PH.
Took them about 3 minutes to do all 5 gens as I played without slowdown perks (except for Corrupt).
Most of the time the gens popped while I was walking my way to them after hooking them but I just could not physically arrive before the gens popped all the time.
And all of them just held W in every chase to waste my time without using any skill. One of them even looked up while taking a hit as in "OooOh nooo I'm getting hit that's soooo dangerous hahaha"
It showed me just how important mobility is.
The fact you personally lost to a very good team with pyramid head does not indicate the killer is weak. He is considered near top tier because many 50/50s or common loops just plain don't work against him.
Splitting up and doing gens is a problem for most killers, but you have plenty of tools to deal with that in the current meta. A good PH applies absurd pressure due to how powerful his ability is in chase, his ability to use tinkerer better than almost any killer, and his very low downtime hooking.
-
Carrying all traps would be a bit OP for lockdown scenarios. Trapper isn't balanced if he can just use a trap whenever he wants until he is out and then needs to redeploy the old ones. Trapper needs to make SOME consideration about where he is setting up and have some prep-time to be fair, its just kinda silly that part of that prep time is wandering to ass backwards ends of the map when he already struggles so hard to keep his planned nest safe in the first place.
Still, 'collecting' traps is a terrible dated system and really shouldn't be the mechanic. Either they should be somewhat central like in lockers where he can pull infinitely until he has 'enough' and then needs to actually manually move them, so he can't use infinite traps mid-chase for lockdown, or he should have a cooldown of some sort for traps to become usable, so he can place 2 at the start, and then every 30 seconds if he has an empty trap slot he gets another ready to go until he has hit his trap limit on the map.
-
@TicTac said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1827031#Comment_1827031
So the average chase should last 30 sec? (2 hits)
Nah. Like I said there isn't going to be one magic number because it depends on resources, how close the survivor is to good zones, ect, and ideally again you want there to be high variance even with skilled survivors.
I would say with two top level players at a super optimal level it is realistic to expect each hit to be as short as maybe 7 seconds (The survivor loses a 50/50 right away) on a mid tier loop, or maybe 10-15 on a strong loop (they lose a 50/50 twice in a row). On longer loops, the 'upper end' time limit can balloon out, but because 50/50s are an endless gamble realistically a 'strong' loop should last 20 seconds top maybe on average before you need to win a 50/50 to bail out, at which point obviously, all play being equal there is a 50/50 shot you eat a hit.
But, again, its more of a toy problem. In 'real world' scenarios even among equally skilled players your more expecting to predict the chase based on starting location rather than an 'average.' The 'average' result is actually going to be quite rare, you will expect the killer either to catch the survivor out in a bad spot or force them to expend a resource that makes a location powerful quicky, or the survivor gets lucky on a few 50/50s in a row, or lands a good juke to break chase for a bit, and basically 'resets' the chase time.
Also, a good player should feel forced to eventually drop a chase against a killer they can't actually predict/fool, which would be one at entirely equal skill, because in that scenario your just constantly flipping coins in the chase and the survivor has way more on the line than the killer. So that equal skill toy problem is assuming the chase 'ends' when the killer eventually grinds out the chase and downs the survivor, which in theory happens because BL3, but realistically the survivor should break chase well before that as their 'win' condition for the chase.
Against an inferior killer, chases in theory could last indefinitely. We all have seen the YouTube vids. And, again, IDEALLY vs an inferior survivor, chases should end FAST. But DBD has a structural problem with its mechanics where even moderately optimized play can create a rather long minimum chase time, which is why you see so many boosted animals in rank 1 absolutely losing their mind vs Huntress or Nurse with no idea about any counterplay tactics that work against all killers because they never had to use them to grind out time. Conversely its generally easier for a killer to 'force' a chase win EVENTUALLY, which is why survivors hate bloodlust, even though bloodlust is, in fact, a good mechanic that will punish whichever side is doing the chase 'wrong' based on context. Also, said forcing comes at cost to killers that minimally optimal play doesn't for survivors, so it isn't a linear comparison and its fair to say the wonky skill floors of DBD are way more of an issue than killers eventually winning chases (mainly killer is OP until survivors become minimally compitent, and then it suddenly becomes dramatically harder and, more critically, a more frustrating experience, while survivors don't need to develop new core skills for a very long time, its WILD how many Red rank survivors don't even know how to 50/50 or do fast vaults in tight spaces).
But if you were to put a gun to my head, I would imagine the average chase being a strong zone, linked with an incidental 'linear chase only' weak pallet to a medium zone. So played well it would be like 30-40 seconds. That makes the game in theory mathematically impossible for the killer to win 'on average' but obviously the way DBD works makes sneaky hits or sudden 50/50 victories create a real possibility and chases would trend lower than this when played well by both sides FAR more than they trend higher, its just that infinity is a pretty big number that pushes that average up, with some maps even having pseudo infinites vs non 4.6 MS killers with certain powers in certain zones. So, you know, maybe your chase ends in 10 seconds vs equally skilled survivors because they try to stay close to use a resource and you just out 50/50, maybe it takes the entire game because people know some tech from under the docks in swamp and your a Slinger.
-
Depends on what you mean by best!
Blight and Executioner are pretty up there in terms of raw power that is easily accessible. Executioner has some pretty nasty tools to just make some loops not work, or really dangerous to try, and even bluffing a shot can mess with survivors. Blight meanwhile is much better in maps that are more open but still have stuff lying around to bounce off of, and has more overall map pressure.
I think for really good Twins players we may see them be considered top tier, but they will be heavily filtered based on mastery, sorta like Nurse or Huntress it feels like a killer you have to main, because the stuff you can do with Victor is pretty nutso. We are talking about chessmastering it so you end a chase in a few seconds. So probably stronger than the other two but 99% of twins will just get poor results vs anything besides hyper-altruists trying to camp hooks with Victor.
Freddy is OP as hell vs Solos but is merely very good vs SWF. He is a problem in that regard and definitely needs a change, but their 'upper level' of power isn't that absurd. So the strongest and easiest in a specific type of game, and one that makes the game worse, but not best by any means.
And I think Ghostface is up there as a 'gold standard' 4.6, even if they aren't strictly as powerful as Billy or the others mentioned. They are more dynamic and feel like they have more tools in their kit, and their overall design is extremely good, feels good to use, and doesn't feel oppressive to play against. Its this weird shining beacon in a sea of killer designs that range from frustrating, weak, physically unpleasant to play, or just one note. So easily best design. Like Pig in that regard for having a cool dynamic design, but way better overall.
-
Ruin-Undying-Tinkerer is someone expending 3 perk slots (Remember, killer perks are more valuable than survivor perks! A killer gets 4, to the survivor's 16!) that can be removed by doing a side objective. Ignoring this combo and trying to 'brute force' it tends to end poorly, but that doesn't mean its OP. Survivors are not SUPPOSED to be able to brute force past killer perks. Imagine trying to just... ignore Devour Hope.
3 out of 4 perks is a huge commitment, and Undying+Ruin is actually a good example of what a totem protection and strong totem should do together. Hexes have a design problem where their impact is large for the slot, but they are supremely inconsistent. What undying does is trade the slot efficiency of hexes for consistency, not in the sense that you will NEVER lose your perk, but it in the sense that it is now guaranteed to have game impact because people MUST search for the hexes and at LEAST 30 seconds of gen time is going away.
If properly countered, its pretty darn fair. Especially coordinated groups can even brute force past it in a pinch: just get multiple gens up there at once. If you refuse to adapt, get ready to get wrecked. The main 'problem' is predicting if they have Tinkerer (which makes searching for the totems rather important for a solo) or not (which makes it rather un-important, just prevent the tri-gen), but that just rewards good survivors who can mentally keep track of if the killer suddenly is on them when they are nearly done out of nowhere with no TR.
-
At equal skill level with a killer lacking chase ending powers, I would say 10 seconds for every 50/50 won at mid-tier loop spots, 15-20 at strong spots, and insignificant amounts at weak spots.
This one is tricky though because you WANT chase length vs equally skilled players to be variable as you want some guesswork and skill to be in chases, rather than it being a mechanical function of how well you use resources. Chases are at their most boring when 50/50s and jukes don't matter, but you need chases to last SOME length of time between those or else that sick 50/50 doesn't matter because buying you an extra trip around the loop doesn't matter. So chases need a 'lower bound' when played correctly. But they also need an upper-bound, ideally one not as long as BL3. This is accomplished by limited usage of windows, pallets, and how 50/50s don't buy you a chase reset fully most of the time.
Most intensely survivor sided maps are caused by not having a sufficiently low upper bound of chases by having too many resources 'strung' together. Think Lampkin Lane, just too many places to do vertical loops. Conversely, most killer sided maps aren't defined by having no resources strung together, but instead being extremely small and lacking resources at ALL. Think Game, think Hopkins.
This is why the Ormond and Autohaven reworks seem to have focused on injecting deadzones into maps with too many 'chained' resources, which I think is clever. You want to end the current loop with a won 50/50 because you need that extra bit of distance to make it to your next resource, and resource conservation matters, but those maps have plenty of strong resources and resources that 'bridge' strong zones, unlike say... old autohaven which was just one massive chain jungle gym. I think the devs learned that resources are exponentially stronger the closer they are together, because chases baloon in upper end timelimit non-linearly. 2 windows make a chase far more than twice as long as one window, 3 more than twice as long as 2, ect.
-
Huntress Lullaby, Tampered Timer, Razor Wire, Overcharge, Distressing, Unnerving on Pig.
Is it smart? Noooooope. Is it funny to see people fail to remove their traps at rank 1-5 without even being pressured? Yeeeeeep.
-
Solo survivor gameplay is about... well not being anti-social or selfish... but not being willing to put yourself out there for your team until its tested.
As a killer main, if your high ranks your perception of optimal survivor gameplay is probably tainted by consistently good survivors who even if they aren't SWF know what to do for each other. Low rank survivor gameplay is NOT that. Until you get past 15 I would honestly say games where you win via gens rather than hatch are a rarity. Take em if you can get em, by all means, but don't assume your team will rescue you, or do gens while your in chase, or anything.
At the high end, stealth, healing, selfishness, ect are anchors. And if you find a good team at the low end they will be anchors too. But at the low end? Absolutely use these tools.
Stealth is bad for good survivor teams because chases delay the killer and stealth is just you avoiding a chase while not doing gens with no guarantee the killer won't get another chase down the line. But solo it means your not the first one in the chase, which lets you guarantee that A: you will not need to be rescued by people who are potentially questionably sapient potatoes, and B: that a gen WILL be getting done even if someone else goes down or is in a chase. Don't be flippin immersed about it, track the killer and know when you can just be loud and proud because they are busy, but try not to be the first one down.
Healing makes sense, because while it delays your gen based escape, it makes it easier for you to avoid detection, and survive till the hatch.
Don't do rescues unless you know the killer is somewhere else. Alturism points for pipping are rad, and other survivors being alive gives you a chance to do gens, but also more meat walls to go on chases with the killer while you do gens to try to find the hatch early, get emblem points, and maaaaybe win as a team.
If someone goes down crazy fast, discount the team, play to hatch, unless a slick rescue goes off and a gen pops that you weren't working on. Still get those alturism points because, you know, emblems, but really don't stick your neck out.
If someone goes down by another hook, go for the rescue unless its basement. Don't eat the hit for them, don't farm them off the hook either mind, and just go back to gens. If the killer chases you, ditch the chase ASAP and wait for another chase to start before rescuing the second victim. Being in chases is an action you do to help your team, and your not here for your team unless you know they are legit.
Ultimately follow the golden rule of rendering aid in bad situations: Help yourself first, and then once you are secure, render aid to others. You cannot render aid if you are incapacitated. Again, DON'T BE IMMERSED OR A SELFISH PRICK. Its just you can only vet your own abilities until you see stuff that impresses you, so your number one goal as a solo is to not be the first down and, ideally, not be the first chase, and you should be willing to do something like hide behind a rock for 10 seconds while the killer is in your area to ensure that. Solo games also get MUCH easier if 1-2 gens can get done before the first down because it primes the team to not over-focus rescues and to keep pressuing gens. Solos are weird in that they often do the opposite of what they should and go for rescues right away when its still a 5 gen situation. The gen count being low also lets you give the killer anxiety, make them think the team is more coordinated than it is
-
It generally isn't a perk problem if you are getting consistently camped, but a problem with your team being 'too overt' with the rescue.
If the killer can see that 3 people aren't on gens because 2 are 'hiding' staring at the hook while you sit on it, or they notice gens haven't popped for a WHILE, they aren't leaving the hook. The only reason they have is to pressure other survivors, and if survivors don't NEED to be pressured, they literally have nothing to gain by leaving.
Sometimes you get ride or die 'I am taking you all 3 hook states at once even if it costs me 4 gen' campers, but that is rare. Generally a SWF group can just threaten the killer by popping 2 gens at once while a survivor waits to rescue, and if the killer doesn't budge, they pop the next 2 and bring it to a 1 gen game with the killer not even having a tri-gen, which is an auto-lose with 3 survivors pipping, meaning that as long as your not ALWAYS caught first, you will as a SWF pip consistently.
The worst thing you can do to stop a camp is have someone 'beg' for a chase. Stuff like someone repeatedly fast vaulting, or running up to the hook then away, tells the killer that A: someone is waiting by the hook and the second they leave that person is getting rescued and they aren't getting that chase, B: Two people are not doing gens and thus they don't NEED to find another chase right now, and C: The survivors are little brats throwing a tantrum that the killer isn't playing poorly for no reason.
Another cardinal sin of rescues is looping near the hook. Loop once or twice there to get the killer comfortable chasing, but then go to another loop further away, and then another. Don't endlessly loop near the hook because A: that prevents a safe rescue, and B: If you go down near the hook, especially a basement hook, you actively just threw the game unless your team is running a full meta loadout of stuff like borrowed time and DS and the like.
-
Victor definitely needs to count as a chase for scoring purposes.
I don't mind that they are a territorial killer. It is ok for killers to be extremely strong defensively. I think the problem more is survivors aren't rewarded for good play against them.
Victor feels fair in that he is a 'reverse legion' effect: First hit is hard, second hit is trivial, compared to first hit trivial, second hit hard. I also don't mind the map control element as, and I can't stress this enough, it is the main benefit of the killer to be able to defend two spots. It subverts the traditional power dynamic of killers and survivors, sure, in that killers tend to be local to one spot, but two spot defense creates interesting gameplay scenarios where survivors will try to exploit your split focus.
I think the reason the Twins seem strong is they deny a lot of traditional 'meta' survivor strategies: Don't heal, don't try to break chases just loop, go for rescues fast, ect. Twins reward 'classic' DBD play, back before even SWF got into the game: know how to break chases, know how to 50/50, rescue late while the killer is in another chase, ect. That is frustrating to survivors who want to win the same way every game, but those survivors shouldn't... win games anyway right? Like you shouldn't be allowed to play vs the same killer the same way every time. Part of why Trapper is interesting is how much control he has over a zone which makes things like rescues hard and he rewards scouting on the killer. Part of why nurse is interesting is that stealth play is so rewarded on her. Myers forces you to not brute force objectives near him, Piggy creates mandatory side objectives and makes you second guess finishing gens, ect.
I think the main balance change to Victor that needs to happen is that Victor needs a 'wind up' on detection after being switched off, just so that survivors who stealth on a controlled Victor can vanish on them trivially. Maybe a scaling cooldown so if your really rapidly switching its tough but if your just deploying one or switching to one mid chase your good.
The killer is also has a pretty intense execution requirement, which in DBD terms tends to mean you are allowed more power (ex: Nurse, Huntress, DS, arguably spirit, arguably blight and billy). They aren't physically pleasant to play in a way which means that the killer needs to be heavily rewarding to be worth mastering. If your just using Victor to close out the second hit on chases faster or just to camp hooks your kinda using the killer wrong and should lose if the survivors know basic Twins counterplay.
-
The toxic survivor problem is a super interesting one a lot of asymetric games face. Low key, especially in the 2017 era of DBD, it was not an accident that the survivor community was so toxic. A big problem with asymetric game design is there is a huge incentive to cater play to the 'many' crowd and DBD got a big reputation for basically letting your 4 friends bully one person.
The game definitely pulled up from diving into that cesspool because of collective community action that made it super clear (along with the first launch of Deathgarden crashing and burning because they went WAY too hard making that a hunter bullying sim. Imagine if you could get flashlighted every 3 seconds no matter what, your gun got turned off every 3 seconds no matter what, ect, it is like those bad reddit meme perks that are like 'fingerguns, stun the killer for 20 seconds, 5 second cooldown) that wouldn't continue to be sustainable. But that element of the community persists.
I think the big problem with the new killer experience is bad 'matchmaking.' Specifically, it isn't that matchmaking is bad, but survivors are currently in an overbuffed state meaning that the pool is completely saturated at the high end as moderately skilled survivor play takes a disproportionate amount of killer skill to beat. This means two things: One is that new killers are more likely to be matched against moderate to good survivors, and it means even moderate killers need to 'work harder' than survivors at their own level. When a newbie killer is matched against survivors actually of equal skill to them, because the skill floor of survivor is higher, the survivors do really poorly, but the skill ceiling of survivors is waaaaaaaaay higher than the skill ceiling of most killers, so killers need to squeeze every bit of mastery they have into their play to counter moderately good survivors. This is because so much of the killer's gameplay is hard limited by binary mechanics and absolute limits on their ability to act that survivors just don't face. So even though the upper end of killer power is literally unstoppable, even high tier killer is extremely hard and frustrating.
So its a way more complex issue than 'survivors op' or 'killers op.' Its why balancing by winrates doesn't make sense either. Most of what killers need are A: More punishments for low skill suboptimal survivor play that is currently extremely powerful, like mindless linked strong loops, which is why we are seeing so many map changes that create large deadzones that 'unlink' strong loops and thus require you to actually know how to mindgame to end any given loop segment with enough distance to get to the next one (sorry, ormond is still survivor sided at rank 1, its just way more fair than it used to be and requires actual loop execution to utilize. Like the survivor equivalent of running nurse), and B: A LOT of quality of life changes that make the killer experience less frustrating even if you lose.
Like that second one is the biggest to me. There is an absurd amount of stuff in the game designed to ensure survivors never get their precious feelings hurt, but killers just gotta sit and take it. The introduction of end game collapse to prevent survivors taking games hostages is a fantastic example: It took forever because it was a killer sided emotive issue which means automatically 'not a priority because they aren't the moneymakers,' and the solution was very clearly designed to STILL allow Survivors to be huge jerks for no reason, when all that was really required was a concede button.
They actively gave themselves more work to ensure survivors could bully killers, and then people wonder why the survivor Q is so long and so broken!
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1825900#Comment_1825900
Even more reason to give the supposed power role more information and not the supposed weaker role.
The main disadvantage of the power role is map presence and information though. Survivors are intentionally at an information advantage, even ignoring the existence of SWF.
That said, I don't agree that undying needs a nerf. A big problem overall with hexes is their output is very inconsistent and undying lets you remove the gamble of the hex for a relatively 'standard' effect at the cost of 'downgrading' your hex from a mega-efficient but risky 1 perk setup to an extremely powerful and consistent 2 perk setup. Killer perks should generally be more impactful than survivor perks, as undying-ruin requires the killer to make sacrifices on their loadout. Undying is actually at a really good spot as both a detection perk (Unlike other detection perks it doesn't completely obliterate stealth as a concept at certain points in the game, but its value is still consistent due to it defending totems 'weakly,' and you generally can assume some value out of it) and as a totem defending perk due to how it specifically only interacts with totems that you don't NEED to clear, but if you decide to clear them it doesn't make it impossible so much as take up a more consistent level of time.
The existence of undying-ruin as a super meta-combo more raises the question of if killers need more regression in their base kit (they do) than undying being too strong. It isn't unbalanced, but its such a huge difference maker in stalling the game that shows that killers sorta need more rewards for applying pressure. Perhaps a mini-pop in their base kit so kicking gens is more rewarding and survivors aren't able to do a gen under their nose 4v1 in certain areas with certain killers. Killers are sort of stuck right now with some necessary utility locked in perks, and while this isn't terrible (because different killer powers care about different things) the perk loadout hardcore biases to some detection utility and then ruin-undying, simply because its the most consistent regression combo at the moment but you can't actually nerf regression because its so vital at the moment.
-
I think the core problem with Freddy is his stall potential vs solos is truly absurd and without having people sharing information he is very oppressive.
I don't think much about him should change, but I would say maybe remove the oblivious effect. Slower repair for being asleep, being vulnerable to snares, and the teleportation already is huge, and obliviousness mostly affects solos compared to SWF and is the main 'difference maker' there. The teleportation also is strong vs solo, but at least serves a real purpose to the character in SWF matches other than making him a solo bully. Obliviousness takes his natural stall potential and pushes it up to 11 because now in addition to slower repairs and his ability to defend gens really well, you also just can't safely repair without lookouts tracking Freddy across the map with you and kinda NEED to go for those clocks, which is just too much overall. It becomes like he has old ruin mixed with Pigs' traps auto-trapping you constantly in solo.
I do overall like his design though, and its great killers are getting multiple abilities that synergize into one set despite being usable in different scenarios so its harder to lock a killer out of the game like some of the older killers. He just has ooooooooooooone too many things going for him in the same category (stall potential) to feel good to play against.
-
I could see something to let you just pop totems faster, but the downside would need to be truly ridiculous. Otherwise you get something like an OoO situation where it breaks the game when SWF can play entirely around the downside.
Hexes are already a huge risk and result in the killer (ideally slowly) getting weaker as time goes on, forcing them to exploit the hexes early and midgame. Fast hex clear counters not just hexes, but a lot of hex protection abilities like TOTH and Undying that exist to allow the killer to play around hexes, which kinda sucks.
So while it would be possible to design a 'fair' way to do this, that doesn't mean it would be a good design, because the differences in potential outcomes diverge a lot: You don't want the best case scenario for this perk and the worst case scenario to be too disparate (Which is already a problem with hexes, by the way, and why undying is a good design, it 'evens out' the expected results of Hexes to their baseline even if people bring anti-hex stuff like maps).
In the case of this perk, lets take the 'you become exposed' effect idea. Being exposed is low key a not as powerful version of being injured and generally is only relevant when its a surprise. A smart SWF team can really exploit any limited duration self expose by just tracking the killer and having the exposed party play edge of map for a bit while other people play centrally to know where the killer is. But even an 'Your exposed until your next down' effect would be weird for this perk, despite how awful that seems for survivors. Why would you want to insta-clense one totem if the killer isn't pressuring you? If the killer is pressuring you, you would only expose yourself if your very confident or the totem is critical, removing the ability for the killer to use a totem at the cost of just 1 hook state, which isn't very much.
So it would need to be even worse than even 'perma-expose...' but that just makes it more and more solidly a 'It basically costs 1 hook state cuz I am not going to kick if I don't need it to get the totem anyway' ability. There are other ways to balance it (ex: The survivor with this perk literally can't repair gens until ALL totems are gone would make the downside actually matter, and make it useful for your team's totem hunter) but they still create wild game variance (imagine someone with this just not finding a totem or not being able to reach it at all, or the map being huge) in a way that isn't fun.
Any anti-totem perk is a perk that lets survivors essentially remove a perk slot (or more) from killers, which is why the design space for it is very limited. Survivors already have a perk number advantage, so 1:1 negation (ignoring 1 perk can shut down MULTIPLE killer perks) is just... not good. Survivor perks are meant to be more personal and have less impact on the killer as much as on themselves, compared to the killer's perks which generally affect the entire tone of the game (especially hex perks, which are meant to be powerful global abilities the survivors have to actively think about).
-
Looking at key escape rates or how they don't meaningfully help the survivor collective win is looking at keys from purely the survivor perspective, which is a huge problem.
Yes, Moris affect actual gameplay more than keys. But keys are worse. Not because they have a huge gameplay effect (they don't) but because the effect they do have is infinitely more toxic and unfun.
See, a Mori may dramatically help a killer win, but it doesn't fundamentally change the entire game. The survivors just subtract 1 from their allowed hook states basically. That is a big tempo swing but survivors still have a lot of power to deny being hooked even once, can still do good resuces, can still play to the hatch as a solo, ect. It doesn't destroy how survivors win the game, it just makes it harder.
Keys kinda destroy how killers win the game because multiple survivors taking the hatch utterly annihilates their emblems. They have extremely little counterplay because survivors can do stuff like hide keys on the map, so tunneling the key doesn't really work. It punishes the killer for doing well eliminating a player early, which is normally their goal, and forces them to do dumb slug stuff. Slugging is fair, don't get me wrong, but its not fun to be FORCED to slug or for the killer to slug in scenarios where they are just trying to find another kill. Ideally the killer should only feel like they want to slug because they immediately hit another chase, rather than to avoid getting screwed out of a pip by the hatch.
If 2 survivors escape via hatch, which the killer can't really stop unless the win was so crushing the survivors really don't belong at their rank, the killer basically auto-loses the match. So keys are kinda the worst of all worlds in that they aren't a very big boon for survivors but are CRUSHING emotionally for killers.
Which is why stats based gameplay design, while useful, is extremely dangerous to depend on. The stats don't tell this story about keys (or at least, they don't measure how often killers pip vs key escapes, which I would assume is extremely low). Despite having a big game effect and needing a nerf, its pretty apparent keys are the worse actual design because no one really gets a 'high point' with them, they just exist kinda to ruin a player's match. Both needed to be nerfed, no doubt, but people tend to be more tolerant of 'this is too strong but doesn't really change how I win if I am good' than 'this actively punishes me for caring about the game.'
Don't get me wrong, part of this is a problem with the emblem system. The killer should care WAY less about hatch escapes, and not be punished for survivors killing themselves on hook for example, because that is more common and is just as likely to rob the killer of a pip they arguably earned. But its less demoralizing to not notice the subtle effect of someone trying to unhook themselves while your not even camping robbing your devotion score (especially because you got the kill, which is a very positive event for killer) than to very overtly lose a pip because survivors robbed you of your ability to do your objective before they use a mechanic designed to balance the game for solos as a duo.
-
I recently had to haul out of 20 as a survivor aftrr taking a VERY long break as a red rank survivor due to finding the role too easy (thank the entity that vacuum pallets are gone and a good survivor can actually lose a chase in the same year it started!). Got back to purple in a week, just taking a bit to hit red because survivor Q times are comically long.
My advice is some oldschool pre-swf advice: ideally the survivors work together and try to get the gate open. Ideally you just run a good chase rathrr than hiding.
Ideally.
But sometimes your teammates are potatoes.
It is therefore imperative as a solo survivor that you do NOT go down as first hook. Be willing to make significant sacrifices for this, such as stealthing out of the terror radius if you are approached doing gens. Assume your team is bad until proven otherwise and play for the hatch. You will know based on how well or badly they handle an early chase and some rescues.
If someone gets hit and then goes down instantly? Or gets caught and hit 10 seconds into the match? Don't assume your getting that gate open. Unhook for emblems, sure, but only when its safe, and once people are really dying and you can search for hatch do that.
You can easily pip consistently long as your good enough to recognize a weak team early, do your share of gens, stealth instead of chase to minimize risk of depending on potato teammates for rescues, and finding the hatch early.
In high end highly cooperative games these are very selfish things to do, because by divorcing your success from the team vs very good killers your getting at best a minor increase, and realistically just a decrease, in your own survival rate at the cost of everyone's lives, but if your teammates are dead on arrival their lives should aggressively be spent in the service of a greater good: your pip.
So be agressively anti-social until your team proves thyselves with a gen pop or two, or a really good chase. Your goal is to survive and pip, and the game has an alt win condition very well designed to allow you to do so if you are cunning enough to realize your goals aren't the same as other survivors, and are merely alligned towards similar ends that don't matter if they can't help you.
-
I think Keys are worse than moris overall. However I agree moris should be nerfed.
I think the real issue is that the killer community kinda has a history of having experimental or rapid fire balance changes forced on them out of the blue, while survivor changes are telegraphed and drawn out with major killer sided issues consistently not being addressed (endgame STILL is an awful bloody mess that is designed to allow survivors to force killers to participate in their own loss running people out, just add a concession button already!), and this change really ties into it.
Its also problematic that the rationale for not immediately nerfing keys too was 'we don't think keys are that bad because they don't help the survivors win that much.' Which is true, Moris are 'worse' than keys in the sense they help the killer win a lot. But keys are 'worse' than moris because keys make it nearly impossible for the killer to win. Which sounds like the same thing, but its not.
A killer using a mori doesn't force a loss on the people not subject to it. It just changes the pace of the game dramatically, but a conventional 1-2-2 pip split (1 for the killer, 1 for 2 survivors, 0/-1 for two survivors) is very possible and the killer can still lose a mori game. A key game is basically pre-determined to be a frustrating killer loss involving lots of slugs and nonsense unless the killer can tunnel the key and no one finds it. Its just awful.
So the idea that moris are worse is really viewing it as a winrate problem, while the idea that keys are worse views it more as a gameplay loop problem. And I think the gameplay loop is the way bigger issue with the 'victory alteration' items. Killers already have their win condition shoved down the survivors pants in a manner that can make them have little control over the match (You know how many safety pips I got because a rank 1 survivor decided to kill themselves on the hook just because despite me being all the way across the map? Too many) in a manner that isn't true in the reverse (A survivor playing excellently can always force at least themselves to pip). Keys take that really huge problem and make it worse.
Those two things combine to make nerfing moris (which, again, SHOULD happen) before nerfing keys (which everyone knows is coming even if there was some ugly heel dragging from devs) a problem and a huge slap in the killer's face. Especially because this was done fast to prevent killers from burning moris, but survivors knowing a key change is in their future might start burning keys making the asymmetry even WORSE.
It really sucks too because the devs... just nakedly treat the two sides of the community very differently which creates an adversarial attitude that should not exist. They chose to create an 'us vs them' attitude where its a battle for changes to the game to favor one side, rather than it being a 'same team' situation where everyone just wants the game better. I think EVERYONE was united in wanting both Moris and Keys gone, but now that it was Moris first in a low key skeezy way, it became A Thing when it didn't have to be A Thing.
In an alternate reality where they didn't change moris until they changed keys, we all could have celebrated as a community together being pleasantly surprised that a huge QoL issue for both sides was addressed. Now it just kinda stinks.
-
@Mysterynovus said:
People really are overcomplicating this. The easiest and barest way would be to add a few lines in characters' backstories about having a same-gender partner (e.g., "the time Jeff traveled with an ex-boyfriend", "Élodie's girlfriend at the time"). The game hardly has a strict narrative as is, so there's lots of wiggle room to fit something like that in.
It's not a matter of difficulty or "not making it their whole personality". It's about giving a toss to do it in the first place.
And for those who keep saying "Well, why does it matter if there's hardly any story?" Because representation is nice to have, you dingbats.
This is called 'no big deal' representation, and is a great way to handle representation.
It isn't the only way, its totally valid to have a character heavily defined by a specific aspect of their existence influencing their life as well. For example, Meg is HEAVILY influenced by being an athlete, even though there is a lot of depth to her (someone with such a focus and will giving it all up to help a family member says a lot about her character). This isn't 'better' or 'worse' than no-big-deal representation, its just different, but its more likely to be handled poorly. No big deal representation is often said to be 'better' but in reality its just easier. However, its important because not every story that includes gay people should be about being gay, just like how not every story with a straight character is about some aspect of their straightness (like their relationship or their kids).
Also there is a gradient. It isn't strictly 'no big deal' vs 'its what the character is about.' A great example is Captain Jack Harkness who's pansexuality is a HUGE part of their character and identity and how they relate to their home time period, but it wouldn't be accurate to say taking that out of the character would gut him either.
In the overall scope of DBD, we probably will get no big deal representation unless a character is an activist or something, at least for survivors. For killers there is a bit more room to play (Gay friendly Hollywood writers did a lot with gay villains during the era of the Hays code for example to allow them to make sympathetic gay characters) but there is obviously a very clear need to not play into the 'deviant queer killer' trope. You would probably want the character in that case to be more akin to Wraith or Nurse's backstory than Ghostface or Legion: Like a prominent idealistic political type from the McCarthy era or something labeled a gay commie after busting up a corruption ring going avenging angel on it before being snagged by the entity.
But, again, the most likely scenario is something closer to a no-big-deal survivor LGBTQ+ character, as you said.
-
Hatch is fine and actually a really good mechanic to ensure the game remains playable for solos.
The emblem system DEFINITELY should be changed so the killer cares way less about the last hatch kill, which in tight skill games often is decisive even when the killer is dominant due to how killer emblems works. However, from the survivor perspective, as a solo player, the hatch lets you play a high skill game with low skill teammates through purely personal excellent play, so it is still a very good mechanic.
Keys just flat out shouldn't interact with the hatch, or if they do should only remove the person who used it AND the option for anyone else to hatch.
The problem with keys is they completely destroy the killer's ability to correctly apply pressure and make winning a game vs a key unfun as hell. In that way, they are worse than moris, despite moris being 'more powerful' because they so drastically screw over one side of the game's ability to really do much of anything, while Moris merely remove one hook state and change the pace of tempo. While to the individual survivor getting Mori'd it sucks, the mori is ultimately less of an NPE than being in a game with 2-3 gens done and feeling actively punished with a loss for killing someone who isn't carrying the key.
The actual equivalent of a killer 'key' would be something like suddenly undoing all the gens and taking away half of the survivor's lightbringer emblem progress, because the key directly mucks with the killer's method of actually winning games in a way moris don't.
Don't get me wrong, Moris DO need to change, and it was smart to not pre-announce the change. Its just even pre-nerf keys were a worse experience for those subjected to them, so its absolutely buckwild moris were changed first without also changing keys and really shows a massive disconnect of the devs with where the community stands, especially when they try to argue keys aren't a problem despite being a tool that single handedly will lose the killer the game unless they play entirely around it in a very unfun way.
-
See the logic on why keys and moris were changed at different times is kinda whack and really DOES show a survivor sidedness, because the logic of urgency of change was evaluated from the survivor's side in both case.
Moris, from the killer perspective, are useful for swinging a game but only increase the speed of kill by 33%. That is very useful for swinging a game, but not crazy. But from a survivor recieving it you are just suddenly out of the game when normally you wouldn't be, and that stinks. However, from the perspective of the survivor COLLECTIVE Moris don't change as much as you might think: Good survivors can still play to the hatch just as efficiently and the game barely changes at all for solo players who basically are evaluating if this is a hatch or gate game every game anyway.
For survivors, keys aren't that powerful, they merely make it so you can nope out a gen or two earlier if a solo, and as a SWF a lot of conditions that make a lot of your friends lose need to be true for keys to seriously accelerate the game. However... from the killer's perspective... Keys are INFINITELY terrible because a key being featured in a game requires you to tunnel the keyholder out very quickly, or steamroll the game, or you absolutely won't pip. There isn't a killer equivalent of doing two gens and then taking the hatch here, if 2 survivors escape via hatch early while there are still plenty of gens to go and you didn't already get hook states from them your de-pipping that game, flat out, and there isn't actually a ton you can do about that.
So from a survivor perspective, even ignoring the bias of wanting their tool not to be nerfed, obviously keys aren't that bad, but that requires you to ignore the key structural difference between the killer's loss condition and the survivor's loss condition. Its actually kinda mega screwed up.
Now don't get me wrong, both needed to be changed and the Mori change is... fine I guess? It just really IS annoying that they changed moris first for lots of reasons. It ties into the pretty obvious favoritism that Devs were showing in the past and seemed to be 'growing out of.' But also it encourages survivors to use keys way more (Because a lot of killers would 'counter' keys via using the mori to remove keyholders from the game very fast, and because survivors know a key nerf is coming and won't save them), and because keys are far more common in games at rank 1 than moris.
It doesn't matter that the key change is more complex, they coulda just NOT nerfed Moris until keys were changed, because, again, Moris impact survivor scoring way less than keys. Also they are less NPE weirdly. Its way better from an emotive standpoint to suddenly be out of the game in a telegraphed way you have lots of control over than to know your almost certainly going to lose because they have OoO and a key, even if you play amazingly.
This is just actively irritating and is a choice that shows very little empathy with the actual problems of the community and the relationship of its two sides.
-
There is actually a suuuper complex history of queer themes in horror. Horror is both weirdly really bad to gay and trans people, but also weirdly empowering. Again, its critical to remember how absolutely representation starved the LGBTQ+ community is, which makes this entire discussion of 'should a survivor be casually gay?' be met with a resounding "yes, probably more than one even."
For example the Hayes code prevented gay people from being anything BUT villains, which was a problem because a lot of people in Hollywood were relatively gay friendly. This resulted in a lot of dimensional, highly sympathetic villains. But also, horror villains often represent a sort of vengeance. Sure, its bad Jason is killing all those people, but at least early in the series he is striking out against representations of callousness and shallowness that resulted in 'That tragic day.' Obviously coding sexual liberation as that is a problem, but still.
This is why there is such a massive affinity for horror among queer people. There is also the fact that often horror slashers or monsters need to conceal their true nature from those around them, were born that way, and if the world was set up differently they wouldn't even be monsters.
Even the really REALLY bad representation like Sleep Away Camp has some elements in the sequels that sort of turn what is essentially the trans killer into a sort of avenger, especially because in the original movie its not very subtle that everyone is fairly unkind to her before she has even done anything.
All that is to say that a LGBTQ+ killer wouldn't be the worst thing ever. We need queer characters to be allowed to exist in EVERY role. And all sorts of different types of stories. It isn't 'incorrect' to have a killer who happens to be gay, nor is it incorrect to have a killer who is a killer because the awful state of the world forced them into it because they are gay, but in that case ideally it should be pretty clear it was a tragedy that it happened and not a case of 'being gay makes you evil,' and we should almost certainly get a good survivor or three in first.
A good example of this is Nurse's history is pretty heavily linked to the lack of power women had in her time period making it impossible for her to stop an injustice occurring, while say... Spirit has very little going on with her gender, as an example of how you can A: Have a killer who has an element we don't want to demonize both be an important part of their story or not, and B: how that element can make them more sympathetic, dimensional, and in a way horrific because you empathize with them more.
Like low key I am creeped way more out by Wraith's backstory as an immigrant who was taken advantage of so many times and now permanently is forced to kill against his own will, being physically mutilated by The Entity to force him to do it, than Clown who is just kinda an evil murder pervert. Doesn't mean Clown is a 'bad' character, but the fact I can imagine myself in Philip's shoes (or lack thereof) position and be kinda upset and unnerved by it knowing how powerless he was to stop anything that happened to him makes him more interesting to me. But maybe ghost face is more interesting to someone else thematically, and that is cool and why you want diverse stories, especially in games with a huge selectable roster.
-
@Awakey said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1803526#Comment_1803526
Whether or not this is important isn't a subjective feeling, it is an objective fact.
This is a video game. You did not buy a video game just to play as an LGBT character. It is objectively not important. We don't need it for game balance, or optimization, or anything.
Important is literally a value judgement word. AKA subjective by definition.
The fact that someone lost their job is important to them. The fact that someone somebody doesn't know lost their job is not important to them.
Like this is basic first grade 'facts vs opinions' stuff (as wrong as that dichotomy is because subjectivity is actually a complicated topic that people have been fighting about for so long that it was old hat when the toga was all the rage). You can't ontologically prove something is important.
-
@anarchy753 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1803480#Comment_1803480
You're perfectly welcome to cover your eyes and ears to what's actually happening, that's not my problem and I have better things to do with my time than argue with someone who is arguing for an agenda, not the truth.
I am not covering my eyes and ears. There is a lot of scientific consensus on the beneficial effects of transition, the low rate of de-transition, and the reasons people do de-transition.
In fact, the American Society of Plastic surgeons did a study and found that 91% of plastic surgeons believe that de-transition should require a mental health evaluation, which is MORE than who believe that transitioning should require one, because de-transitioning is, again, usually associated with some other mental health crisis. They also found that while the highest individually stated reason for de-transition was a change in identity, it was not even close to the majority. So of those .3% of people who de-transition, only 20% of them de-transition because they changed gender identity again. For perspective, that is 6 out of 10,000 people who transition. Again, that is a freakishly high success rate for something that is theraputic, assuming we could eliminate the social pressure to de-transition and make it less physically painful, which combined easily eclipse a change in gender identity as stated reasons to peruse de-transition treatments.
The actual science is just... absolutely not on your side here, and the only person covering their eyes and ears here trying to push an agenda is you.
-
@JesusOnWheels said:
pyramid head is lgbtq
Pyramid head is actually a physical manifestation of a lot of heterosexual angst and guilt of the degrading nature of Jame's relationship. Like that isn't even a joke that is literally what he is, he originated in Silent Hill 2 as the piece of Jame's psyche that was frustrated with the sexual dimension of his relationship with his wife going away when she got terribly sick, and Pyramid head was deliberately very sexually aggressive (including a scene where he actively mutilated representations of Jame's love for Mary). Almost every monster in 2 is a reflection of some negative aspect of Jame's previously perfect relationship with Mary.
He is absolutely a snack, sure. But he is like... literally the straight Id.
-
@The_Krapper said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1803453#Comment_1803453
You don't get to decide what I think and that's where you're wrong, you sit here and act like I'm discriminating and that's not the case at all, also what about legion and nea? They're obviously LGBT but just because it's not in the lore people complain and as a nurse main I couldn't care at all what sally's relationship was, for the last time: Im not against it they could add it now and I'd probably play whoever it was , yes I like the ICONIC back stories but I don't even care about the originals and I dont understand why the heck anyone would want a backstory that talks about the relationships these people were in before the game because it doesn't help me when I'm playing and straight or gay I simply just don't care do what you please or what makes you happy, I just don't see how a relationship of any kind really plays into the game no matter what they are
I am saying you should examine your own thought process and self reflect. Often times prejudice is dangerous because its invisible to us and we don't realize we are treating people differently than we treat other people or we try to justify to ourselves a valid reason for doing so by any means necessary to avoid cognitive dissonance, which to be clear is in fact 100% what your doing.
Like you... literally don't know that there are multiple characters with sexual relationships that are quite important to their story. Do you like Freddy? His sexuality is kiiiinda important to his story because he had a wife and kid. Its actually a HUGE aspect to the Friday the 13th stories. Like so much of the plot just would not happen if Freddy never went to pound town on someone.
-
@anarchy753 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1803434#Comment_1803434
Do I expect people to be even vaguely familiar with a court case that has been in global headlines for the past week surrounding the topic they're bringing up? Maybe I don't expect perfection, but I don't tend to go around starting highly controversial political discussions without at least glancing at what's going on recently. Here's a quick on-topic article related to the case; https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/dec/06/keira-bell-lawyer-warns-on-internet-coverage-of-transgender-issues
Here's the best link I can give you surrounding the book, https://open.spotify.com/episode/4SIh4Pt39AtGQYzMJMNkv1 I certainly don't pay for spotify so that should be available to you, unfortunately the youtube versions have been removed. (Important to note that it's worth listening to the first minute before deciding there's 'transphobia' from the name, because the issues being discussed are far from it.) She's an amazing woman who has put her own career on the line simply out of concern for the safety of young girls.
And in short, yes, I would say it's ignorance to enter a conversation saying "I don't know the current issues, or the extreme influence activists are having on politics and the medical field, so I'm going to assume that you're wrong."
It is the consensus of the psychological field that de-transitioning is mostly an issue of the extreme hostility trans people face trying to transition, more than a 'regret' of transitioning itself. People don't de-transition because they realize that being trans was a phase, they almost universally do it in the face of extreme harassment and psychological pressure. De-transition rates are .3% meaning about 3 in 1,000 trans people get ANY level of detransitional treatment. From the perspective of being a mental health treatment, that is downright miraculous.
The act of transitioning even without gatekeeping hurdles is such a massive challenge that the amount of people doing it on a whim is 0%. Like ######### isn't getting your hair dyed.
Furthermore, even if people DID regret transitioning, which to be EXTREMELY clear it is not, it is pretty much objective fact that dysphoria is a super serious thing that is actively life threatening due to its extreme mental health effects, and refusing to allow transition because of a de-transition epidemic that, again, really obviously isn't happening, is akin to withholding a life saving treatment from a group because less than a percentage of them will have a negative reaction to it. There are many treatments we consider absolutely essential to obtain for similar reasons as transition (such as anti-depressants) that have a higher failure rate than transitioning.
-
@Venzhas said:
I can already imagine the clichés perks names ;
Poppers, rainbow flag, Pride Walk
Nah honnestly i dont care bout a LGBT char
We already had Manly Nea and PowerBottom David King
Parody is beautiful, because its often a self portrait. Its so interesting you think this, but not that Feng Min's perks should reference her being good at math and bad at driving.
Hell they don't even really reference her status as an MLG pro-gamer. Your imagining a ridiculous situation SPECIFICALLY to shoot it down, one that doesn't match how any other survivor links their perks to their thematic identity.
We don't have a Hispanic survivor yet. Which is a pretty clear gap. Do you think we shouldn't do that because inevitably they would be named Pablo, have a sombrero, and be prone to napping in their perks? Should we never have a survivor who isn't a straight cis white dude because anyone having any aspect of their identity which you don't consider 'default' instantly makes that the character's SOLE character trait?
Like the reality you posit in order to shoot this down is farcical on the face of it and its sad you feel so threatened here you needed to invent this nonsense to attack.
-
@JesusOnWheels said:
inb4 people start tunneling/camping the hell out of the trans suirvivor
Luckily this will be a self correcting problem as DBD is tightly tuned enough on the killer side that this is highly exploitable behavior which will result in a LOT of lost killer games in SWF.
Kinda love it actually. Loud and proud trans survivor goes full mama/papa bear and takes the heat head on to frustrate and loop the killer so they play mega-inefficiently. They took that ######### in the real world all their lives, one more nut with a knife is nothing.