fake
fake
About
- Username
- fake
- Joined
- Visits
- 7,555
- Last Active
Comments
-
The developer has announced a January 2023 fix for this inoperable bug.
https://twitter.com/DeadByBHVR/status/1598724630239494145?t=CqIpTRYDtKGt_agJFCxFHQ&s=09In fact, ...... Why?
Why no kill switch?
When the bug occurred when a nurse attempted a grab and remained stuck and inoperable until the end of the game, she was quickly kill-switched.
Why isn't the twins' inoperability bug subject to a kill switch?
Which do you think is more likely to occur, the nurse grab or the Charlotte & Victor viewpoint switch?
Is it because in the case of the nurse it is considered a game breaking bug and in the case of the twins it is not?
I can't find any reason to leave it as a bug for a month. I do not understand why it is not a kill switch.
-
If you have the right reasons and they make sense to you, you will complain, but you still need to make an effort to understand and accept them.
But this shadow nerf at Bamboozle was not mentioned in the patch notes, nor was there any explanation. They did not disclose for what reason they nerfed it.
If you insist on transparency and consistency, you owe an explanation. Not just this time. Shadow nerfs have been done before.
-
You can call for a vote.
Whether we vote for it is another story.
Still, many will vote. It is a great game.
-
Statistics show numbers, but it is important to consider why the numbers are the way they are.
Knight is played a lot in the first 3 months or so when he first appeared. But Knight will soon become the worst used killer. He may still be used more than the Twins though lol. Unlike Wesker, he is weak, uninteresting and very difficult to find value in playing. There is no expansion through add-ons.
And the players who continue to use the knight even though no one uses him anymore will play him really well. This could cause the denominator to decrease and the numerator to increase, resulting in a not-so-low kill rate. (For my part, I also think that the kill rate may not go up even if the knight is handled well.)
They may look at it and decide it's "playable, git gud" and leave it as it has always been, and I really don't expect that since almost nothing has changed after the PTB feedback.
-
Sorry, but I honestly disagree with the title.
It is useless without learning how to play against the Knight Guards.
-
I understand what you are saying, but it should not be done.
-
As I thought in the discussion when the Blast mine bug was removed, is it that difficult to touch a generator for 45 seconds?
For me it is not.
-
@Audiophile said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3284029#Comment_3284029
I mean.. sure. I guess. Not the best division of A and B but ok. You’re basically saying A are good solos and B are swf players. I 100% agree that people that only play swfs are generally not as good as players that can do well in solo and swf. 100%. The difference though in my point and yours… 4 man swfs are 5% of games. Killers that just focus their game around the hook to get cheap hits or tunnel, whatever… my guess is that’s closer to 50% - 75% of games. And that occurs against solos 90% of the time.
First... Thank you for taking my comment as a logical argument. Thanks for the reply.
My argument is divided into several sections, but for now I would like to respond to the points you made.
The idea that the SWF of 4 is 5% and the camps and tunneling is 50-75%.
My point about SWF for voice chat is that the number of people is irrelevant.
Even with a SWF of two people, the maximum advantage gained by voice chat is lower, but it is still an advantage.
What you have there is information that is not inherently obtainable in the game. Taking advantage of that is consistent with your assertion that you can't win a game without relying on voice chat for a large part of your play and believe that you are good at the game because you have had a lot of success. I am glad you understand me on this.
Now, the guess that camping and tunneling is 50-75%.
I don't know about guessing the numbers, but I believe that not a few killers actually choose these.
There are several reasons.
The killers are finding enjoyment in the kills.
We want to get at least 1k.
Archive.
There are many more, but I would guess that the primary reason is to win the game by taking advantage of the game.
It's obvious that if you field four survivors for the majority of the game you will lose; you can only gain an advantage by making it harder for the survivors to choose by making it three.
The choice of camping and tunneling for this purpose makes sense in itself. As I commented earlier on that, the fact that the survivor faced with that would be boring should be addressed, and it is my opinion that it would be good to have a system that gives the killer an advantage by not making those choices.
To bring the argument back to SWF again, to win SWF (especially, as you say, with 4 people) as a killer, you need to make the best in-game choices over and above the best loadout. Camping in voice chat is pointless, but reducing the number of people early is in itself an advantage. Still, it is hard to get 4k without camping or tunneling against a good survivor, SWF or not.
If you still lose big by 0-1k, it will be strongly ingrained in your memory. Like a trauma. Even stronger if they did BM.
And I think they will use camping and tunneling as their main tactic in the next game and even more so in the game after that. Because it feels more ridiculous to lose without it.
Sorry for the long sentence, but I see a lot of problems with the game system. I will mention that when you consider DbD from many angles, a balance that allows 5 people to continue to have fun at all times will never happen.
-
It's hard to know whether to respond seriously or sarcastically.
They might lash out at the killer for achieving 4k instead of perfect, lash out at the killer for not being perfect and getting himself escapes, escapes at the killer for being perfect and 0k, and then call the killer for being perfect and achieving 4k OP.
How should this play out?
-
We can now divide survivors into Type A and Type B.
Type A survivors are very skilled and always on their best behavior. Above average chasing, above average generator, and above average unhooking.
However, even a good Type A survivor can be 4k'd because matchmaking does not allow for a full four survivors. But still performs better as a solo queue than a type B survivor. This is because they are willing to sacrifice allies to achieve their objectives if necessary, or to be part of a resource that buys time without selfishly DCing or killing themselves.
Type B survivors are SWFs together. They use voice chat, which does not inherently exist in the game, and obtain an overwhelming information advantage that they cannot inherently obtain in the game. They use it to generate no-pressure generators.
Type B survivors who gain an advantage that cannot be gained in-game through voice chat have had so much success that they believe they are good at the game and will not try to become Type A survivors. If they want to be good, they must be able to win without having to rely on voice chat for the majority of their play.
Yeah, we can talk about both sides of the issue.
I have no problem with camping and tunneling as a tactic, but I understand that it can be boring when faced with For that reason, I believe we need a system that makes it more fun for the faced survivor and incentives for the killer to choose not to play them to make the game more lucrative.
This is my thought on the possibility of the "that killer is OP" argument arising if you make camping and tunneling completely impossible and still have a type A killer do 4k. If it always does 4k without camping or tunneling I would consider it OP. I also have the slightly contradictory thought that it is not OP because of the camping and tunneling.
-
Shadow nerfing is beginning to feel like an uncommon occurrence in DbD.
This time around, too, there was no mention of it in the patch notes. Is this how people claim transparency and consistency?
We know that if necessary, we can make additions to the patch notes that we have already published.
-
I can understand why he would want it to be 115%. There are times when I actually feel frustrated with being at 110%.
But if he is 115%, you may feel essentially the same way as old Billy Instasaw. Now he has to be 110% for instasaw.
Killer designs that are strong in 1vs1 exist so-so, including Trickster. Even if that is not as strong from a 1vs4 perspective.
But too strong in 1vs1 can also be a problem ... That is my concern about the 115% Trickster.
-
I think that is the pallet loop tactic. I don't really agree that shrinking the lunge will further ensure another loop and a reliable pallet stun.
We need to determine if the current loop is safe. Whether this is the last lap or not. Lunge is not a problem.
However, I can understand why you feel uncomfortable with the decision due to server delays. It is the same for both the killer and the survivor.
-
Most importantly... Is whether it says anything about patch notes about that. If they insist on transparency.
-
Dead bye...
... It's nothing.
-
JP
-
I support the current rate of around 60%.
Higher than 50% is better. However, I think 75% is too high.
I take into account that DC is not included in the statistics. Still, 1k occurs more often than 0k and the bottom up due to survivors who cry all over everything on the first hook sous vide. Including that, it is clearly statistically justified to be higher than 50%.
Nevertheless, it is true that there is a big difference between solo queue and SWF. We feel that more than the kill rate, we need to increase the escape rate for solo queues and decrease the escape rate for SWFs.
-
Was DH changed for the main reason of utilization?
I thought not.
The developers designed DH to duck killer attacks, but as a result, OLD DH was able to use its invincible acceleration to increase the loop by a round or reach a palette or window where it would not normally reach in time. I think the developer said this was not the intention, but I may be misremembering.
-
There are times when I enjoy using my head and times when I don't want to use my head.
When I'm in the mood for fun without using my head, playing against knight isn't a bad idea; just hold W and I'll experience success with ease. I can be a baby because I can always get a free success story.
When I'm in the mood to use my head, playing against knight is bad; there is no mind game other than hold W.
What fun is that? I'm not good enough at the game to play belly hard mode, but I'm also not baby enough to be satisfied with super easy mode.
-
If you can say that a nerf is not needed on the grounds that it has been nerfed multiple times, then you should not nerf the nurse.
However, there is little need for a nerf to the COH itself. If anything, I would rather seek a base kit for Shuttered Hope.
-
If the MMR is working, then the next survivor you play against should not be as good as the one you just played if you tried and failed for the adept...
But no, well, you know.
-
Let's say you choose from several methods that can be done for MYC knight.
1. knight's kill switch
Certainly a kill switch of a knight with numerous other bugs would solve the problem, but from a business standpoint it is difficult to kill switch a just-launched killer.
2. kill switch for MYC
Yes, it is certainly effective, but there is no need to make anyone but him unusable when he is not buggy except for KNIGHT!
3. change of shrines
Considering that shrines change every week, I don't think the developers will spend the effort to change them for a few more days.
My choice is 4. report players who abuse MYC knight.
-
We have increased the possibility for beginners to perform a save with light stun.
Or even advanced users who are not good at it.
-
It is as important as the perspective of impartiality. Should we seek reality or not?
By touching a generator with your pinky for 0.1 second while being chased by a killer, you can repair a generator that had just sparked and malfunctioned to an unbroken state.
-
oh..........
-
@almofan1001 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3280462#Comment_3280462
Pointless comment without any argument/basis. Feel free to elaborate instead though - might actually contribute something worthwhile to the discussion.
Yes, because I've seen the survivor-main argue many times that "the killer should care about the survivor's enjoyment" and I thought it was only natural to say "the survivor should care about the killer's enjoyment" as a sarcastic response to that. I agree with this irony of yours.
On another topic, I see the "if you feel bored as a survivor, you can DC, I don't care about other fun for my own enjoyment" topic.
If they agree with this, do you think anyone on the game should be free to DC? I can ask. Interestingly, the selfish DC addicts disagree.
So I found this discussion interesting.
-
I don't know if my little brain can comprehend or not that this discussion is sarcastic. I have decided that I can understand it this time.
-
And, yeah, the HUSK system in development will help with this, replacing the DCed gameplay abandoner with an AI and continuing the game; the AI's control is not perfect, but just being there is at least more helpful than the useless game abandoning DC player.
-
@Terion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3279271#Comment_3279271
you can stick your attitude somewhere else, i feel i have to explain it over and over and over again with you guys and still you dont understand..
im not talking about someone being unable to move from the start and then dcing.. Im talking about RAGEQUITS!!! can we finally understand this please????
Oh... I'm sorry." I missed "RAGE". I mean, I... I mean, I didn't do it because of "RAGE," so forgive me.
And I understand and agree with you. No one should be allowed to affirm a DC who has let his anger get the best of him. If they do affirm, the affirming party has no right to play the online game.
-
MANY slight reworks
-
If, in theory, I can move between my home and office locker, which are tens of kilometers apart, in a few tens of seconds. You can go to your friend's house as well as your office. Friends, do not lock your locker🫣
-
Eventually the offering was finally kill-switched.
What was the time that I had not kill-switched the offering before?
-
@Shroompy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3279500#Comment_3279500
yeah killer is absolutely the easiest its ever been
now before some one reads this and starts foaming from the mouth, I'm not saying killer is easy. I'm just saying if you look back throughout DbD's history, its the easiest its been.
I agree with this opinion...
DbD old man crap, but it used to be much harder. We are in the process of putting some weight on the killer as well, to slowly bring the tilted balance closer to parallel.
But the weight of SWF has always been the same.
-
Penance. I have now dc'd due to an inoperable bug with the cursor display on the console.
I am so sorry to the other 4 players. I do not want my DC for the bug during this period to be recorded and to be perceived as the selfish and self-serving player I am... But I did not want to wait AFK over and over again. I felt selfish. I hope you will forgive me. What a thing I have done.
-
Balance of the scales.
Wait 15 minutes and play the game with an ally or opponent of equal ability as much as possible.
Or, since you can only wait 3 minutes, play games with allies or opponents of compromised threshold competence.
Well, actually, it would be nice to have the option to choose one or the other.
The old matchmaking system was changed to MMR with no visible threshold as it is now because the rank threshold no longer works.
-
Would my opinion that only Eruption actually needs to be changed be unpopular?
-
Do you think they know what information they have looked up at random on Wikipedia?
They don't look into the requirements for timing, distance, etc., and go in and out of lockers to avoid BBQ with all hooks.
-
I will work harder than usual.
-
The developers thought that giving the killer a separate hook counter would facilitate tunneling.
My opinion is NO. we have built a discussion about it in the past, if you want to take a look.
@fake said:
Yes, we already know there is a hook counter. We also know that it doesn't help.
I would like the killer to be able to see the individual hook counts for each survivor, just like the survivors got in 4.5.0.
I'm remember the developer answering about this, I mean from Q&A 2021/2/5.
Q.Why is the hook counter on the killer less informative than the hook counter on the survivor?
A.We were concerned that it would facilitate the tunneling of the killer. Also, the killer's task is to remember the survivor's hook count.
I am still not satisfied with this answer.
First, I think it is a big mistake to say that hook counters promote tunneling. Just because you can see hook counters for each individual, killers who tunnel will tunnel and killers who do not tunnel will not tunnel. Regardless of who is hooked and how many times they are hooked, they need to find that survivor and make the chase in order to tunnel. It is the killer who plays to tunnel, hook counter or no hook counter, that does it.
I tunnel or don't tunnel depending on my mood; while doing the 8-hook-0-kill challenge, I'm thinking in my head, "0-0-1-0.... .0-1-1-0.... .0-1-2-0... .0-1-2-1..." Isn't it silly?
And it's funny that memorizing the number of hooks in Survivor is a killer challenge. When you play Survivor, you don't have the memory, so you need to be told how many hooks your allies have, and the Killer needs to do it because it's his assignment. Why is it that when you play survivor your memory disappears and when you play killer you need memory?
I think this was sophistry on the part of the developer. The presence or absence of a hook counter does not affect tunneling. A tunneling killer will tunnel with or without a hook counter.
Then in 4.5.0, at the same time that the survivor hook counter was implemented to help survivors with no memory, the now nonsensical killer hook counter was implemented. It seems as if the development was a tacked-on damage control to giving hook counters only to survivors.
Also, there is an aspect of DbD that tries to balance the killer by stressing it. As the developer said regarding this as well. The chase background music is set loud to drown out the sound of the survivor. Other things.
-
In my opinion, the gauge should be charged after the animation of the gate lever fully down.
It is odd that the gate opens just by tapping without lowering the lever lol.
-
In fact, the knight also has Killer Instinct. Killer Instinct occurs when a guard downs a survivor.
That situation rarely occurs, lol
-
The reason for the higher percentage of solos in Survivor is that Killer is a solo.
If I switch to survivor after a killer play, it's not because my friend suddenly spawns.
-
When the Green Orb pallet stuns, it forces the creation of a patrol route for the guards, returns to the Knight's perspective, and stuns....
It is indeed strange. It's like if you hit Victor with a palette stun, Charlotte will stun him. Technically a special ability?
-
@Marik1987 said:
BHVR released Sadako, Dredge, Wesker and Knight in 2022.
If u take a look at these 4, Wesker is BY FAR the best killer out of them.
The others are weak and / or boring.
Yeah, how can you not play Wesker after seeing these members... LOL
-
Now let us assume that the generator is finished in 10 seconds.
You will not be able to sabotage the generator in time, so you camp to secure 1 KILL.
What is the difference?
To make camping less attractive, I think it is more important to give more incentive for not camping than to punish camping.
Also, the issue of DC is different. Selfish players who routinely DC will DC in any situation.
-
Game players do not care about the circumstances of game developers. They buy and play.
Is "spaghetti code" an insult? If it is an insult, I understand that I should not say it.
So is it a fact? If it is a fact, I may use the term "spaghetti code" as before.
The information we are seeing from players is that there are always bugs in the game, and those that have been fixed in the past will reappear within a few months.
All games in this world are great when programming complexity is combined with the game experience. Yes, in fact all games are great. Kudos to the developers.
So if a game has a bug that occurs over and over again, and the fixes recur quickly, should we still say it's great?
That is the player's emotion. You can never know if it is the spaghetti code that is the cause, but players will guess that it is the spaghetti code and say as a complaint that bugs occur. The "spaghetti code."
It is worth remembering that the developer commented that "fixing 99 bugs created 103 bugs". If there is a catchy phrase other than "spaghetti code" that conveys dissatisfaction with a bug without being insulting, use it. However, short, clear, and emotive power words are always effective in the Internet world.
-
Does replacing the subject with the console killer help this discussion to be constructive?
I'm a console player, so I'm a bit saddened. We will camp out if necessary.
-
I know that there is an internal test play going on before the PTB takes place.
Despite that prior test play, many problems that we think are possible to notice before the PTB begins are discovered for the first time at the PTB.
Test play is lacking. Otherwise, none of the developers need to be good at the game, but it would be nice to have some feedback from players who are somewhat proficient at playing. It would be nice if we could have fog whisperers participate in test play before the PTB and get a bit of feedback.