gantes
gantes
About
- Username
- gantes
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,552
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/548068#Comment_548068
The perk was buffed explicitly because of its interaction with Enduring. Enduring was then changed so it only affected pallet stuns, yet DS remained the same. Does that seem fair to you?
Imagine if NOED was buffed to give the killer a massive speed boost to counter Adrenaline. Then imagine that Adrenaline was nerfed to no longer give the speed boost, yet NOED remained the same. Do you think that's fair? Do you think it makes any goddamned sense?
This scenario is irrelevant because NOED already counters Adrenaline as much as a perk should counter another perk.
If anything NOED has no business giving a speed boost because it's primary effect is already strong af. But I'm not the one here asking for nerfs for things that shouldn't be nerfed so w/e
-
Nah it's fine.
And during the last Q&A stream they said they're currently not looking to change DS.
I only get hit by it like 1 out of 10 games as killer. It's highly preventable and the chance you as survivor is gonna play with 3 perks by using it is pretty high.
-
Nope.
Buff low tier killers. Make an optional voice chat. Improve the game's HUD.
Plenty of ways to balance the game without cucking half the playerbase.
-
@OpenYoureyes said:
"My point is that you're wrong, plain and simple. You offer NO PROOF of a declining playerbase and try to blame the ######### matchmaking on that..."
You are not following: bad matchmaking is a consequence, not the cause.
" while the MUCH more likely answer (and probably one even the devs are gonna agree on) is that the matchmaking they're testing is quite bad and needs improvements."
Sorry, @Peanits just declared in another post they didn't touch the matchmaking since March.
"You can't ask me to prove you're wrong."
I didn't ask you anything, you are trolling for no reason even if all I bring are facts that perfectly explains 2 situations:
- 4-men swf is a rarity (not like the killer consensus wants, sorry)
- bad matchmaking - reported by many - is caused by playerbase drop (arguable, but the simplest explaination. hope devs will publish data to prove me wrong)
Especially on the second, the playerbase started dropping in Sept '18, causing big issues already during the Serum event (30 mins lobby anyone?) and despite killer mains claiming long lobbies were caused bye "a bug" - fact officially denied by devs - the drop got even worse with the new year, forcing devs to retouch the matchmaking ASAP (around march if I recall).
Now, after few months, you can read again killers complaining about lobbies AND you get the weird ranking matchmaking - not only by individual personal opinion, but everywhere on social and in this forum too: two hints might start to look like an evidence.
Not and endemic problem yet again, but I believe is better to face it and ask devs to take action to give us a playerbase like we had in 2018, that hiding the head under the sand for god knows what.
See you in the fog.
Please, read my post properly before replying. I know you're saying the bad matchmaking is a consequence, that's exactly what I said. But your point is worthless if you can't prove the playerbase is shrinking in the first place.
-
You want anecdotal evidence, I have it too. On 90% of my killer games I never get survivors more than 2 ranks higher or lower than me. There, this is worth as much as your anecdotal evidence. But unlike you, I know it means nothing, so that's why we have, you guessed it, NUMBERS.
-
@OpenYoureyes said:
You didn't answer.
2018 have been a bull year (until Sept). 2019 has been a heavily bear year, so far.
It's true: this game raises more frome june on, this can still happen and I hope so.
I expect big jump with dedicated servers - unless they screw it up.
I hope, like you, that 10x more people comes back to the game.
But as of today, June 24th, I talk about facts not predictions: player base ran away and you get that matchmaking.
Again: what is your point?
My point is that you're wrong, plain and simple. You offer NO PROOF of a declining playerbase and try to blame the ######### matchmaking on that, while the MUCH more likely answer (and probably one even the devs are gonna agree on) is that the matchmaking they're testing is quite bad and needs improvements.
You can't ask me to prove you're wrong. That's not how arguments of any kind work. You are putting forward a claim (that the matchmaking is bad BECAUSE of a declining playerbase) yet you offer no proof of a declining playerbase, so your point isn't worth arguing. Is it that hard to understand?
I even sent you the numbers and you're still insisting on your flawed point, so I have no hope for this discussion.
-
@OpenYoureyes said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/546516#Comment_546516
Believe me, I follow that chart much more than you.
But bfore I tell you that:
- Player base started dropping exactly in september 2018 and never stopped (check the patchnotes if you want to know why)
- May peak is a clearly extpemporary bug in counts
- June peak is the only real raise in almost a year, due to 3Y Aniversary
- I am sad that playerbase is dropping, but is not my fault, and I am a victim as you are, having invested money in a game that is disappointing me but I will hope will turn in the right direction again
Apart from trying to confute, what is exactly your points?
That you really play every match vs 4-man swf?
That matchmaking is going ok with NEVER 5 players from the same rank?
Seriously, which is your point?
I made mine and is pretty clear and simple, what is yours?
Again, you show your inability to analyze data. Since I'm a nice guy imma help you.
Compare this time of the year to the exact same period last year. For three years now, the period from March through June experiences a playerbase dip, which promptly recovers from June onwards. Doesn't help that there was no March chapter last year and Plague was considerably less popular on release than Ghostface or Spirit for example.
Now compare every single month from 2018 to their 2019 counterpart so far. Bigger numbers on every month in 2019. I doubt they're worried about their numbers, and we shouldn't be either.
You are using the numbers to see what you want to see, in both cases.
Since I still think you're bait because I refuse to believe you're that bad at analyzing numbers, I'll yikes out of this thread. Have a good one.
EDIT: they just got their highest peak number of players ever this month. You're the only one worried bud.
-
@Peanits if you have the time please elaborate on how the party size statistics work.
-
There are PLENTY of healthy discussions about what can be improved about the game to be had without making up "facts". Grow up.
-
@OpenYoureyes https://steamcharts.com/app/381210
Take a look for yourself.
-
Show me the player counts for the game then smartypants.
@OpenYoureyes said:
Math is easy: 50 matches you meet solo player + 30 matches u meet 2-p-swf = 80 matches.
Player count is dropping: matchmaking - that Peanits just said was not touched - is filling the gaps across all ranks, something unthinkable few months ago.
Denial is a typical reaction.
-
@Cymer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/546495#Comment_546495
Like the 80% survival rate at rank 1 on PC?
Later it was clarified that the system got the numbers wrong and we never got an update with the real numbers.
Or is it still 80% at top rank?
Somewhere Peanits retified that it looked closer to 43%. I don't remember where though.
-
Sorry to disappoint you guys, but 4-men happens only 5 matches out of 100, and 3-men swf only 10 matches out of 100. According to official stats:
- I don't think you know how to interpret statistics. Some other members with more patience and free time should explain to you how you misread that data.
- Show me the actual player counts and we can talk about a declining playerbase. Hint: you won't be able to, because it's not. Not to the extent you're claiming.
Nice bait tho.
-
Not healing should be more dangerous.
Right now, against most killers, getting healed wastes 16s out of each survivor when it's one person healing another. If you're not on a dead zone, with one health state you should be able to stall for... 30 seconds maybe? Assuming average survivor, average setup, decent killer, not taking into account BS setups. Taking into account 10 seconds-ish for the killer to pick you up and hook you, that's half a gen for each other member of the team.
Now take into account DS, which gives you another safe-ish minute of non healing after being unhooked. Now factor in Adrenaline. Dead Hard is the most used exhaustion perk at high ranks, and it helps a ton at getting to another loop before the killer downs you. The truth is, for competent survivors, it's rarely worth it to heal against any loopable killer. If staying injured was such a problem, Plague would be top tier.
I don't know how they can do it, but staying injured should be more dangerous against killers that aren't Nurse, Spirit, Hag or Huntress (and now Ghostface too, it's dangerous to stay injured against him). Those are the only ones I consistently heal against, and the ones I see other players healing against the most. Against any other killer it's generally worth the risk to stay injured all game, pop all gens and wait for Adrenaline which almost everybody runs anyway.
-
The only way to balance around high ranks without cucking low ranks and without making the game play differently depending on rank is to balance around red ranks and then increase the ######### out of the skill cap of pubstomp killers.
Anyone who's been through the new player experience knows how killer sided the games can be.
They clearly balance the game around mid green/low purple ranks imo. If you're gonna balance around red ranks, the easier killers will have to stop being as easy as they are. Then we might have a chance of getting a game balanced around the highest level.
-
@weirdkid5 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/546256#Comment_546256
It's too bad the devs clearly intend for the game to be competitive, since there has been a Ranking system since Day 1, and they even tried to dabble into official tournaments.
Just because the Ranking system and tournaments are absolutely hideous doesn't mean the game isn't competitive.
It just fails at being competitive.
Wanna know a real party game? Super Smash Bros. That game is MADE competitive by the community, and the developers still balance the game around the top 1% of players because that's simply the smart thing to do.
Even for a "party game." Monopoly is a "party game." You still play it for the sake of competition, and you still play to win. Otherwise, what you are doing isn't a game, it's simply freeform play with no boundaries.
Not all games are born to be competitive.
-
@darktrix said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/546140#Comment_546140
Yeah yeah 'the dragons are coming', but I'm just saying it is not a great to use 'competitive game' term for debates when we don't even have the infrastructure for it.
I don't think calling DBD a competitive game is realistic at all. It's a casual party game put behind a rank system with no rewards for some reason.
I don't think we'll ever get a game balanced enough out of DBD to legit call it a competitive game.
-
@TrueKn1ghtmar3 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/545487#Comment_545487
Lol that streamer must be [bad word] at finding the center of his screen because I've never once had problems breaking ghost out of stealth, as for stalking the marked surv, im fine with it not extending the exposed status but I'll be [bad word] if they remove my ability to track that surv with my stalk, Michael can do it so should ghost, as for pallet stuns knocking me out of stealth fine ill deal with that just don't take away his one good tracking tool
Fine, every single high level streamer is bad at revealing him but you're a god. Congrats. Back to the real world now where it's bugged and needs adjustments.
-
- makes no sense for him to remain stealthed after a stun
- they already stated that stalking an already marked survivor was never intended
- do you guys even play survivor? Have you ever seen a high level streamer playing against him? Revealing him is jank af. It's SUPER bugged. Like bugged beyond belief. It NEEDS adjusting.
I was skeptical at first about the changes, but honestly, they're barely gonna touch his viability. You guys should wait to see how things play out before you #########. But it's too much to ask from these forums, I know.
-
@BunnyTheHutt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/545207#Comment_545207
You are not getting it at all. It was an example, not a comparison. And THEY ARE NOT POOR. If you watched the anniversary livestream then you would see that they have tons of money too spend on extra things. And again, they still make tons of money off of new players buying the current DLC and cosmetics. They will not go poor in 6 months. It's unrealistic and naive too think so.
It's unrealistic and naive to think ANY company would give up their main source of income for six months to spend a lot of resources on something that POTENTIALLY increase their costumer base marginally.
-
@BunnyTheHutt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/545200#Comment_545200
The forums are filled with people complaining about the state of the game. If they truly listen too the community about thing as they say they do, they would take steps too improve the game for QoL. Sometimes you'll make more money by fixing things for the long run over just rushing out patch jobs that will bite you in the ass eventually.
If they follow every command from people who have no clue on how to run a business, there will be no game to fix.
-
Besides, dude, you just compared DBD with Overwatch. With a game that's declining like crazy and still probably has 10 times more players than DBD and is made by a huge company. That shows you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
That's why they as a business don't listen to their playerbase on business matters. They probably have an entire team to debate their timeframe, their finances and everything they need to do to keep running smoothly and they're not gonna change it because some players think, in their magical rainbow land, that 6 months without financial income would allow them to magically fix the game.
-
@BunnyTheHutt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/545188#Comment_545188
True, i misread, but my point is proven in the fact it has never NOT been buggy. If they spent a good 3-6 months pushing out bug fixes, then this game would be so much better, and it would bring more players in since people don't want too play a game that feels like it's in beta then released.
You clearly have no understanding of how the real world works with both money and businesses.
They have a system and a timeframe that works for them. No company would ever opt into making half the money they normally make for half a year.
The way the game is made probably assures that there will ALWAYS be bugs every time you change anything. The only way to change that is to make a DBD 2 from the ground up.
What keeps this game alive is the new content. As long as it's playable, they will not stop with the content, and rightfully so. If you exclude the 20 people raging on the forums no one will stop playing because of a few bugged perks, while being deprived of new content would surely push many players away.
-
@BunnyTheHutt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/545179#Comment_545179
"Never been buggy" when I know of 5 perks that are broken ATM. Both BBQ and WGLF don't go too 4 stacks, Wake Up affects all actions, Bamboozle just doesn't work, and Furtive Chase changes too any survivor who saves another, even if the one on the hook isn't the obsession. And I'm not dumb, I know they won't change their stance, but I can still voice my opinion on what I feel the game needs too help it succeed.
I said never been NOT buggy lol. Read my comment properly before replying nonsense.
Your stance is exactly what the game needs to not make money anymore, so it's bad.
-
@BunnyTheHutt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/545172#Comment_545172
Wrong. Overwatch doesn't produce a new hero every 3 months and they are incredibly profitable. Also, I never said too stop all production on new content, only slow it down. They have over 100$ worth of DLC chapters and Paragraphs right now, and this isn't even including skins that need auric cells. But if they keep rushing out content that is horrid and doesn't even work right, the playerbase will die off. No one want's too play a buggy mess when it SHOULD be mostly complete for 3 years of being out. Plus, they can push out how every many cosmetics they want too since it's a different team that does it. So they really wouldn't be short on money.
If your logic was correct people would have stopped playing a long time ago. This game has never been not buggy.
DLCs are still a large part of their sales. Most players I know personally buy every single one of them, even if they don't buy skins.
Say whatever you want, suggesting something they'll NEVER do - proved by their plans for the next year, which already include one chapter every 3 months and a rework - is pointless and repetitive. Not gonna happen.
And stop comparing DBD to a huge game from a huge company which has a dramatically bigger playerbase, thank you.
-
Something people seem to ignore a lot.
They're a business, and not a huge business at that. They need to keep ######### working, dedicated servers are coming, and they need to pay their employees.
Have you guys even seen the playerbase graphics when new content comes out? That ######### is crazy. They'll never break the "new content every 3 months" cycle because that's what boosts the player numbers. They'll never stop pumping out cosmetics either because it's one of their main sources of income.
I want many things with the game fixed, as much as any of you do. But the "stop with the new content and fix your game" suggestions are, and I'm sorry to put it that way, useless. They'll never do it. Never ever. I guarantee you guys. And that's smart from them, because it would harm the game, and most people here aren't in a position to understand that.
If you want the game to prosper and last, wanting new content to stop is counterproductive. Yes, there are plenty of things to fix. But if they don't put out new stuff, they won't have the resources to fix anything. As simple as that.
-
I think they should balance around high ranks and just increase the skill cap of whatever becomes opressive at lower ranks.
But they won't so idc
-
That's why the hotfix is coming. Because breaking him out of stealth is EXTREMELY buggy.
Other than that, his core mechanics are more than fine and people asking for nerfs need to get their ######### together and learn to play against him.
-
@DenimChicken said:
I don't understand how you can be for people being banned for using bugged perks. Who gets to decide if the person is intentionally abusing a perk?
Not everyone reads the forum or goes online for information. If someone unlocks a perk after it is bugged how are they going to know it's not working as intended when they have no prior experience with it.
If it's bugged disable the use of it until it's fixed
You do know that there's a huge pop-up news screen when you open the game they can use to give warnings right? Just like they did with the Legion exploit a few months ago.
-
@Jacoby2041 said:
They shouldn't be banning anyone, it's their fault and not the players. The bugs are so widespread that plenty of people could be "abusing" it/them without even knowing.
Something that takes deliberate and intentional maliciousness to exploit is one thing, but something that anyone can do just by accident is completely different
Plus anyone who doesn't look on the forums etc. will not even know that they could be banned for using something they might not have even realized was a bug. Maybe someone just tried out Wake Up! for the first time and thought it was supposed to affect everything, or maybe they are just using the perk because they like it and don't know why they have a yellow bar on everything. Or maybe they just got some cool new addons for legion and want to see how well they stack, only to realize they are super good and continue to use them, little did they know BAN just like that, for no apparent reason
The devs should focus on fixing the problems they created as opposed to punishing people who may or may not have even known they were doing anything wrong
They should warn everybody ingame. And after that, yes, they should hand out temp bans for people abusing the bugs.
It stops being exclusively their fault after they warn everybody. After that, it's just people facing the consequences of their own actions.
-
A fat no is my standard answer for anything that shits even more on weaker killers and makes no difference against the top tiers.
Not healing against Trapper, Doctor etc is a joke. When people at red ranks heal, it's generally vs Nurse, Spirit etc.
-
Of course it's better to solve the issue/disable the perks and addons. But if the devs can't for some reason (and I'm assuming they can't because of their hideous spaghetti code), they should absolutely warn people not to use the exploits and then bring down the hammer.
What kind of ######### dystopia we living in where it's socially acceptable to intentionally abuse game bugs to ruin everyone else's experience? People are a real gem sometimes.
-
Really speaks a lot about the average level of play of our community when we've been dealing with Nurse, Spirit and Billy for a long time but stalky boi is apparently where the line is drawn
-
@invira_zero said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/540029#Comment_540029
you didnt get the point.
Its about equal URares, not tunneling.
Atm, BNP does not so much, cause 20 seconds is almost nothing, tbh. Its a way weaker than Mori, expect cypress one.
And, BNP can be countered easily, cause its one time based.
If you force survivor to go off the gen, he losts his BNP.
Not gonna say, that mori is OP, just BNP is way weaker, than ebony mori, thats in same tier.
I agree with everything except "20 seconds is almost nothing".
90% of this game is time management. 20 seconds can be the difference between a killer snowball and a 0k.
-
I hate that "it's fine, adapt" mentality when it's applied to EVERYTHING.
We are no longer in the 90s ffs. Devs can patch their games to make them better.
Something not being absolutely gamebreaking doesn't mean it can't be better and healthier. If you want a stale game that never changes, there are plenty of SNES titles for you. This is an everchanging game and it's great but far from perfect, and we'll always be able to improve it.
IMO neither are gamebreaking but both Moris and Instaheals could definitely be healthier for the game with some changes. I wouldn't put that at the top of the priorities list (please map design) but they're far from being a fun experience.
-
@Peanits something that really makes it worse is Gateaus spawning like crazy for killers (2 per bloodweb) and almost none for survivors.
Like, what's the incentive for playing survivor then?
-
@SteelDragon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/536529#Comment_536529
what about hex ruin? this change wont do ANYTHING for hex ruin, if anything it will light up a totem when someone starts a gen, and that can be much worse because you can start a gen and since a lot of totems are near gens instantly see the totem light up and than your totem is gone in 6 seconds
OMG what is your problem
This change would fix the main problem with hex ruin, which is survivors spawning on top of it and it being gone before you can even defend it
-
Huntress Lullaby, for example, would only notify the survivors of its existance after someone gets hooked, and would only be assigned to a totem after that.
Devour Hope would only be assigned to a totem after 2 stacks. The survivors would only know it's there when someone gets downed after 3 stacks, as it is right now.
The only perk that would considerably change would be Haunted Ground, which would only be able to be proc'ed after 60 seconds of a game, which I don't even consider a nerf TBH. It would pretty much ensure the perk never pops during the early game when you have no idea where no one is.
-
@BunnyTheHutt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/533749#Comment_533749
Giving survivors time too pop dull totems before the Hex activates is bad. They should just let the killer place the totem themselves which will reduce not only randomness of them, but the problem of them being cleansed in 10 seconds. Plus you are completely nerfing perks such as Haunted Grounds and Ruin with this idea. It makes no real sense tbh.
Survivors generally consider a massive waste of time to cleanse dull totems. I heavily doubt they would.
And something both you and @SteelDragon completely misunderstood is that according to my idea the perk would be activated since the start of the game, but it would be only assigned to light a dull totem only after 60 to 90 seconds. Think of how NOED works, but except of activating in the endgame it would be assigned to a totem after some time. That would make the perk survive for at least one minute.
If the killer chooses a totem to light it becomes painfully obvious to any survivor that happens to be in the killer's area and knows a dull totem's there. Any competent survivor would cleanse the totem 10 seconds after you leave the area.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/535140#Comment_535140
Infectious Fright and Corrupt Intervention are noob traps. They are both bad and not worth a perk slot. Corrupted intervention is only good on setup killer like Trapper or Hag, that's the only exception.
The others you mention have had some decent use, but I'd call that like a 10% rate of getting decent perks.
"I do think killers have had better overall perks recently than survivor though."
Killers have had better ones overall lately, but that's because overall survivor perks are just way better in general than killer ones.
It's more frustrating that there are so many perks they've released that COULD be great, they just don't make their numbers good enough. So many of them could see viability with the tiniest of tweaks.
Infectious Fright is amazing on a good Nurse though.
Other than that I agree.
-
I do think it'd be better for the game as a whole if tunneling wasn't such an efficient playstyle sometimes.
Because honestly, few things are more efficient than getting rid of an easy target early on in the game.
But for real, no point on shaming people for tunneling. People who do it want to win and have fun as much as you do. If anything, shame the devs for not making any changes to make tunneling less optimal in certain scenarios.
It's just like games ending in 5 minutes and survivors abusing extremely safe loops and infinites. Is it fun for killer when that happens? Hell no. But it's not the survivors' fault, it's a problem with the game.
-
It's because the Ghostface player shouldn't be expecting to stalk people in open fields without getting broken out of his power.
I've played quite a few games as him and the immense majority of times I get revealed are when I get greedy or someone's looking at me from behind and I haven't spotted them. He has a lot of agency on his side to stalk without being revealed, it just takes patience.
-
@Blueberry said:
It wouldn't be a big deal if the perks they kept adding were at least decent. We just keep getting more garbage perks to be thrown into the pile of never to be seen again.
Like I said a few weeks ago, Plague was at least OK-ish because some perks were useful on some killers (Infectious Fright for Nurse, Corrupt Intervention for Hag and Trapper). Legion only had Discordance of a somewhat useful perk. Spirit had good perks all around.
Ghostface's only remotely useful perk is I'm All Ears for beginner killers who don't know the optimal path survivors take around loops yet. Other than that everything's garbo.
-
@Caretaker said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/533864#Comment_533864
"During rank reset." So against bad killers, who tend to tunnel cuz they don't know better? What about people playing fair who happen to down you in that time after hooking another survivor?
I'm assuming a good player knows when it's time to pick up and when it's time to slug.
-
@Karl_Childers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/533917#Comment_533917
I think including instadowns and removing the only when Injured part, puts it in the middle of that (between overbearing and extremely useless). I don’t think that would be overbearing or unfair in the slightest. Seems like a decent compromise. The perk is still going to be niche because of the activation requirement, but at least you possibly useful reward to shoot for. I just don’t think the answer, no matter how strong a perk used to be, is making it utterly useless.
I think it might be OK. This is probably something they'd look into if they revisit MoM because it was the first PTB iteration.
As I said, I hate it when perks are useless. I do think they generally do a better job at making most survivor perks OK than they do with killer perks though. As survivor it seems like you can make a ton of fun builds, and as killer I feel I can't deviate too much from my main build from each killer without shooting myself in the foot.
-
@HatCreature said:
@gantes I like that it's niche, it gives the player a certai playstyle when they have the perk. We got stealth players, Gen jockeys, runners etc this would go into a sort of in your face type of gameplay, I guess the Runner. This player isn't working on Gens they're protecting their team and distracting the Killer and that's what gets them those Protection hits.
Once they fix that Protection Hit Event I'm sure the perk will be fine but right now it's borderline impossible. I got all 3 stacks one time but my team was on the brink of death with me and one other dude and I got instadowned by GF so it didn't even get activated.
I guess a good build for it would be Empathy, MoM, Self-Care, and Dead Hard? With either a Med-Kit or a Flashlight as an item.
I'd honestly prefer they made a different perk for Runners. As a "role" it has quite a bit of potential, but I think MoM will never be salvaged into something healthy.
Just my opinion. Maybe I'm wrong. I hope I am because I HATE how many useless perks this game already has.
-
@Karl_Childers said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/533880#Comment_533880
Having to try to get 3 “extra” hits just to get 1 hit while injured isn’t worth it at all though. It’s garbage in this new state. For the effort and time it takes to get those hits, as well as having to heal, it really needs to include instadown protection otherwise it just makes no sense.
Again, since I don't think the extra hit mechanic should be in the game at all, I'm not bothered by this.
Chances are they made the requirements this hard simply to dissuade people from using it.
I think that unlike DS, which could be salvaged into something healthy and a good addition to the game, MoM will always, by the nature of its effect, be either overbearing or extremely useless. Prefferably the latter.
-
I believe the change was meant to make it extremely niche and hard to achieve, especially with how gamechanging the effect is.
I'd rather wait for them to fix protection hits. Gameplay in general becomes 100x better without MoM in the equation, It was opressive enough with only one person running it, so it was a "God have mercy on your soul" situation when 2+ people decided to run it. I firmly believe the effect it provides has no place in the game, but if it's gonna stay, the current iteration (that pretty much guarantees it's impossible to see more than one per match) seems to be the way to go.
A perk that gives a free hit should never be meta. Adrenaline, DS, BT, DH and BL are fine examples of perks that are extremely good without being unhealthy and overbearing when everybody runs them. Then you have more niche perks like Deliverance, which provides a strong effect but is situational (you're realistically not going to see more than 2 in a game) and has requirements to set up. MoM provides an even stronger effect, so it should be more niche and harder to achieve.
-
During the last Q&A stream they mentioned that DS seems to be in a fine spot and that they're not looking to change it atm iirc
Which I kind of agree to. When I'm playing killer DS only affects me when I deserve to be affected by it, and as Survivor it can be a godsend (especially during rank reset :^). I think it's fine the way it is.
-
@twistedmonkey said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/533714#Comment_533714
Why not? Asymmetrical just means the two sides are not of equal strength in essense which is true in this game but it's dependant on each players skill and knowledge as it's a game.
The finer points are up to interpretation but not all asymmetrical games have to follow the 1 is so much stronger than those they verse so it's a massacre, it's just what some people think it should be.
People are just delusional if they think anyone would play (or make) a game where one side is overwhelmingly stronger than the other.
Asymmetrical means just the way the gameplay goes. Two teams against each other with a different number of players. Anything beyond that is just people having wet dreams of power.