gendoss
gendoss
About
- Username
- gendoss
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,098
- Last Active
Comments
-
It's pretty much the biggest flaw with this game. It literally gives me an incentive to lose cuz I don't actually know or care what my invisible MMR rank is.
-
@ChiSoxFan11 said:
This thread truly has everything that makes this forum ... err ... what it is.
-- People claiming the game is horribly killer-sided.
-- People claiming the game is horribly survivor-sided.
-- People using incomplete data/statistics to justify their points
-- People using outdated or out of context data/statistics to justify their points
-- People using well-known content creators videos out of context (with a cameo by one of those to clarify what they actually said)
-- People using the experiences of one of the best players in the world and claiming that represents the overall experience of the average player (FWIW, no one has posted a link to a different 2 hour long video of that same player, running meta perks in the middle of sweating to do win streaks in a number of those matches -- the title of THAT video is "2 hours of {famous streamer name] getting destroyed", which proves about as much as the other video being referenced in this thread does for some of the claims).
-- People using hyperbole and exaggeration
-- People flat-out making false statements
-- People who can't see there's two reasonable sides of this debate with solid points to be made on each, or that there's two both-important roles for the game to be successful, but instead focus only on their own -- and therefore, those are the same people unwilling to see the forest for the trees.
But at least it's been ... entertaining?
ETA: I forgot to mention that some good points have been brought up in this lengthy discussion, so I don't want to come across as negative. For those people who have made those points, kudos to you.
I was not expecting the thread to blow up as much as it did but I'm honestly glad. There were some nice discussions that came out of it but also the typical hate mail that was really fierce this time around.
-
@Verstenenaghtedral said:
I would rather kill myself than see another insane survivor buff.
Bruh.
-
@Mandy said:
There's no set time, we've said anything from 6 months up
Is it true that some outfits will never make it to the store?
-
I mean if Scorpion could theoretically beat Shao Kahn he could obliterate Feng Min in a millisecond. I don't know why he would walk at a brisk pace and slap the survivors a couple times when he could just kill them in one punch.
-
@LoneSlinger said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2741591#Comment_2741591
I mean you also have to consider dcs affect kill rates
Those hackers that play pig and everyone spawns in with traps on their heads that insta pop affect kill rates
People that purposely troll after their team mates farm them affect kill rates
Killers that let the last one go after two dcs affect kill rates
Challenges for both killers and survivors affect kill rates
Again I'm restating what the other guy said that we can't take kill rates at face value
Deathslinger definitely didn't have a high kill rate yet for some reason was nerfed regardless
I believe you can (mostly) take kill rates at face value because that's what the game is. It is objectively true that in (old) red ranks Freddy had a 75% kill rate be it for DCs, legit kills, farms, trolling survivors, whatever. If going against Freddy made survivors DC well that's a problem, me being a survivor in red ranks meant that I only had a 25% chance of actually escaping and that's a huge problem.
Furthermore, it's a video game and people compete to win, there is an incentive to actually play the game as dirty as you can so I don't see trolling and farming as a good excuse to discredit or disregard the kill rate. If there was a 1v1 fighting game where one character had a 75% win rate that would be a huge issue and nobody would say "well the stats don't take into account trolls and DCs so we shouldn't rely on it". It doesn't matter, the stats are legitimate averages of results and it's unbalanced.
-
Hillbilly and Huntress. Both are similarly designed but for different purposes.
Hillbilly is super fast and can insta down but he has to charge up his chainsaw and has a reasonable counter. He also takes a lot of skill and is a deep character that is rewarding but very balanced.
Pretty much the same thing with Huntress. She's not fast but she has map control with range and can hit over pallets but has a long startup animation that gives survivors time to mind game, dodge, etc. She also requires a lot of skill and has reasonable counterplay.
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/304104/why-does-nobody-want-to-nerf-nurse
Being the best killer does not an OP killer make. She's not OP, and she has valid counterplay.
Let's talk about things on the survivor side that actually are OP, and don't have valid counterplay.
Nurse is not OP but Dead Hard is. Ok dude.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2741240#Comment_2741240
As for the arguments for both survivors having reasonable arguments and the killer average first off its not way over 50% the most recent killer average that we got has the highest at 59% (cenobite) which by now thanks to COH is probably lowered
Things have likely gotten better, yes, but the argument that the game was leaning too much in the survivor's favour was around even when the devs released stats that stated that the average kill rate at red ranks was at a whopping 68%.
But even the current stats strongly suggest that the balance is leaning in the killer's favour, with the exception of the Trickster and Nurse. I mean, in most MOBAs, a 59% winrate would probably net you a hotfix nerf.
for the survivor arguments yes, some have reasonable complaints but how is it that those aren't really shown but ones that complain about camping and tunneling, noed (...)
You're missing part of the argument if you're referring to camping and tunnelling complaints as 'not reasonable'. When Otz showed that a killer with a blank load-out and a 30 second late start can consistently win matches, people were quick to point the finger at the fact that he was camping and tunnelling. This, in essence, is a tacit admission that these tactics are unreasonably powerful, to be able to more than make up for such a massive handicap. @Munqaxus and @KayTwoAyy ran their own experiments in regards to camping and they found it to be a very effective strategy.
The fact that you call complaints about camping and tunnelling unreasonable in light of mounting evidence that these tactics are, on average, too strong does highlight a little bit the reason why I think these forums are part of the problem.
NOED tangentially ties into that with how it interacts with camping/tunnelling, but it also highlights how stubbornly the forums refuse to take the survivor side seriously. I think it's either @Pulsar or @GoodBoyKaru who's commonly arguing against the tired old meme of 'do bones' and explaining why exactly 'doing bones' is an ineffective strategy, and yet there's still loads of people on these forums who are genuinely convinced that it's a good idea to pre-emptively do five totems to counter NOED.
and for a while lightborne
Which I think was one killer saying the last survivors they fought complained about it and then pretty much the entire forums agreeing that those survivors were stupid.
And it's not like the killer side doesn't have its own share of dumb complaints, like that time someone was getting salty over the healing speed boost on WGLF.
You mention otz saying it's more around bad game design I agree on that however, who gets more out of it?
On average, the killer. Because the killer can do this without consuming add-ons or offerings, and without having to coordinate a team. It's way harder to set up and run a bully squad than it is to plop your behind under a hook and stare down the survivor as you wait for NOED to pop. Kind of evidenced by the fact that in his three experiments, Otz only encountered one genrush squad.
Also wanted to add, for as much as you want to say killers are oppressing survivors take a little look around and you will see the exact opposite around the forums here.
That's a pretty vague handwave and I think it's not accurate at all.
The game is fubared at the moment but no matter who tries to say otherwise until something gets done it is survivor biased and even the way the devs go about their QnAs and hearing about multiple issues with this game, they usually are shown to be biased to one side especially with this new update.
Or, as I've been saying, the devs aren't survivor biased, the forums are just killer biased. Because if the average kill rate is still over 50% and killers can consistently win with a blank loadout and 30 second late start, we might be wrong about our perception of balance and the devs might have some insights we don't.
Bravo. This is genuinely the best post I've seen in a very long time on the forums.
-
@Dino7281 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2741300#Comment_2741300
LOL, what strong killer stuff?
First of all, red ranks were RNG anyway, it doesn't mean high skill.
Freddy got nerfed to oblivion. CoH is meta, validation is here, SBMM is a thing. It would be way lower now.
Well Twins, Trickster, Pinhead, and Artist all got released.
Perks like Starstruck, Deadlock, Plaything, Lethal Pursuer, Grim Embrace, and Pentimento came out.
CoH is overrated. It's strong but not OP by any means
SBMM also apparently doesn't ever work and a lot of people cry out that the old system was even better, so that's a rough argument.
-
@CyberDragoon656 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2741278#Comment_2741278
And that would be? ( % wise)
It's old but only by about a year. There's been a ton of really strong killer stuff added so I would think it's around the same now.
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2741272#Comment_2741272
They've literally said their target killrate was 60% average. Which every single killer fell below average-wise when counting the entire playerbase, which is what actually matters to them. They don't want to balance around just specifically one group because that leaves the others in the dust lmao. Maybe actually pay attention.
Where did they say that? They've always said they aim for 50%.
-
@CyberDragoon656 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2741257#Comment_2741257
It's the most recent one either way until we get a new one from BHVR this is all we got officially also not every has all perks or plays this as their job why should all skill brackets not be factored in that's why we have a perk pile with 2-3 perks that tank hits.
Because when you take a step back and look at the kill rate of players who are somewhat experienced (red ranks), it becomes a lot more devastating.
-
@SuzuKR said:
Devs don't like posting stats because they know morons are going to take it out of context in one direction or another.
I hear this all the time, "taking stats out of context". How is that relevant to this at all? Because literally the point is that killers win more often than not. Unless you're saying the stats are faked it pretty much proves that killers win more and that's all I care about. Stop making stuff up that discredits the stats.
-
@CyberDragoon656 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2741240#Comment_2741240
Also here's the image of the killer %
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/7KH70YHJ1LNF/3l9r0mviq2s71.png
Also seeing this again reminds me including COH look at who got nerfed in the mid patch then come back here and try to explain why on earth would they do this.
Bruh this has been sent so many times, these are for ALL ranks, even new baby players that just started (which is the majority of players in this game).
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740721#Comment_2740721
Oh, yeah, my bad. I am just so used to reading survivor sided and it is quite late over here. I totally got it backwards!
I get it. However Scott mentioned to me that he doesn't think the game is generally killer sided so I'm trying to leave him out of it lol
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740710#Comment_2740710
But he got a 3k average during his experiment. Didn't he?
Yes he did. That's why the title of this thread says "killer sided". Good killers will win more and average killers will tie. There are enough facts and statistics to prove that the game is generally killer sided.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740701#Comment_2740701
LOS blocking isn't a counter....? Reading how long she's holding her first blink to judge distance on if you should double back or not isn't a counter...? The notion that "this is all survivors have !" is non sense. If you can break LOS well enough and mix it up between double back and holding W after the LOS block. You'll have no issue with her
Try playing her some and figure out what's strong against her.
A good enough Nurse can predict you/track you through other means than sight. There exist sounds and a constant speed of survivors that she can use to accurately predict where you'll be pretty much every time.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
Huh? Didn't Otz and Scott JUST advocate for the opposite?
Well to quote Otz from yesterday: "a Killer can get a ~2k average with a huge handicap if they are willing to play as dirty as you can."
So essentially he's saying the game is balanced if you play dirty which most killers should do anyway.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
Lol "killer sided" Yea right. Moving along before I hurt my sides laughing at this.
Maybe it's time to actually critically think about the balance of this game for once.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/304104/why-does-nobody-want-to-nerf-nurse
Because she is balanced to 99 % of nurse users who can barely use her...?
Maybe try playing her and learn what's effective against her. Just because you can't loop her in a traditional sense or just mindless hold W and throw pallets. Does not mean she doesn't have counter.
All survivors have are pallets, windows, and holding W, and she counters all of them.
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740678#Comment_2740678
Which is why competitive preselects the map so it's not one-sided for either side. For reference, her competitive map is Coal Tower. That is what it takes to have an even match against heavily restricted survivors. Also, nothing is ever unbeatable in this game. People are not perfect. Even on a map like Midwich, you just have to make the right read enough times. There is a reason she consistently averages out to 2 kills/2 escapes against even skill matchups.
Well we're not talking about balancing her at the top level of play. They clearly don't balance for the top level they try to do it more towards the average skill level which Nurse is way too strong for. I'm not necessarily saying they need to go out and nerf her especially because she has the lowest kill rate I'm just wondering why the community gives her a pass. And I don't think it's because she's "balanced" or the most "well designed" killer.
-
@SuzuKR said:
She's the best designed killer in the game because she is not limited mechanically. Chases are mindgames of who can make or fake the better read on the next action one takes (or doesn't). It's not tile-dependent/not a predetermined chase just because it's a strong or weak tile. At most for a dead zone, she hits you the same way any other killer would. But unique to Nurse is that you can also evade her in dead zones because of how her ability and chase works. This makes chases as and against Nurse the epitome of skill.
I have an issue with this because there are legitimately unbeatable situations with her. She has a 100/0 matchup on Midwich meaning that she can literally kill every survivor faster than they can finish every single gen especially with a perk like Starstruck. She is actually so incredibly quick and negates pallets, windows, AND the hold w meta. I don't think she's balanced by any stretch of the imagination.
-
@CyberDragoon656 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740653#Comment_2740653
How about the fact that no one can say that killer can be played without camping and tunneling along with sweaty perks and techniques now?
Maybe the fact that certain killers don't see much play or any at all now such as deathslinger, twins and trapper might be evident enough for you along with the fact that most people say that the only top tier killers are nurse and blight which have simular kits factors into that.
What about the fact that if you read and look at how people use survivor perks including using an anti tunneling perk in a way that encourages it, a distancing perk used to tank i frames and a healing perk that stacks with medkits to allow 2 sec healing times.
The fact that people using tournaments is also wrong cause it's much like saying TF2 tournaments are all skill-based even though the game has so much RNG and some weapons (Much like DBD perks) are busted or have broken tactics and need to be looked at.
The evidence is there and taking one area of the game as evidence shows how laughable the idea that anyone can say the game is killer based when it's not true at all.
Ok so when I say that the game isn't as survivor sided as people say it is I'm including camping and tunneling. Why does it matter if killers have to camp and tunnel it's part of the game and it's what helps them catch up. Honestly I don't believe you only need top tier killers to win, there are a lot of killers that are great that nobody talks about like Hillbilly and Twins.
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740660#Comment_2740660
You're forgetting:
Haunted Ground
Surge (Jolt)
Make Your Choice
Sloppy Butcher
Starstruck
All of which are perks that range from okay to good on her.
True. That would be a pretty good balance change that wouldn't rock the boat too much.
-
@IlliterateGenocide said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740530#Comment_2740530
Making her post blink a "special attack" wouldn't kill her but it would ruin some fun
I mean that wouldn't do very much at all. It would stop STBFL, NOED, and Devour, that's all that's worthwhile.
-
@ChurchofPig said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740600#Comment_2740600
Would I call them fixing DH annoying? Yes. Would I call it a buff? No.
Agreed. I hated how people called it a buff.
-
@CyberDragoon656 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740636#Comment_2740636
It is an actual balance or SBMM bullshit mainly however it is still survivor sided because if you look at the toolkits and the fact that one side lives and dies by the perks and items while the other has perks,base kit, and addons to factor in its easy to tell that as of right now it is survivor sided.
When you only have 2 killers that are Viable in every skill bracket along with how easy survivor second chance perks can be for lack of a better work exploited it's no wonder people think this way as well.
What evidence do you have that the game is truly survivor sided? Even tournaments that have no restrictions on them come out to being balanced (slightly killer sided but negligible). Personally I have hardly seen any stats or evidence to show that the game really is survivor sided outside of people just saying that it is based on their own experience which is never a good thing to go off of.
-
@CyberDragoon656 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740582#Comment_2740582
Im leaning more in the SBMM is bullshit camp cause seeing how some people play and still win kinda defeats the whole purpose of it being skill and more it being that they got good RNG
Well if that's the case then people still need to admit the game is not as survivor sided as it's made out to be, be it for actual balance or SBMM #########.
-
@Pulsar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740526#Comment_2740526
You know, the token system that limits her Blinks.
She used to be more ridiculous.
Oh yeah, the 5 blink nurse?
-
What cooldown?
-
Probably Alma from F.E.A.R.
-
It could have also been for the achievement to cage 30 survivors or something like that.
-
Probably A tier. He's very anti loop.
-
Hex: Plaything is a good stealth perk for basically everybody.
-
I personally think the extra 1s decrease wiggle speed is great. I think wiggling has needed to be slightly buffed for a while.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739821#Comment_2739821
If good killers can already deal with SWF for the most part, then killers don't even need buffed. Only survivors.
In a random match, the killer shouldn't win as easy as they do.
Well I guess I'm not even as radical as you then lol
-
The person who DS'd you even a minute after could not have progressed the game. They didn't touch a generator so I don't know what your problem with that is.
-
I like how somebody asks for advice on how to play a killer but then you get a ton of people that say "DON'T PLAY HIM HE GOT NERFED HE SUCKS NOW YOU WASTED YOUR MONEY." It's really sad people can't let other people enjoy a character.
-
@ChurchofPig said:
https://twitter.com/OtzdarvaYT/status/1479461895606255618?s=20
Hmmmmm, this post is from yesterday and reading it, it doesn't sound like he's saying it's killer sided. It just says that killers can do well if they play really really sweaty/dirty/whatever you want to call it.
Also he said in his latest video when he was talking about the game after his 3 little experiments that he thought the game was balanced. So where did you hear that he said the game was killer sided because he didn't. Or did you skip the first half of the tweet/go deaf watching his videos at the parts where he didn't say the game leans towards killers?
Well he's talking about purely from a game mechanic standpoint. In actuality the game isn't as balanced as it seems. Also most everybody on the forums believe the game is survivor sided which according to this tweet Otz himself doesn't believe.
I do admit I probably worded the title a bit badly. I meant it more as "not as survivor sided as it seems" than straight up killer sided.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739291#Comment_2739291
Well, it is not fair to balance the game for high experience survivors all working together, but not expecting killers to git gud like Otz. I think this is how the game is overall killer sided now. Way more expected from survivors to win.
Well I don't think we should balance the game around swf. We should buff solo survivors and then buff killers accordingly. All I'm saying is that generally killers are more well off than survivors and there's a lot of evidence and firsthand accounts to prove it.
-
@ReikoMori said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739784#Comment_2739784
Do you understand how statistics work? That's not a dig, I'm legitimately wondering because this isn't necessarily the smoking gun you think it is.
Freddy's win rate in high ranks is higher in relation to the amount of people who play him. If not many red ranks play Fredboi his stats percentages will be higher as there isn't enough players to drag down the average with losses. Nurse and Blight by contrast have substantially lower win rates, but substantially higher pick rates. They're both considered the best killers which draws more players to them which in turn drags their stats down overall.
Well that's half true. What you said isn't incorrect but the bigger deal is that Freddy is easy to play and is overtuned but Nurse is very hard to play. Anybody can pick up Freddy and get instant value by using snares and being able to teleport to any gen he wants with a click of a button. Nurse is very micro and needs a lot of practice to get good at.
We're obviously ignoring the weird things with the stats like Nurse being last place because there are explanations for that. But the stats don't lie, in the old ranking system Freddy really did have a 75% kill rate and there's no denying that.
-
@ReikoMori said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739778#Comment_2739778
What does it really matter how that data shakes out? What does that have to do with the fact that you've been told directly by one of the people you referenced that your take is way off base?
Moving the goal post won't give you anymore validity to your argument.
Because I'm asking a question. It's a discussion not an argument winning contest.
-
@RainehDaze said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739778#Comment_2739778
Filter by active players.
Well the current stats we have aren't filtered by active players. The best stats we had were the old ones filtered by red ranks because those are players who have at least like 100 hours.
-
@Raccoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739765#Comment_2739765
You realize that the game has had tons of free weekends, has been included in various humble bundles/fanatical deals. etc?
Anyone that logs into the game 1x contributes to these statistics.
There are literally tens of thousands of 'dead' accounts out there that most likely have 0-1 achievements completed - It's the same reason people say certain 'impossible' achievements are nowhere near as hard to obtain as the percentages say (I have most of them, I'm booty).
Yes, that's my point. The point is that most of the players are taken up by new players who will probably drop the game in a week, so how do you get the average player that isn't skewed towards the bottom?
-
@AngyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739643#Comment_2739643
You do realize the average is the average of ALL PLAYERS playing Killer? Not just the ones you want to count? Hence 'average'. Not 'Average of the best players'.
in every game ever the actual average player is heavily skewed towards the bottom. For example only 54% of all players have the achievement to level up a character to 10.
So when anybody says the "average" player they don't mean the 50% of players that have never leveled up a character to 10, they mean an average level of skill, more towards the middle. It wouldn't make much sense to include ALL players because you'd be talking about babies.
-
@ScottJund said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739635#Comment_2739635
It is but only for a handful of killers. If we are comparing averages, then no, survivor is objectively stronger.
So then why do you think there are certain stats that show an advantage to killer? Is it really because most survivors are bad, cuz that doesn't seem like a very likely answer to me. It would be hard to say that most killers are decent and most survivors are just bad, there's gotta be something else.
-
What country/area of the world do you play from? I hardly hear people getting disconnected often in my area.
-
@Gamedozer7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2739643#Comment_2739643
It's all player your right new,high level and mid thats how average works they balance out to make an average. How do you assume the average player is high skill level?
No, because there are more new players and people who have barely played the game. It skews way more towards the lower end than the higher end.