hermitkermit
hermitkermit
About
- Username
- hermitkermit
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,625
- Last Active
Comments
-
I’m really cautiously optimistic about it. For me, It definitely depends on how the system will detect it and things like that. It does feel a bit like treating the symptoms and not the cause, similar to gutting skull merchant without tweaking any of the reasons that people found frustrating/difficult. I dont want another SM situation. The fact that she is still in the gutter is really upsetting and unfair for her mains. But yeah, for the most part I’m excited to see what we have in store!
-
@CautionaryMary said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3891123#Comment_3891123
Oh sure, no problem! In reality, you should thank @Nun_So_Vile because I more than likely wasn't going to upload the video today! Haha.
I was probably going to do a comedy video or something along those lines as I do daily chase videos anyways. I'm glad the video helped and hopefully it helps others as well. 🤗❤️
Haha, well I'm grateful for @Nun_So_Vile , and you as well then! See you in the fog guys <3 glnm
(also congrats on being full time in university! I wish you luck! cheering you on 🎉)
-
@HeroLives said:
I personally think Dwight is the cutest babygirl and immensely saddened he didn’t even make this list. He’s the prettiest girl, and for this reason the creator of this tier list deserves jail immediately.
I second this! Dwight is the prettiest girl at the party. And I will forever be waiting for a Dwaid cosmetic. (Dwight + Maid)
-
@CautionaryMary said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3890985#Comment_3890985
If you want a visual representation of how to counter Knock Out, you can see it here.
I'll obviously edit in tips and strategies into the description box when I have the time (I'm a full time university student on my end).
But here is the video:
https://youtu.be/z-wgrS0jcVY?si=iDJ58doszN2WYhTd
I just uploaded it, obviously have to redo the thumbnail and everything tomorrow (I reached my limit for thumbnails sadly).
I find it helps to see and visualize these things versus explaining over text, hopefully this video helps highlight that a Knock Out killer can easily be thwarted even in soloq, as this video is a duo queued session.
Just gotta take note of where the killer comes from, move from the initial spot, and put the killer in a dilemma to drop or hook you. 😊
Hey, thanks so much! I've just subbed to your channel as well, happy to support.
Yeah, seeing it in real time in a game really helps. I feel a little embarassed that I have never thought to do that myself lol. I haven't encountered knockout in awhile, but with the possible upcoming changes with slugging who knows if there will be an uptick. In any case, I'm thankful for the tip. 🤗
-
I love being a support in Solo. (It's also always the role I like in 2v8). I understand what you mean about the stealthy survivor as being considered "hated", but I do strongly feel that that kind of mentality is quite unfair and I hope nobody has made you feel shame for playing that way.
You wouldn't bring a perk that you're terrible with, so why would you play in a playstyle you're terrible with, you know? I would much rather someone hide successfully and be able to crank out gens or go for unhooks rather than someone that goes out of their way to get into a chase that burns through resources and goes down within 15 seconds. The best player you could be is when you work to your strengths.
I like to run empathy alot as well, so if I notice that a teammate of mine is on dead hook and I have a hook to spare, I will take a body block and a down for it. It can be really helpful in the later stages of the game if one person has several hooks to spare, and usually that person is the more stealthy players.
In any case, gliyn! See you in the fog! :)
-
@CautionaryMary said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3890985#Comment_3890985
I'm sorry to hear that you've had that experience when it comes to the Boons. I find that when I notice people are having Knock Out, I will ultimately push myself towards going into a locker. I actually ended up getting a 4 man out against a slugging Singularity because I would force him to hook me.
It's either you drop me and get no Knock Out value or you hook me getting no Knock Out value. The problem is, is that it makes a survivor have to notice it first, get picked up (however long that takes), and then utilize the locker which the killer can just set you down to bleed you out anyways.
As I've said, with the rise of Knock Out and blindness related builds (not add-ons) more people will opt to play SWF due to the fact that you can undermine these builds with simple communication. Just remember for next time, just try to put yourself into a locker and if you're slugged — what I like to do is to crawl away from my starting position and hope that someone finds me, at least that is how I played when I played soloq.
@Nun_So_Vile , I see the variety with those builds. It's kinda crazy that you made a whole build based around blindness but most of the time I just see Knock Out by itself. 😂 Those are some creative builds and I can see that you put a lot of time into creating them.
Do you typically use those types of builds or do you go for the simplicity of just using Knock Out? I would think that most killers opt for Knock Out because it's more generic to use and can easily give value once a survivor is down compared to simply hitting a survivor with a basic attack.
But as we've mentioned and we both agree that Hexes are generally really hard to get value from unless you're running a full totem defense build -- but even then they can be deleted from the match as a whole! I remember going against this Pinhead with Thrill of the Hunt, Devour Hope, Pentimento, and Undying (I think?) and my SWF and I destroyed his build by about 3 gens left causing him to be a perkless Pinhead. But at the same time, these types of builds are very strong towards soloq as obviously they don't have the necessary resources to combat these otherwise strong builds. 😅
Thank you for that tip! I really appreciate it. I'll definitely try and keep that in mind.<3
-
@CautionaryMary said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3890977#Comment_3890977
Yeah, I see your perspective. I do hope that with the upcoming changes especially with the surrender mechanic being implemented that Knock Out will be monitored and adjusted accordingly.
As it stands now, it's a pub stomper for people unless they equip anti-slugging builds but Knock Out is such a niche perk because it has a low pick rate from what I understand.
But the reason why we're getting a surrender mechanic is due in fact to Knock Out's pressure on soloq and people complaining about it. Especially with people posting pictures of four man bleedouts via the forums (I'm sure it has been posted here) or on the official Reddit subpage.
I do firmly think it's strong against soloq versus obviously their counterpart SWF. If anything you can just simply put a timer on Knock Out and leave Third Seal for perma-blindness, but again - it just impacts soloq drastically in a way due to lack of information being withheld.
This is a bit random but I remember strongly (as one does with super positive or negative experiences) a match I had on Coldwind in solo against a ghost face who ran a full slugging build, and I actually did have exponential. The problem was he would consistently snuff it out, as he would always be able to tell where it was easily because anyone slugged would crawl towards it. I fought to keep that boon up 4 times before I ended up bleeding out. As did the rest of the team.
I remember feeling so grateful I had it equipped, but then it didn’t end up mattering in the end and it just felt extra bad because I did the thing everyone always says you’re supposed to do lol. Unlucky.But yeah, I’m very curious to see how knockout and slugging in general will be adjusted in phase 1/2. Hopefully it will be a balanced and fair change for both roles.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3890087#Comment_3890087
I see where you're coming from, and it's an interesting perspective, but the biggest difference is that the tools available to survivors are basekit for the entirety of the playerbase. Nurse and Blight are very specifically a balance problem for those very specific killers and isn't a basekit problem for all of the killer roster. Survivors' potential and its problems applies to the entire side. Nurse\Blight potential and their problems are very specifically them and not a problem with killer balance as a whole.
Both roles have the basekit tools needed to win.
Survivors: Gens, use pallets, and loop. All requiring a level of skill (knowing safe pallets, looping tiles, timing stuns, knowing safe gens vs unsafe, not 3 genning etc.)
Killers: Injure/down, use powers, kick gens, and kill. All requiring a level of skill (chase management, zoning, gen defense, knowledge of power strengths and weakness etc.)
Perks, maps, stronger killers, or 4-man SWF tilt the balance but they do not define it. You still need skill to win. These tools make things easier but don't replace fundamental gameplay knowledge and skill.
A cracked Nurse or Blight isnt' a general survivor issue just like a cracked 4-man isn't a general killer issue. Both are outliers, proven statistically. (According to the stats that BHVR has released, they may have changed but all we can go off from is what they've given us, and I'm all for consistently updated stats to better understand the state of the game)
Nurse has a 4% pickrate, a 55% killrate. Blight has a 4% pickrate, a 59% killrate.
4-Man has a 3-6% occurance, an average escape rate of 43.09% and for high MMR 48.30%
Both outliers, and neither of which grants a 100% winrate.
When we look at killer balance as a whole, they have an average of 58.50% which is slightly below the goal of 60% which should be met, but it also proves that all killers are performing well, and they don't need to be a Blight or Nurse to do it. You don't need to rely on being a Blight or Nurse to win more than you lose, but even if you are in a top MMR 4 man SWF, you will still lose more than you win, and that is intended by design.
I can't agree with applying different standards to each role by trying to dismiss the skill required to make it there. If the stats showed that it was way more common then that would imply it's much easier to accomplish and my opinion would change, but that's not the case. My perspective is shaped by the evidence that's been presented. My perspective is subject to change, because evidence is subject to change, but I personally can't just willfully ignore the evidence.
-
@xGodSendDeath said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3890087#Comment_3890087
People call for nerfs for Blight and Nurse ALL THE TIME despite the fact that the vast majority of players, especially on console, has no ability to ever play them to the level where they're actually problematic. In contrast, calling for nerfs for 4-man SWF is met with cries of "you can't punish people playing with friends!!! You'll kill the game!!!"
Playing in a 4-man SWF to get to a level where they're a significant problem for the balance of the game is considerably easier than trying to become a console giga Blight or something. You just need to get on comms with 3 other people, run a whole bunch of 2nd chance perks, communicate basic stuff like where the killer is and where the gen that's regressing is at, hold w and pre drop. That's it. It doesn't take a lot and you will wipe 90% of the killer roster. You can even make it easier by throwing on an Eyrie or Badham offering.
This feels like an oversimplification of the strength of a 4-Man by downplaying the skill that is required to do it successfully. People constantly call for Nurse and Blight nerfs , and many also call for SWF nerfs or to be removed from the game entirely, despite both of which, having most players not being skilled enough to play them to that point. The average SWF is nowhere near the level where they wipe "90% of the killer roster" and that is based on evidence, not my opinion. Just because something is possible does't mean it is common, and the stats show that it is not common.
"Being in a 4-Man" and "being in a 4-Man that stomps high tier killers" are completely different things. Just hopping on comms doesn't automatically mean you're coordinated, nor does it mean you have the mechanical skill, game knowledge or fundamentals honed to dismantle all killers. Much in the same way that playing Nurse or Blight is also not a magical win button either. There's a huge skill difference bewteen a casual SWF, and a top-tier SWF, it has been statistically proven. Just like there's a huge difference between a Blight on a winstreak, and a casual one.
Map offerings are not exclusive to survivors or 4-mans, Killers can also bring them, so I don't really see how that's relevant because maps can be "abused" by both roles.
We know from Stats that SWFS win more than solos, but it is not an automatic stomp, even when looking at the very best players. They are not out performing killers, which is a good thing. I am always looking for more perspectives, to help understand or to learn, but this feels like asking me to ignore actual statistical evidence and data and unfortunately I am not wired that way. If the stats said something different then my opinions would absolutely change, because that's what being open minded is about, but to willfully ignore what has been proven doesn't make sense to me even if it's a stat I may not like.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3890071#Comment_3890071
"Learning counters to 38 killers, plus all perks, add-ons, and playstyles, is a trial-by-fire experience."
100% agree. Survivors have a LOOOOOOOOT to learn - a massive amount to learn - in order to reliably succeed on the regular. Putting time into that will absolutely show positive results, but there isn't a lot of people with that much patience or time. There's a reason that a lot of the community says that 500 hours of DBD means you are no longer a "beginner". While that seems "the accepted truth" in DBD, putting that logic vs other games…the reality of it is just bonkers…most people don't even PLAY games for 500+ hours, ha. The point though is, by design, the survivors literally have the advantage over the killers (talking SWF here considering the game is balanced around SWF), but the amount of experience it takes to reliably do that isn't exactly fair….scratch that…isn't remotely fair for the casual playerbase (which is why BHVR tends to balance around the average player and not vs the experienced players). That's why so many high tier players who play killer complain, but their requests go ignored - BHVR isn't balancing around high tier play - they are balancing around the average player. So it's true that survivors absolutely have all the tools to just stomp killers, but it's unrealistic to expect the average player to ever get enough experience on survivor to ever reach that point. As for players who excel at DBD and move beyond the average player, they start falling into broken balance territory which won't be changed to avoid hurting the average player base. So generally, it's a skill issue, sure, but the amount of time it takes to invest to overcome killers on the regular most players simply either aren't willing or aren't able to apply. Again, 500 hours is becoming "decent" at the game…a claim that would be ridiculous in 99% of the games out there but rings true in DBD.
"I don't agree with the claim that survivors can be 'unbeatable,' to then immediately contradict it by admitting that Nurse and Blight exist and are exceptions to that very rule."
There are always exceptions to rules, that's what makes them exceptions. There's also the phrase of the exception that proves the rule.
"To be honest, the claim that survivors
just need to put in effort to windoes rub me the wrong way as I feel it ignores a major disparity: killers have multiple ways to practice."I seriously feel that survivors should have the ability to do killer bot matches to practice outside of the tutorial. It'd be awesome if BHVR came out with some ingame scenarios on looping and such - even if they outsourced it to volunteer players to put it together for them.
"Every kind of statistical evidence, along with both my personal experience, contradicts the idea that killers always lack the tools to succeed while survivors always have them. Survivors and killers
bothrequire skill, experience, and game knowledge to perform well."You have have misunderstood this point. I'm talking about if you assume 100% skill, knowledge, and experience, and both teams have that, the SWF has the clear advantage over an equal level killer. Teamwork and the tools survivors have simply trump the majority of killers (nurse\blight being the exception). The trick is having that skill, knowledge, and experience…which as I mentioned the average player will not. I'm just saying design-wise, survivors do have the upper-hand. The rest is up to the players to utilize those tools appropriately to succeed. Some are crazy good at it - some dedicated SWFs have 500+ wins in a row.
I appreciate the well mannered discussion. Nice to see on the forum - even if we don't see eye to eye. Cheers!
Edit - While I claim to be a killer main, my playtime is more like 60% killer 40% survivor, and over the past 2 months, I've only played survivor.
First off, I appreciate the civil tone of your responses! It's refreshing to have a discussion without condescension or hostility. :)
I think one of the main issues I have with understanding where you're truly coming from, is regarding the points about SWF. From your posts, it seems you view high-tier SWFs as the baseline for survivor strength rather than an outlier. You do acknowledge that Nurse and Blight are exceptions to the rule, yet don’t seem to extend that same logic to top-tier SWFs. My issue with this is that I can make the exact same argument in reverse: If an experienced SWF can "stomp" killers using their tools and coordination, then an experienced Nurse or Blight can do the same. Both are outliers, not the standard experience.
Statistically, high-level SWFs win about 8% more than solo survivors, but they still remain under a 50% win rate even in the top 5% of players. That suggests they are far from an instant win button and are less common overall. To me, these highly skilled SWFs are the survivor equivalent of a strong Nurse or Blight player, both are extreme ends of the skill spectrum. That's why I struggle to follow when conversations use top SWFs as proof of survivor strength while excluding Nurse and Blight as proof of killer strength, and are only considered as exceptions. If feels like a double standard. In my opinion, if we’re going to use SWF success as proof of survivor potential, then we need to do the same with Nurse and Blight success for killers.
I'm happy we agree with the need for more survivor-side tools for learning/practice, like killer bot matches or tutorials for both roles. The knowledge gap between roles is massive, and it’s only growing with every update. I feel It’s unrealistic for new players to enter the game as Solo and perform well, when the learning curve is so much steeper than for a killer playing a single character, simply due to the amount of control that you do and don't have between the two. I would like SoloQ to have better incentives compared to SWF, especially as the expectations for survivor performance and knowledge keep increasing, thus making the standards for perfoming well higher and higher.I think it's better for the game as a whole, and can help with many frustrations for both roles. (less DC's please!)
Your opinion on, "100% skill, knowledge, and experience," SWF has the clear advantage (excluding Blight and Nurse) feels contradictory, due to what I've already mentioned before. If we’re excluding Blight and Nurse because they’re exceptions, why isn’t a fully optimized SWF with 100% knowledge, skill, and experience considered an exception too? Why is one removed from the equation while the other is used to define the rule? Despite them both being statistically uncommon?
Overall, I think we agree on quite a few things and we may be on opposite opinions of others, but I’ve enjoyed hearing your thoughts. For clarity, I will explain as well that I am not entirely sure where I stand on SWF or Blight/Nurse. It feels like you need both because the other exists, and if you took one away then the other would completley dominate. And at the same time, it's because they exist that it holds back buffs or perks etc. that would greatly benefit the majoirty. Maybe some kind of ranked mode where only certain perks, killers, items, and add-ons etc. can be used,? And those same killers, items, perks, add-ons etc. are restricted from the standard mode? I'm not entirely sure. But I agree that in top tier play, both have potential to be unfair and unfun.
(I really have enjoyed this back and forth and I mean no disrespect to you or your opinions and if any of my points feel that way please know it's not my intent, sometimes tone can be tricky in text format) 🙈
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889647#Comment_3889647
I believe the statement generally reflects that at the core, survivors have all the tools available to them to always succeed and killers do not. True, nobody plays perfectly, but survivors have the capability of being unbeatable, while killers inherently do not. In other words, if a survivor just simply cannot win, it's because they need to improve on their skillsets provided to them, not because it's impossible to win. Regardless, I do feel that nurse\blight is an exception to this - I genuinely do think they are fundamentally broken and unfair towards survivors at all levels. That is just my opinion, however. Beyond that, I feel that a lot of survivor complains about killers being impossible to beat comes down to just needing more experience. I used to get my butt HANDED to be as a survivor until I went out of my way to truly learn the game - that opened a LOT of possibilities and my success rate shot up after I started mastering looping, check spots, seeing hook states as a resource, and so on instead of just seeing "gen" as "the" gameplay. I just feel that many in the community don't want to make that effort. Just in the thread recently, I made the comment that certain perks have counters that can be used to overcome them, and boy did the community hate that idea - just downvotes upon downvotes. Survivors seriously have a lot of power - if one works on practicing all the tools made available to them, their gameplay would improve significantly.
I admit I do have some trouble trying to follow some of the reasoning. The idea that survivors have all the tools to succeed while killers inherently do not is simply not supported by evidence. I truly believe if that were true, we wouldn’t see killers achieve 1000+ winstreaks, nor do I think we would see them win in matches where they play 100% perkless and only rely on the killers built in power. I think both roles are designed with the tools they need for a chance of winning. (though that's not to exclude the need for improvements for diffrent factors/tools/mechanics etc. in the game)
I don't agree with the claim that survivors can be 'unbeatable,' to then immediately contradict it by admitting that Nurse and Blight exist and are exceptions to that very rule. I feel that alone disproves the idea that killers don’t have the tools to succeed, if they truly didn’t, then there wouldn’t be 'exceptions' that dominate at all levels of play. But again, statistically all killers are performing well, and that's not exclusive to those on the top of Tier lists. Every killer is statistically winning more than they lose (which is good!)
To be honest, the claim that survivors just need to put in effort to win does rub me the wrong way as I feel it ignores a major disparity: killers have multiple ways to practice. You can practice in customs or against bots with every perk in the game, and against every perk in the game regardless if you own it, and any map of your choosing. Survivors have no way to practice counterplay outside of live games. Learning counters to 38 killers, plus all perks, add-ons, and playstyles, is a trial-by-fire experience. In addition you have to learn the fundamentals of survivor, primarily looping, which is a skill and takes time and practice to be good at. Saying survivors 'just don’t want to make the effort' comes across as dismissive when killers have significantly more resources available for improvement. By that logic, should every struggling killer just play Nurse? She’s free, and shes the most powerful thing in the entire game. Why couldn't that be considered "practicing all the tools made available to them"? If you apply that standard to survivors, it should also apply to killers, but I don't agree with that because everyone has preferences and natural strengths and weaknesses.
Ultimately, we may just disagree at a fundamental level. Every kind of statistical evidence, along with both my personal experience, contradicts the idea that killers always lack the tools to succeed while survivors always have them. Survivors and killers both require skill, experience, and game knowledge to perform well. And while the game is designed with killers in favor for the power role, that (usually) doesn't diminsh the effort it takes to get those wins, nor does it (usually) diminish the effort it takes to survive in a role that is designed with intentional lower odds.
Thanks for the discussion though! Even if we don't agree I appreciate your perspective!
-
Hawkins. If i could skip a map it would be that one. Hate it both ways.
-
@ratcoffee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889596#Comment_3889596
Usually the argument goes "but killers can lose even if they didn't make any mistakes, do you think it's fair that perfect survivor play always wins but perfect killer play can still lose?" Not saying I agree with that argument, that's just generally how people reply to your point.
IMO talking about what happens with perfect play is mostly pointless. Everyone makes mistakes, nobody is perfect. Especially if someone says they played perfect in a specific loss - it feels like "not yet experienced enough, or else not yet good enough at self-analysis to recognize the mistakes" is the more likely scenario
I completely agree that arguing based on perfect play is pointless since nobody plays perfectly. My issue with the original argument wasn’t about perfection, it was about the way they framed it. Saying that 'killers only win if survivors make mistakes' was presented as a negative, when in reality, the role that makes fewer mistakes should win. That’s how competition works.
I also don’t expect perfection, and I agree that it’s unrealistic to base balance discussions on that. But if someone’s argument is that 'the only way to win is to play flawlessly,' then that already says something, especially when it also implies that even if survivors do play flawlessly (which is impossible), they still shouldn’t win.
Beyond all this, statistics show that killers are succeeding, even when mistakes happen (which is good!). We should acknowledge that stats need nuance but every piece of non-anecdotal data we have shows that killers perform well, including in high MMR. And since nobody plays perfectly—not killers, not survivors, not even bots lol, It’s impossible to prove that a flawless killer will still lose, just like it’s impossible to prove that a flawless survivor will still lose. That’s why the argument itself doesn’t hold up because it’s based on an impossible, hypothetical standard rather than what actually happens in real games.
-
@Nomade said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889528#Comment_3889528
Yes and no.
Once survivors actually start playing well and acting like a cohesive team, the gens start getting done efficiently and survivors can keep a killer in chase for a long time unless they mess up. Even at high levels of play, mistakes happen, and im not going to pretend that they dont, but it boils down to the fact that it is 4v1. If all of the survivors on a team are good and they are all bringing the best stuff most killers wont be able to keep up unless the survivors make mistakes (which does not sound like a good position for the power role to be in) The only exceptions would be perhaps against the S tier killers.
Killers are thrown far fewer bones than are survivors as well, just another thing to consider.
Its actually a super easy thing to understand but the problem is that the entire MMR system is designed in such a way to make people think they are better than they actually are, which creates a lot of ignorance. Hell, you cant even request your MMR data from BHVR anymore. People say "I dont struggle so you shouldn't either" thinking that they are playing against really good teams when really they are mistaken. I know that im not a top skill level player, but I do watch people who are and what I am seeing and hearing from them vs what some people on here are saying proves that somthing is not right. Im far more inclined to believe what I can actually see and trust in the experts than what some random person on the forums says, no offense. It would be incredibly foolish not to.I think see what you’re saying, but there are some things I still don’t quite understand. You’re stating that at high MMR, killers only win when survivors make mistakes, but shouldn’t survivors who don’t make mistakes win? The way you’ve framed it makes it sound like survivors playing perfectly still shouldn’t be able to escape, which suggests that killers should win even when the other side plays flawlessly. That would remove any competition from the game entirely.
Being the power role doesn’t mean an automatic win, just a statistically higher chance of winning, which is already reflected in the game’s statistics which consistently show killers maintaining a strong position across all skill levels including high MMR. It’s also important to consider that if killers should never be designed/expected to lose, even at high MMR, then why is it acceptable for survivors to be designed/expected to lose at lower and average MMR? If difficulty for one side is a problem, shouldn’t it be a problem for both roles?
Also, I get being skeptical of random forum opinions, it’s good to take most things with a pinch of salt. But if personal experiences are unreliable and official stats from BHVR are to be ignored, then what standard do we use? At a certain point, if both anecdotal and statistical evidence are dismissed, the. The conversations are directionless without any kind of merit unless it’s an opinion that mirrors your own. (Not you directly I just mean in general)
-
@Nomade said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3889224#Comment_3889224
Just wait until you start playing vs survivors who you cant end a chase in 5 seconds against. Once survivors know how to loop you and how to deal with you, if they are bring the meta perks you are going to struggle hard.
I’m not the original person you’re replying to, but this point confuses me a little. Isn’t this just describing how skill-based progression works in any competitive game? As you improve and win more often, you naturally face stronger opponents—ones who know how to counter you and push you to adapt. Why is that seen as a flaw rather than a normal part of growth? The wins that got you to that point still mattered..they just lead to the next stage of challenge, which is how skill development works in any game.
If the expectation is that winning should always remain easy, then what’s the point of improving? At a certain level, you should be playing against survivors who know how to loop and use meta perks well, just like killers.That’s not a design flaw, that’s just competition.
-
@Nazzzak said:
I'm going for yes, purely because I'm getting so many older tome challenges I've been avoiding done. Pop 20 gens? Much easier in this mode lol
Yes! The “survive the trial and let others go out the exit gates while alive” I was able to get it done in one trial my 3rd or 4th match, as opposed to it taking 3 or 4 days and 20 matches each lol.
-
@UknownShredder said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3888677#Comment_3888677
I understand your point and how its sounds like a contradiction, i do not want to come of as a prick but lets just say i know how to play games on a very high level in general, i have issues okay.
Why i think he needs to be buffed is because it is so evident that other killers are far superior than Ghostface and that isnt right. Just because i manage to kill everything with it does not mean that the average player who want to come and play for fun and have a good time will.
Things that i feel would make Ghostface in line with other stronger killers is to make drop a knife basekit and possibly even Dricers license (because ghostface does not have the same map pressure as others. it should be Impossible for someone to reveal ghostface while stalking that specific person (must be leaning ) its okay if other people can do it but not the ones who are being stalked. People on hooks should not be able to reveal ghostface and people on the ground should have a 3 second timer to be able to reveal ghostface and when those dying survivors on the ground start to reveal ghostface then the killer should be notified so he can escape.Gotcha, thanks for explaining your position in a little more detail.
Personally I wouldn’t mind some buffs to Ghostface, just to make him a bit more beginner friendly. I don’t agree with everything you’ve suggested but I do think being able to reveal the survivor you’re actively chasing is strange. You just kind of have a stare down some times and it can break the immersion a bit.
Even though I don’t necessarily agree with everything I appreciate your clarity and sharing your opinion. 😊
-
There’s definitely no such thing as perfection, but that doesn’t mean we don’t strive for better. The game is always changing, which I think contributes to it feeling always imbalanced. Because new things are always being added in, there’s no control group essentially. I believe it’s because of DBDs constant changes that makes it the king of Asyms, because it offers something others can’t. But its biggest strength is also its biggest weakness, as it becomes a constant push and pull for balance where the standards shift with every new addition.
-
Just to ensure I’m understanding your position correctly, you are very successful with Ghostface and have admitted that you rarely lose any of your games regardless of who you are facing. You want buffs— not because you can’t win most of your matches with Ghostface but because you can win your matches with 5 gens remaining as Wraith?
I’m just trying to understand what you mean exactly, because from the sound of your post you’re not saying Ghostface is weak, only that it takes more skill to use him? Would you like Ghostfaces ability to be more similar to Wraith? I find when playing Wraith that one of his biggest strengths is the speed in addition to the stealth. Do you think increasing Ghostfaces speed when he is stalking is the kind of buff that would make him feel better to play?
-
I've never played As, only against, but I really enjoy facing Singus. I have certainly gotten my butt handed to me plenty of times, but most of the time it feels good because you can clearly tell the Singu is skilled. I love skillful gameplay no matter which role I'm playing, and many Singus I've faced really know their killer well and I love to see the passion. The only time I don't enjoy it is probably when Singu used to 3 Gen. But thankfully it's pretty rare I ever run into them, and since you can no longer infinitely 3 gen kick anymore, even less so.
I only wish he felt better to play. Again, I've never played as him but from those that do play him he sounds a bit clunky, and that makes me sad for those who main him. Power wise/counter wise, I really like facing him. Plus he's cute <3
-
I do it all the time. Just today I thumbed up a blight :) The devs have said I believe that they do keep track of that information. So I wouldn't be surprised if they did something with it in the future. If it ever does happen, I hope my thumbs up make peopel smile!
-
Slenderman, Poppy from Poppy's Playtime, Bendy from Bendy and the Ink Machine. Basically "Mascot Horror" is super popular right now. Anything that can be turned into plushie of some kind.
(And yes, I've seen Myers plushies and things but I'd argue that's because it's popular right now. When those movies first came out merchandise wasn't like that, more so movie posters or bloody shirts with metal font. When Scream came out I didn't see a body pillow of Ghost Face for sale….so thank goodness we have them now, take my money!!)
-
I always play the way I want others to play against myself . You know, golden rule and all that. If I can acknowledge a certain tactic is “unfun” when I go through it, I’m not going to acknowledge that it’s “unfun” and then proceed to do it myself, as in my opinion I just become part of the problem and it feels hypocritical or somewhat selfish.
So, that being said I don’t slug unless I have to (flashlights) or camp or tunnel (unless I have to as in the freshly hooked person actively gets in front of me).
Something I struggle with is probably maps. Depending on the map it can really put you at a disadvantage, and I know this goes for both killer and survivor.But map imbalance I think really sits at the core of many issues. It can lead to gens taking too long, gens taking too short, hooks being far or close, the number or quality of loops is affected as well. Better map balance would help the game as a whole, and it’s what I probably notice the most when I play killer, as it can really tilt the scales in a way that has absolutely nothing to do with my own personal skill or the skill of my opponents.
-
I’ve been pretty vocal about this topic. I think providing killer bots would help so much for practicing and learning counter play, which is only beneficial for everyone.
The fact that the list of killers with their add-ons, perks and powers gets longer and longer means the knowledge required to be somewhat competent at the survivor role is extensive. And there is no way to currently practice, unlike how killers can. They have access to every survivor perk and killer perk in the game even if they don’t own the perk themselves, and can combine it with any item or perk combo to practice against or with. Not to mention choosing which map to practice. Thats such a huge tool.
Honestly I think the information expectations for survivors is kind of steep in comparison. Not only does every killer have different counter play but their add-ons when equipped can change tweak that counter play as well, and of course killer perks in general. And there is no tutorial for each killer so you’re blindly thrown in.
It really doesn’t make sense to me why this tool isn’t made available like the other role has, and has had for awhile. Here’s hoping that will change soon!
-
@MaddieMage said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3884032#Comment_3884032
My recommendation to you is to ignore this user. They’ve been on here for days in several posts basically saying that anyone who claims an experience that they don’t agree with is a liar. They’re claiming they “proved” that what they’re saying is correct while alll they’ve done is state their own opinion but offered no evidence. They’re even calling the devs liars because they were supposed to have patched a bug but it didn’t get patched properly, the. Claimed that the devs are always lying about stuff.
Their entire engagement on here is in bad faith and revolves around “What you’re saying isn’t true and didn’t happen and that’s a fact because I said so and anyone who says it’s happening are liars.”
Either theyre a literal child just here to troll or an adult with zero emotional and social intelligence and possibly just here to troll imo.
I appreciate the advice. Once I realized that there was no real back and forth I stepped away. And I believe I did this in another discussion with a different user and you actually recommended to end that discussion as well and then I did haha
Sometimes I definitely get carried away and caught up in the spirit of discussion which can make me blind to realizing that the person I’m trying to find a common ground with—doesn’t actually want to find common ground. So I appreciate you reeling me back in.
I hate how weirdly passionate I am about this stuff lol.
-
Statistically speaking, yeah. But it’s intentional. Killers are/should be in the power role. That means that survivors will, by design, lose more than they win. Which in my opinion is good for the kind of game it is, but if you want players to be okay with being expected to lose, it should be fun. It’s not losing itself it’s how you lose that should be looked at.
-
Basically celebs in the forums and I would watch it like the super bowl 🤗🍿
There'd be so much to learn from everyone <3
-
What a great idea! You can get your lore accurate Rocket Launcher without the pain of trying to balance a rocket launcher weapon in normal gameplay. Plus I'm sure if it was attached to the Skin, people would definitely pay for it so it makes financial sense too.
One rocket to the face please 🚀😵💥
-
I saw the entity come for Duo Lingo the owl today (rip) Made me laugh.
-
@XtremeDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3883955#Comment_3883955
The point is, doing badly is your own fault. Nurse and blight are insane, theres no excuse why you should be losing, unless your a console blight, then your controls are quite limited. Also, why would they dismiss other players because of nurse and blight? Im not wven sure what you're trying to say, maybe theres a language barrier that idk abt, but that does not sound right.
The point I was making is that dismissing criticism just because some people don’t struggle isn’t a good argument. And I was using killer winstreaks as an example for that point.
DBD is a game where skill alone can only get you so far, as it heavily relies on RNG. Bots are apart of that RNG, and to a large majority of players, it's a negative one. Think of it like getting a map with poor locker distribution everytime as Dredge. Does it mean there is no chance of winning? Of course not. But your chances are now slimmer regardless of your personal skill. For a dedicated Dredge main, it may not affect them. But majority who play Dredge are not dedicated mains, so they will struggle, and the struggle is unnecessary, just like the addition of the bots.
Bots do not have to exist in 2v8, they were implemented in an effort to help with wait times which hasn't worked. That was the entire purpose of them. The addition that a large majority of players feel that bots are not good teammates, make the change feel even more unnecssary, because not only did it fail to do what it was designed to do, but it made the overall experience worse for many people.
In any case, I'll end this here. Hopefully I clarified my post for you to better understand. We can both respectfully agree to disagree, as I've said my perspective and you have said yours.
Gliyn!
-
@H2H said:
People sure have a lot of derogatory things to say about someone using a perk that only activates in the endgame (meaning they played most of the match with only 3 perks), can be eliminated before it ever activates, and which screams out its location to them.
It's not a crutch perk any more than the zillions of second-chance perks survivors use. It's a perk in a game with a perk system. Anyone saying "it's only used by bad players" or "it gets you kills you didn't earn" is just being kind of a jerk about it.I think many people felt the same way about Adrenaline.
After both Adrenalines nerf and NOEDs nerf, I feel both are in a decent spot that could either change the game dramatically or have no impact at all. There’s just so many factors involved.
-
@XtremeDBD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3883462#Comment_3883462
They don't have enough of a clue on what the problem is, so instead they're just ruling out bots as the problem to why they can't last long enough fir any meaningful progression to be made
So the argument is that everyone struggling just doesn’t understand the problem, but you do? And their experiences don’t count… because they aren’t yours?
By that same logic, should we dismiss anyone struggling with killer because some players have 1000+ win streaks with Nurse or Blight? Or struggles with Clown or Cenobite because there are win streaks in the 100+? If someone out there is succeeding, does that mean no one else’s struggles or criticisms are valid?
Bots are designed to fail skill checks. They’re better than no player at all, but ignoring the majority of criticisms just because you personally don’t have an issue with them isn’t how balance works or how changes to games are considered/made.
-
@GuineaGamer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3883610#Comment_3883610
I am not too concerned how my statement came across. I made a statement. I was not talking about anyone in particular at all. If the phrases I use illicit responses in other people, I cannot control that. The only thing I can control is my own actions or reactions.
You started by saying you didn’t understand why people disliked the mode, and when they explained, you dismissed their reasons as just ‘emotional’ because they weren’t positive like yours. But your own reason for liking the mode is emotional too.
So if emotions invalidate criticism, wouldn’t they also invalidate praise?
Either way, if you don’t care how people feel/what they think about it, thats fine, but then there is no point in starting a discussion about it, as communication is a two-way street. In any case I think it’s clear you’re not really looking for more than just agreement, and as I don’t think I fit in that category I’ll end it here so I don’t clog up your post anymore.
Gliyn!
-
@GuineaGamer said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3883531#Comment_3883531
The "feedback" I have read is what I am talking about. I said what I said and would say it again. Criticism is fine, if you leave out emotion. Once you do that it is based on emotion and not actual constructive feedback. The example you gave I would not call emotional…maybe learn the difference if you are going to have an opinion on it. I have not once said do not criticize? Where are people reading that? People see "triggered" and get triggered. LOL!
Sometimes tone can be difficult to convey over text both in writing and reading so if I’m incorrect in the interpretation of your tone, I apologize and I will try to clarify.It seems like you’re saying that criticism is only valid if it’s emotionless, but that’s not how discussion works. People can be frustrated and still provide valid feedback. One doesn’t cancel out the other. If a game mode is frustrating, that frustration is part of the feedback, not something that makes it invalid. Expressing how much you like the game mode is also feedback even though it involves emotion.
Perhaps you’re not aware of the way it comes across, but the way you’re using the word ‘triggered’ in this context is inherently dismissive. It’s not a neutral term—it’s a way to mock people for having a negative reaction, which is why so many have pushed back on it regardless if it was your intention for it to be mocking or not. As you’re not engaging with what’s actually being said; you’re just deciding that anyone who doesn’t like the mode is being too emotional to take seriously, which comes across as a way to avoid the discussion entirely if someone has a different opinion than your own.
Again, this is the way the messages are coming across. I’m not accusing you of saying these specific things or believing them, but the phrases you’re using, and the way you're dismissing feedback unless it meets your individual expectations of what you believe feedback is— comes across as intentionally dismissive or backhanded.(Also, for clarity, the example I provided wasn’t meant to show someone being emotional- it was to demonstrate how that kind of logic could be used to dismiss anything, even when it shouldn’t be. If I clarified that someone was frustrated because they got into a match with a cheater, and then voiced their frustration about wanting a fair game, that doesn’t mean their feedback about not wanting a cheater in the game because it frustrated them, isn’t valid.)
-
Hey, It's great you're enjoying the mode. I'm glad you'e having a good time!
But, respectfully, framing valid critcism as people veing "triggered" or "too emotional" comes across as very dismissive. The reality is that many players have expressed clear, reasoned concerns and criticisms they've had about the mode, and brushing all of it of as an overraction rather than actual experiences that matter, doesn't come across as having good faith nor does it add to the overall discussion.
Also, to be honest you could justify anything with that response. "This person was clearly hacking, I loaded in and they completed every gen in 2 seconds and floated around the map and I could't reach them." "It's just a game, they're having fun don't be so emotional."
It being a game doesn't mean is it immune to critcism, nor does voicing those critiques make you an emotionally triggered individual. Your opinions, just like others can completley change the game, because the game is always subject to change based upon feedback.
I'm sure the devs will appreciate hearing your praise for the mode, as positive feedback is just as important as negative.
-
@XtremeDBD said:
Again as i said in various posts of clearly inexperienced players complaining abt something thats their own fault or out of their control, the bots are not the problem, The players are. The lack of mmr in 2v8 means bad teammates. Killers also have really hard times tunneling out any survivor, since they essentially have to find them after caging. Getting found after being fully healed and sent at least 40 meters away fron both killers is simply embarrassing on your part. And correction, bots are always on gens. That is all they do, and its their intended purpose to counter dcing players while real players take on chase.
I have not seen a single attempt of tunneling once out of the 10 survivor games i played, 9 pf which i survived and majority being 6 outs or more. One match i played agaunst a wesker and legion. I had over 7 minutes of chase time between both killers, BECAUSE theres no mmr, WHICH MEANS anyone in your lobby can be any level of experience. This gamemode is survivor sided, it just keeps getting better and better for survivors, now being able to straight up REMOVE STAGES COMPLETELY FOR FREE!!! Theres no excuse why any combination of killers should be preventing a minamum of 4 outs a match, that is on you and or your teammates
It's nice that you're providing your perspective. But I have to say that dismissing other's as being simply inexperienced or implying that they may be lying about their experiences isn't very constructive, nor does it make you seem like you are speaking in genuine good faith.
Ignoring the majority of real, expressed experiences in favor of your own not only comes off as biased, but it also doesn't help improve the game. We all bring different experiences to the table and if only one perspective is considerd "valid" simply because it's your own, then how could progression or balance ever come from selective experiences as opposed to the majroity of them?
For meaningful discussions and changes, we need to consider the majority's input, not just assume that anyone who disagrees with your own personal experience is either inexperienced or unwilling to learn.
-
The ping has been really awful. Currently facing killers with 120+ and teamates with 113. I myself was pushing 99 which is not typical for me. I keep rubberbanding, which needless to say really screws up the gameplay. I'm really just trying to get the challenges done, and then I will probably put it to rest.
-
I agree that faster or longer bleed out doesn’t really discourage slugging, and would only encourage more players to rely on it because a longer/shorter bleed out doesn’t make the tactic less risky.
And frankly the mindset of the game going in this direction truly worries me.
If the overall desired scenario for a player is to completely incapacitate their opponent so their opponent can never use any perks or even walk, it raises some serious questions.
First, what incentive do players have to choose a role where they are stripped of their ability to use perks? How is the role worth playing at that point if your expectations of the game are to become essentially one-shot from being downed for up to 4min until death or until someone picks you up in which case they are downed and then you try to pick someone else up. It becomes its own gameplay loop where your main objective shifts into something that does not passively push you closer to your main winning objective, unlike your opponent.
Second, if the ideal is to have the opponents entirely incapacitated as opposed to hooked, doesn’t that make gameplay even more overly restrictive? Killer perks are now restricted to only what helps them with slugging and survivor perks are now restricted to only what counters slugging. Perk variety becomes even slimmer.
Third, the ability to bypass counterplay and entire game mechanics by simply not engaging sets a slippery slope: the game then becomes less about skillful interactions of playing around your opponents abilities and instead disables them from having any completely. The game becomes less about what you can do and more about what they can’t do.
If the goal is to avoid challenge altogether, then the spirit of competitive play is lost. A game where survivors are reduced to NPC behavior isn’t fun for anyone, and if it’s the desired outcome then it makes no sense for bots not to replace SoloQ instead. We should be rewarding dynamic, skillful play for both roles, not simply encouraging tactics that shut down options for everyone. Ultimately, relying on slugging as a win condition undermines the challenge and long-term enjoyment of the game as a whole.
That being said, here are some of my suggestions to help with slugging that have both a “carrot and a stick.”
— Incentivize hooks more. Maybe in the form of a base-kit slow down that does not activate if the same survivor is hooker consecutively. This rewards killers for going out their way to chase multiple survivors, and offers a chance at more perk variety so they don’t feel they must equip a form of slowdown as it will already be base-kit.
— Make recovery speed faster. I think that having a recovery speed increase based upon proximity of the killer to the slugged survivor would be beneficial, and I do not agree it could be abused as the killer still decides if it even activates. The farther the killer moves away from the survivor the faster the recovery. It doesn’t give you an automatic UB at the end, they still have to be picked up by someone else. But if survivors spread out, which is the proper counter to slugging, then slugging all 4 becomes more risky and difficult but not still impossible. It only activates once the killer has left the slugged survivors radius. (Like a reverse anti-camp on hooks)
Slugging is a base-kit ability that is not balanced like every other ability/tool/perk in the game, so I’m not against a form of base-kit counter. But I don’t want to make slugging entirely ineffective as slugging counters flashlights, so it’s important that any kind of changes made to counter slugging ensure that the right kind of slugging isn’t disabled.
-
I haven’t played as him but playing against him I really enjoy! There’s a lot of back and forth which is great, as both roles get a chance to rely on their skills. I’ve been beaten very badly by Freddy and also beaten him badly as well. I wouldn’t mind a few more slight buffs to him? Maybe with the alarm clocks, making them more spaced out. But he’s definitely stronger than he was before and he’s a lot more fun to face.
-
Statistically speaking, as killer you are more likely to win your games no matter which one you pick. You should be fine, as the majority of people who play killer are maintaining a decent kill rate. (According to what was last provided) If you don’t believe in statistics, then I don’t know how else to reassure you.
Maybe just give it 3 games or so and see how ya feel! 👍
-
@danielmaster87 said:
Do y'all ever factor MMR into why solo is so "miserable?" Or just blindly blame killer stuff every time?
I do partially agree. MMR plays a factor absolutely but where we might disagree is that I don’t believe it is the end all be all. Just like knockout itself isn’t the end all be all. It’s a combination of all those things.
Asking for reworking of perks isn’t new, no matter how old the perks themselves are. Adrenaline is a good example of that.
-
@crogers271 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3881024#Comment_3881024
The reason why tactics like Tunneling and Slugging are so heavily criticized and receive more backlash is because the effort you put in compared to the value you get out is not comparable to anything else in the game.I think this is correct, but also there's more to it.
Part of the problem with tunneling and slugging is what happens after that. Slug a survivor and they get to what? Just lay on the ground and wait? Who wants to do that.
There have been lots of matches where another survivor has been tunneled or the killer has slugged and I'm thinking 'great, killer won, can we just move on already'.
There's lots of matches were I envy the tunneled target, picturing them happy as can be in the next match already.
The simplicity is part of it for sure, but that it just creates a boring game is another huge problem.
Yes, I do agree with this. The reason why I didn’t bring it up is because the original poster I was replying too gave the impression that any kind of reasoning based on how it makes a player feel may just be brushed off or ignored, which is why I tried to take a very simplistic and logical approach to try and explain on strictly a balance level, why those tactics are heavily criticized.
But I do agree with you. I’m of the belief that losing in itself it’s not the issue, I do think it’s possible for killers to maintain their current kill rates and survivors to still enjoy their role. It’s not necessarily losing, it’s how you lose. I believe that killer should be the power role, which does mean that survivors will lose more than they win, but if you want players to be content with losing more, it needs to be fun.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3881096#Comment_3881096
The thing with LCDs is that they are all basekit, its part of where I coined the term from (accessible to all killers from the start, with loadouts and powers only accentuating them) which is why I don't consider things requiring perks specifically into the mix. They're the lowest effort for the most reward while being accessible to any killer the moment they install the game. As for the ubiquitous "spreading pressure," it varies wildly among the roster, with some killers excelling while others might as well not exist outside their TR. Likewise it can be much more reliant on perks, addons, and even offerings, basically making it too volitile to be an LCD. My argument is basically that the easiest option should never be the best option, and the nerfs and/or changes that other aspects of the game got are how we got there. Hope that makes sense.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3881138#Comment_3881138
Likewise friend! Respectfully disagreeing but understanding why people feel the way they do is always better to me than just having people blindly agree, so its always nice to see. That said, we actually do agree on most of it, I was mostly iterating on your post (I know it seems like everyone only responds to counterpoint here.) You're also correct on the juxtaposition regarding nerfing the unhealthy, like the OverBrine example. The issue is that BHVR tends to overnerf things and then put them on the backburner for far too long, which is particularly serious when it comes to core gameplay mechanics.
This affects incentivizing healthy behavior the most, as it gets people into bad habits that need to then be re-conditioned out. Making up completely hypothetical extremes for a scenario, lets say that PGTW was 90% flat regression. This would be extremely stupid, and would then understandably get nerfed. Before its nerf, however, killers would be incentivized to go for hooks to keep their Pops going, and they would be encouraged to search multiple gens while its timer is active instead of settling on that nearby gen thats only 20%. Now the perk gets nerfed (as it should in that case) but BHVR makes it so that its only 5% of current progress, and they internally decide to keep it there so people wont complain about it while they try to think of a rework. This would remove the perk from viability, but also remove the playstyle changes it encouraged in its previous form. This causes a slide backward to LCD strats, and even if reverted at a later time, the time in between would get killers in the habit of just sticking with the comfortable LCDs. The damage gets worse the longer that the overnerf is present, and would be completely avoided if the nerf was less severe. People would still try to work with it instead of abandoning it entirely, thus its incentivizing impact would still be present.
Not a psychologist, but emergent gameplay is something I've been taking a lot more seriously over the last few years in game design. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. The best way to get players to conform to a behavior you prefer is to gently guide them toward it in a way they discover it themselves, and the more esoteric you make viable strategies, the more their intuition will simply settle on LCDs (in any game.) Simply put, if a player plays the way you want them to and you didn't have to bombard them with flashing arrows pointing at what you want them to do, you designed both their (dis)incentives properly.
TLDR: LCD strats need nerfs, but ONLY after better strats get buffs that make them both equally viable while also requiring more skill. There needs to be more healthy universal mechanics and they need to be less braindead, but they need to retain their current level of strength.
Yes, absolutely. Understanding the why regardless of agreement or not is why I love discussions. I think it’s always important to appeal to different perspectives no matter how warped or biased they may be, so you can then explain things better from their point of view. (Maybe a reflex of discussions with my kindergartener lol as I try to see her way of thinking and the kind of language she uses before I try to explain something to her in a way she will understand).
Anyway, yes, I do believe in agreement. The way “balance” has somewhat shifted into simply “nerf” is concerning and you bring a great point about it being scary when base game changes are brought into balance as we’ve seen what has happened to the perks themselves. And while I believe you agree with this so it’s not necessary to say, I would still like to mention that regardless of the fear or the difficult of balancing anything base-game may be, it doesn’t mean we never try. And we have seen the devs already implement some base game changes for balance that did what they were meant to, (anti-face camp, BT off hook).
It can certainly be frustrating to see the hammer so heavily brought down on changes in the past, and I share the same concerns as you about it happening again and putting the game in an even worse state. I think PTB testing any base game changes would be a start, along with considering feedback from the community alongside actual data they received, as facts aren’t everything , nor are feelings everything. The best results happen when both are taken into consideration (imo). I don’t want tunneling or slugging to be eradicated from the game, as both can and sometimes be the best option in certain situations. If they worked more like perks, where you had to be selective about when you used them I think that in itself would be a huge improvement. I don’t want to take away more player freedom that has already been restricted, but more so making it a choice that they decide is worth making. If there are no downsides then it’s hardly a choice, it’s obvious. And I agree that the best choice shouldn’t be the easiest choice.
I wouldn’t be surprised if slugging did see some kind of change. The survey question indicate at the very least that the devs are asking about it, and who knows what kind of data they have on their end to feel it needs adjusting. And with the influx of new players coming soon with the FNAF games, I would be concerned as a dev myself if it was still possible to bleed out 4 people for 4 minutes as it would leave a very nasty taste in my new customers mouth. From a business perspective alone I don’t agree that the ability to do such a thing is profitable in the long run, you’re pleasing 1 customer and losing 4. That math is not in their best interest. So that being said. Here’s hoping any changes that come to base game mechanics are carefully thought out, and given a chance to be tested before put into live games.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3880861#Comment_3880861
Thats not what people mean by second chance. They mean they won the chase yet were forced to lose it due to a perk or mechanic. Its a form of objective denial similar to gens getting blocked or regressed, which is why the amount of times it can happen is so important. 4 survivors given even only 1 "second chance" is 4 extra hits/bladewipes on many killers, and it plays an important role in the forced time waste caused by the process of hooking (all on top of the obvious chase extension.) Time pressure can often be very real when playing as killer (like it can as survivor, though the agency is more shared in their regard) so time spent prolonging chases that were already won is free pressure for survivors and pressure removal for the killer.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3881024#Comment_3881024
In the past I've referred to strategies like slugging and tunneling as Lowest Common Denominator strats: Very effective effort/value ratio, possible by essentially the whole cast (though some have inherent strengths in each, yet very few have real weaknesses in any) and most importantly they are the strategies that people fall back to when more healthy ones get nerfed. It feels like nobody wants to address all three at once, while addressing the first two when they are present causes the last one to move to the next goalpost. There can be criticism about LCD strategies and it can often be valid, but its always important to remember that the carrot and the stick are both important.
When people say part of why we got here was from other more healthy things getting nerfed, they're not incorrect. There will always be people who respond better to the carrot or the stick, but neither is as universal as many tend to argue (X change didn't work because there were people that still did Y anyway.) Every time a more healthy mechanic/strategy/anything gets nerfed on either side, people will always move on to the next LCD strat in a degenerative progression. For survivors it means more gen rush and abusing whatever bug du jour is currently awaiting a long overdue fix, while for killers it means reverting to slugging/tunneling/camping/etc. We'd get a lot better results if people didn't feel the need to be in either camp, even if the improvement wouldn't fit 100% of the userbase.
Hello Ryuhi! Good to speak with you again. I always enjoy the conversations with you even when we don't always agree. But I do believe for the most part I agree with you here(?) Forgive me if what I think you're saying isn't accurate.
But from what I gather, I do agree that when healthier strategies or tools/perks that support healthier strategies get nerfs, tweaks or changes which will lead to players defaulting to whatever is next. But I also believe the same could be said for it's opposite, nerfing of unhealthy perks or tactics will also result in healthier game play because there isn't a different option. I do agree that balance changes should definitely not only be "punishments" but also rewards as well, incentivising the desired outcome while also discouraging the other.
I do also believe it's a chicken and the egg scenario. As changes are just domino effects that can all be dissected into subjective reasoning. Bob does X becaue of Y but Sally does X because of Z. Both have different reasons for doing X but X is still done, and both of their reasons are valid. We can debate wether or not Y or Z are good enough reasons to do X, but that's just a distraction from the fact that X is occuring, and I think it takes away from the conversation a bit when things like that happen. If we're taking your example of "LCD" strats, I think nerfing them isn't a complete fix either, but the effort-to-value ratios are still too high compared to other tools in the game, and that should be balanced.
-
Sad that this may be considered a “hot take” But I do believe the devs truly care about the game, and the community, and they do try to make it better. They have made some mistakes and some questionable choices (like the refusal of refund to the cosmetic issue) but I do believe they care.
-
@H2H said:
What exactly are killers allowed to do that won’t be called “unfair” or “crutch” or any number of other derogatory things?
Both roles are have tacitcs and playstyles that have criticisim and can be considered unfair, a crutch, or toxic by whomever deems them to be so. The reason why tactics like Tunneling and Slugging are so heavily criticized and receive more backlash is because the effort you put in compared to the value you get out is not comparable to anything else in the game.
To explain it simply, a possible comparable to slugging for killer is getting blinded. Both render the particpant mostly incapacitated, unable to work towards their main objective for differing amounts of time. So Lightborn, the counter to blinding, let's say it now would work like a counter to slugging, UB or a counter to tunneling, OTR.
This would mean that Lightborn now:
Has a cool down (you can only resist a blind every 60 seconds), an activation requirement (you must hook someone before it activates) and it was not free (either get it through the shrine or you have to buy a character).
Meanwhile, the survivors ability to blind you does not require a perk slot, has no restrictions, no activation requirements, no cool down, nor does it require an item to use. And it also, passively, works towards their main objective in the end but circumvents the intended mechanics, meaning they all would be able to escape without doing any gens so long as they keep you incapacitated for a set amount of time.
This is the core issue with tactics like Tunneling and Slugging. When compared to other tools in the game—perks, add-ons, items, or even killer abilities—none offer such an extreme level of value with so little investment or some kind of trade-off. They all have cool downs, they all have restrictions, activation requirements, or can only be done a certain number of times. Even killers entire powers have a combination of those things listed above. Thus, the heavy criticism.
-
Thanks for writing this! A very welcome change from the typical but understandable doom and gloom posts. Thank you for this post and I hope you enjoy your future games! :)
-
@Peppa_Pigsaw said:
I agree, DbD is a very unique and wonderful game despite its glaring issues. I've been around since the Beta back when Trapper was called "Chuckles" so I've seen it change a lot over the years along with seeing a lot of people come and go. When I first started playing I was 14 and now I'm 23 on my way towards starting my career and saving up money to move to Australia to be with my gf so we can eventually get married and settle. It's been a huge part of my life and it's something I'm still very passionate about.
I love dbd. I very truly do. It stings to see it in states like it is right now. But I do genuinely hope it continues to be a part of mine and other people's lives.This was a beautiful message. Cheers to you and your girlfriend, wishing you a wonderful future together! Good luck in the fog gamer <3
-
@Iabloko said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3880015#Comment_3880015
I read what you wrote well, the thing is that different killers have different MMR, you have simply played too few games for the selection system to really start selecting the "right" survivors for you.
I beg you, continue for at least a couple of weeks, and write again about how the selection has changed.
I assure you, after a certain number of matches, you will be offered only SWF or hidden cheaters to play with. And there will be no talk of winning 48 games anymore.
That does make sense though, shouldn't it? If you're winning 30,40 games in a row then naturally you will be going against harder opponents as you progress, especially for long win streaks like that. If you personally are going against insane SWFs every game then you're a really good killer. You've climbed all the way to the top of the mountain so to speak. Going weeks with wins should eventually come to a stop, no? It's good that the more wins you get on that specific killer also increases the skill of your opponents, otherwise people would never be challenged nor could they ever improve.
(edits for spelling stuff my bad)
-
Reminds me when I asked people to define what gen rushing is. And the answer was very much, "It is what I say it is." Meaning everyone has a different definition of what constitutes as a Bully Squad, as Gen Rush, as BM, as Toxic etc. Each thing can be broken down piece by piece, but not very many people in the community want to do that. (It does drive me crazy because in order for a word to have a definition it needs to fit a certain criteria with a widely agreed upon meaning.) So all that to say, there really isn't such thing. The only term majoirty agree on is Tunneling, but everything else is very much personal opinion. Because as it stands you can currently call it X and I can call it Y and we're both as wrong as we are right, just like everyone else.
"When everyone's super - no one will be."