hermitkermit
hermitkermit
About
- Username
- hermitkermit
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,625
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Vishlumbra said:
Win by behavior definition is 3 kills at least. That will rise your MMR, 2 keeps it as it is and 1 or none is a lost game. That’s not a community definition, it’s how the game and developers handle your MMR.
Also you completely disregarded a big point, that is that the stats are not considering the diverse powers and playstyle of each killer. Facing a Trapper is not the same as facing a Nurse, yet the stats are mixed together.I have tried to come to a middle ground where all I am asking is that if a lot of people regard slugging and camping and tunneling as toxic, we should also be able to question why those strategies exist in the first place and by consequence, attend both sides equally. If they disappear completely, a few changes would have to be implemented so killers stay roughly with the same power they have today.
The worrying part is that balance ain’t happening fairly, the developers consider a buff chopping a second from an ability, where there are killers that requiere a deeper look to actually leave the bottom tier.
But well, I am done with this topic, I think there’s a few good points made but what I learned is that there’s no middle ground, is either you all win and completely intend to disregard absolutely everything I say or you won’t feel good. Kinda like survivors do. Peace.
I’m unsure if you’re aware, but they have provided kill rate stats for each individual killer. All of them have at least a 50% kill rate, the lowest being doctor at 51%. This was before his buffs as well. So it’s not as if one killer (like trapper in your example) has extremely low kill rates but it’s hidden behind someone else’s. Every killer has more than a 50% success rate. That’s good. But to claim that the 60% kill rate stats should be ignored because they aren’t specific to killers isn’t accurate, because every killer even at their worst wins 51%- 54% of the time, and at their best wins 67%- 70% of the time. Statistically all killers are performing well. (Though more buffs and QOL changes should/can be implemented with certain killers)
-
Every kind of evidence we have states the complete opposite. Based on actual statistics, not just personal experiences. You can have any kind of opinion you want, but until the evidence supports your opinions, it's bound to be rather unpopular and frequently challenged.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3836369#Comment_3836369
I dont think they are that rare anymore, but i could be wrong. I regularly play in one 2-4 people, and when i play as SoloQ i also run into them often (this is not 4 people swfs ofc)..
I wish we could see some newer stats on that part.
Yeah, unfortunately I think 2022 is the most recent stats we have on it, but I would love to get even more recently as well. Perhaps if we express an interest the Devs will be so inclined.
-
@Vishlumbra said:
I really dont see why my post has becomed a battle against comp, or killers or trying to protect survivors. I am advocating for leaving the game as it is without implementing more nerfs.
It really makes no sense the arguments you are all giving, mainly because you claim is a matter of MMR and that the game is balanced and not survivor biased because of how some people chose to play. If anyone with higher skill claims or proves something and you all assume he is always wrong and that shouldnt apply to the "real" game, how come EVERY SINGLE TIER LIST OF KILLERS ranks nurse, blight and hillbilly top spot. Have you faced a normal nurse? They are terrible. Same could be said of a bad billy or blight, yet those lists are based on a good skill and performance from above avarage players, how come when it comes to the macro game, that goes out of the window and you all just try to demerit every argument I give. Good survivors are the top tier, not killers. I want survivors nerfed? NO. I want killers BUFFED? NO (At least on a macro level, a few of them could use some buffs, namely Freddy, Onryo, Trapper etc).
I am not fighting against anyone, I am not the one that makes dozens of posts every single day crying about slugging or camping or tunneling, I am trying to make people understand that those are needed strategies. Dont you think there are toxic survivor strategies? Mainly is a fault at design but have you ever faced an unhookable group of survivors, with map offering camping a gen at a top floor? Making hooks invisible, boil over, no mitter etc? If you dont slug they would win 100%. What we doing about those? Should we nerf those perks because it feels bad for the killer? No. It is fine.
I think what we all should be asking for is update for certain killers that are outdated and weak. Asking for real updates to killer powers instead of moving a few numbers (Cough Ghostface), more fun elements to survivor gameplay, new posibilities or maps, good new content, not just judging every single killer as the same and claiming they HAVE to stop the slugging and tunneling. If those were to dissapear, they would have to actually invest a lot of time balancing killers to have better chances of winning.
Btw stats say that with good perks, survivors have a high 35%-40% chance of surviving, in order to tie a game, you have to beat those odds twice. If you aspire to win as killer three times. Can’t really base everything on killers win 60% survivors 40%.
Is your position that because tunneling and slugging is “required” in comp scenes (required is debatable but for the sake of trying to find common ground let’s say it is) that people need to stop “crying” about these tactics because they are “required” in comp and therefore nerfs are not needed or justified?
You claim that because these tactics “need to exist for competitive play” that therefore casual players simply need to accept them and to have concerns or frustrations when facing competitive tactics in a casual setting is unreasonable —But those that are engaging in competitive tactics against causal opponents in a casual setting are not unreasonable. I am struggling to follow this logic and I hope you can clarify it for me so that I can better understand your position. -
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3835743#Comment_3835743
I would have expected swf's to be a lot higher in the statistics, i dont play killer that much any more but when i do, i often feel im going against swfs.
There’s really no way to tell if survivors are in a SWF group unless they say so. It's likely very common that when a group of survivors plays well, people assume they’re SWF, even if they’re not—just like people assume a killer is ‘sweating’ when they might simply be good. Sometimes, players are just skilled. But even then, top 5% of MMR SWFs win 48% of the time so they can be the best of the best and still lose more than half their matches.
According to statistics from the devs, SWFs are actually pretty rare, which is why I don’t think they should be used as a benchmark for balance. Setting standards based on the smallest percentage of players isn’t a good idea, just like balancing around Nurse isn't a good idea. Both SWFs and Nurse can be strong, but they’re also both uncommon, and even more rare for them to be very good.
-
@Vishlumbra said:
I didn’t say is impossible to lose as survivor, I’m saying if it’s a group of 4 survivors playing to win, they have a very very good chance of winning, more so than the killer.
I am not saying: Make the game easier for killers, that’s the perception of people wanting to challenge my post decide, which isn’t.I am trying to avoid bringing more and more nerfs because people keep complaining that killers kill them. They brought now a “trade hook state” with a survivor on hook. They nerfed many killers which none of them is actually considered S tier by any means in this last patch, and everyday there’s many posts complaining that sluggin is bad and we should feel ashamed of slugging a survivor in order to get a 4K.
The “data” we have is that killers win 60% of the time, that’s enough for most to suggest we need to bring more nerfs to killers, when in reality is just that when 4 people of different skill are matched together (which is the majority of matches played) they only win 40% of the time.
The sentiment im trying to bring here, is that the game feels ok as it is, and adding more and more ways for people not to feel bad for not escaping is detrimental to the essence of the game.
One of the solutions I suggested (cause people claim that is not fun waiting on the ground to bleed out if you get slugged towards the end of the match) was that there could be an option to risk getting up at a 4% chance or bleeding out, that would give you a chance to opt out while keeping your BP without DCing.
But saying that they should totally make it impossible to “tunnel” or slug survivors is detrimental to the game.A few years ago, there were players who believed the game “felt ok” when killers were at their weakest. Does that mean we should revert back to that state? I don’t think so, and I suspect you would agree. The problem is, every reliable source of evidence we have contradicts what you’re saying. So, if we ignore statistics gathered from thousands of matches worldwide, what would you suggest we use as the benchmark for balance?
If the standard is purely personal experience, then we have to consider everyone’s personal experiences—not just yours. When we do that, we see how certain tactics, perks, and killers are problematic for many players. But you seem to dismiss these as non-issues and suggest that complaints should be ignored. So, if we’re discarding both statistics and the majority’s feedback, then what’s left? If the answer is ‘nothing,’ that’s not a solution—it’s a way to destroy the game. Freddy would never get needed buffs, bugs and exploits would stay unfixed, and PTBs might as well not exist. Without a basis for adjustments, we simply won’t have a game for long.
Yes, it’s possible to win as a survivor if everyone is trying, just as it’s possible to lose if everyone is trying. It’s possible for the best player in the match to die. It’s possible to be the better killer and still lose. But there’s a difference between possible and probable. A 5% chance is technically a chance, but is that worth playing for or enjoyable? Would you gamble on those odds? Luckily it’s a bigger chance, a 40%, but that means that people need to play a role that they are inherently designed to lose more than they win. Even at top MMR—the top 5% of players worldwide full 4-man SWFs survive less than half their matches. Saying that any chance should be good enough isn’t realistic, and you could make that same argument for killers as well.
So I’d genuinely like to know: if we can’t use statistics for balance, and we can’t use majority feedback, what should we listen to?
-
You are entitled to your opinion, as is everyone. Survivors are the weaker role, not stronger. Every kind of evidence supports this. That being said, it is not a bad thing. With this asymmetrical style of game and the horror elements within it, along with needing incentive to play the Killer role over since it doesn't have a kill with friends option, the game should be leaned more towards killers, which it currently is. The problem is that if you want people to be okay with losing more often than they win, they need to be having fun while doing it. While fun is subjective, the opinions expresed by the majoirty can help give an insight into what the best course of action is. Like when majoity agreed that old MFT was too strong. Or how the majoirty agreed that old DS was too strong. Just like how majority of survivors have usually and still currently voice concerns over tunneling, camping, and slugging. These strategies are effective because they exploit specific weaknesses in survivor mechanics, which are frustrating precisely because survivors often lack reliable ways to counter them. There are perks that can help, but none are currently strong enough to deterr these tactics from being common (hence why more mechanics and perks trying to deterr these tactics are being implemented), and being forced to equip something to counter something base-kit for the other "side" can be frustrating and feel both limiting and unfair.
I think survivors losing more often is a good thing, because killers should be stronger. But it's how survivors lose that can be improved. It's okay to want improvements. Killers not long ago also wanted improvements because they were struggling and not having fun with the game, they weren't enjoying their role and their concerns were thankfully listened to and the game was heavily adjusted and is now in their favor, which is a good thing. It's good that they can enjoy the role gain. And in the same way, it's okay for survivors to also want improvements too.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3834833#Comment_3834833
Im not so sure about that, were there ever released any stats on it?
Granted, it's been a few years since, but in 2022, they released the following:
- ~ 3-5% four-man
- ~ 9-13% three-man
- ~ 28-30% duo
- ~ 54-58% solo
(I attached a screenshot as well hopefully it goes through)
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Knockout is only "good" versus SoloQ players. SWFs will just till the team where they are.
The majoirty of survivors are Solo players, so Knockout is "good" more often than it is not. (good as in effective.)
-
@HerInfernalMajesty said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3830869#Comment_3830869
I agree with you a lot. Especially on this.
This idea is off topic and maybe you’d like to discuss but I think a dying “consolation” prize of sorts could go a long way in making dying as a Survivor more tolerable.
Oh, I completely agree. BP alone are a great example. You could be in chase for half the game, buying your team crucial time to finish generators—arguably one of the hardest and most important contributions you can make as a survivor—and still end up with the least amount of points. Given that survivors are designed as the weaker role, (which is good) it would make sense to offer greater incentives or rewards for playing it.
Increasing rewards, like more BP or even special end-of-match bonuses for surviving a “bloodbath” could make the experience more enjoyable and rewarding and might even encourage people to stick around in matches that feel one-sided. I also think making some QOL changes would be great too. People aren’t frustrated simply because they’re losing more—they’re frustrated by how they’re losing. It’s one thing to lose in general, it’s another to lose to strategies like tunneling, slugging, or camping, which can feel unbalanced and demoralizing, especially with the need to bring perks to counter these things when they can be done completely perk less on the other side. If dying were less about being personally targeted or left incapacitated on the ground for minutes, players would be far less likely to feel that their losses were unfair. So working towards discouraging that kind of play would really help. Everyone has opinions on how to do that, I think providing a base-kit gen regression that is linked with Hooks where one hasn’t been hooked consecutively could be useful, to reward killers for spreading hooks and to help lessen the feeling of needing to bring only gen regression perks, opening up variety. And in turn, gives all survivors a chance to play the game.
What bothers me most is the narrative that frustrated survivors are somehow just “entitled” for wanting improvements. This makes no sense because when killers were frustrated with the game, their concerns were seen as valid (which they were!), which led to the huge overhaul of the game and the addition of recent changes that improved the killer experience of what we see today. Many remember when queue times for survivors stretched endlessly because killers were dropping off; they weren’t having fun, so they stopped playing and it impacted everyone. The game shifted, and I think that was a good thing—it needed to happen for killers to enjoy their role again. But both sides deserve a fun, balanced experience; if one side is consistently unhappy, it affects the health of the game overall. And right now, survivors are really struggling.
If killers were struggling to enjoy the game, it was worth making changes to keep them engaged. I’m glad the killer role improved, it really needed it! By that same token, if survivors are now struggling, their concerns should be equally valid. Balancing for one side over the other without consideration isn’t sustainable, and dismissing survivor concerns as unreasonable only creates more divide in the community. Both sides deserve a game that respects their input, fosters fun, and provides fair rewards for their efforts. After all, if one side stops playing, then nobody plays. And that doesn’t change no matter which side stops.Sorry went on a tangent lol passion and all that. 🙈
-
@trapners said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3830869#Comment_3830869
so if the sales role is suppose to be the powerole,
-survivor’s make up 80% of the trials
-survivors have the most dlc characters
-survivors have the most dlc cosmetics
-survivors have the most in-game perks
-survivor’s have the most cosmetics
By a landslide survivor’s are the games main money-bank, should survivor’s alternative win 60-75% of their matches because of that now?
This may very well be simply just my opinion, but I do believe that DBD's success hinges on the appeal of its iconic killers. The ability to both play as and against horror legends from across various media is what truly sets DBD apart. If the game were purely about surviving against these killers, without the option to play as them, I doubt it would have reached the same level of popularity. Playing as Laurie, for example, is fun, but playing as Michael Myers creates an entirely different kind of fun. The focus on iconic killers is what maintains the horror identity of the game and keeps the core experience thrilling. I'm not saying survivors in horror movies can't be iconic, but people don't typically watch horror movies to watch the survivors, they do it to watch the killers. When we look at DBD marketing—trailers, events, and new chapters—the killer is almost always at the forefront. It’s clear that the killers are the selling point. Players are drawn to the opportunity to be the terrifying force they grew up watching on-screen.
In my original reply I did not mean to suggest that the side generating more revenue should be the one made more powerful—that would be a gross oversimplification. But the game and horror in general, fundamentally relies on the killer being a force to be reckoned with. DBD operates on a 4v1 format, and if the survivors were just as powerful as the killer, it would upset the entire balance and diminish the horror aspect. The point isn’t that the survivors should be significantly weaker, but rather that the killer needs to remain the dominant force in the game for the horror element to be present. After all, the essence of horror is the fear and danger, not an even fight.
Just for reference, I primarily play solo Q and I get the frustration. I've had losing streaks in the 20+, and some of my very old posts when I first started playing this game like 2 years ago were questioniong why killer was so much stronger than survivor because I was struggling so badly. In fact, I hold the unpopular view that the balance should be closer to 45% survivor win rate rather than 40%. It also feels unfair to require survivors to run specific perks to counter killer tactics that can be done without any perks at all. I don't agree that WoO should get a nerf, because the criticisims of WoO could apply to killers aura reading of generators at all times. Etc. So while many of my opinions and views lean toward a survivor perspective, I can still acknowledge why killers need a higher win rate to keep the role appealing.
Ultimately, just because survivors make up the majority doesn’t mean the game should cater to them at the expense of the killer role. If survivors were balanced to win more than killer, it would undermine the horror foundation of DBD and remove the incentive to play the killer role. Part of what makes survivor role appealing is the option to play with friends, something the killer role doesn't have. So if you had to pick between the 2 roles, one you win more often and you get to play with friends and the other you lose more often and you're alone- I don't think it's unreasonable to believe not many people would play the killer role. But as it stands now, one role you can play with friends or others but you lose more often, versus the other role that you're still alone but you win more, which is an incentive to pick killer over survivor- because of the higher chance of success. The balance needs to ensure that playing as the killer remains both rewarding and intimidating, while also making victory as a survivor possible. By keeping the killer role powerful, DBD maintains its identity and ensures that the game still functions because people need reasons to play both roles and winning more is the reason to play killer, take that away and I'm not sure what they still have.
DBD isn't "fair" but I don't think it should be. I think it makes sense for the Survivor role to lose more than win. (by how much is debatable) Losing doesn't always feel bad, it's more about how you lose that can feel bad. And that's what should change.
-
Killers are the marketing point of DBD. So it makes sense to keep them in the power role. The game is not survivor sided, nor should it be because the horror icon should be stronger. That being said, it is still a game. And if you want people to be okay with losing a game more often than winning, it needs to be fun. And solo isn’t fun right now.
-
@Tostapane said:
good words, but… you must be really optimistic if you think that the dbd playerbase could be touched by your essay generally speaking (mind you, it's a good thread, but not everyone have the maturity to discuss about those things)… it's sufficient to see the endchat after a match to get what i mean. Anyway, i wish you good luck for your campaign aganist cancer.
DBD players are people. Just people. And all people know pain. It's not optimism it's basic human connection.
-
The “I’m not responsible for your fun” mentality misses the point of playing a multiplayer game. If one player intentionally disregards the enjoyment of others, it can lead to toxic gameplay, drive players away, and ultimately harm the community and the game itself. Multiplayer games are meant to be a shared experience, and being considerate of that fact makes the game more fun for everyone. It’s not about taking full responsibility for someone else’s fun—just not actively ruining it.
And frankly, if everyone adopts the "I don't care because you're not me" mentality, it becomes impossible to empathize or build any sense of community. If no one cares, then nobody is having fun.
-
@Leidenschaft90 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3826974#Comment_3826974
You still don't get my point.
Why should the game give you two protections (full life and DStrike or Endurance effect through OTR)? That's just OP. Especially when - like its_vk described it correctly - survivors abuse these effects to tank hits for others or later in the game when the killer just randomly finds and chases them again (that's not tunneling) and still has to fight through a DStrike or an OTR although these people are full life and got unhooked like 55 - 75 seconds (for example) ago. To say disactivating DStrike and OTR by becoming full life would make them less of a threat to tunneling killers is wrong, because it wouldn't change a thing for real tunnelers - they still have to go through a 60 seconds DStrike or an 80 seconds Endurance effect. Which is more of enough protection for a tunneled survivor. People would still bring these two perks. Nobody would say: I don't use DStrike and OTR anymore because I can't use them when I'm full life. And no killer fears a DStrike or an OTR of a full life survivor because nobody expects them effects to still be active. Only a focused tunneler, who goes in chase with a survivor who gots unhooked right before and ignores everything else, worries about getting dstriked or having to fight through an endurance protection. But if a survivor is unhooked, gets fully healed by another survivor and got found and downed 50 seconds later for example - although the killer chased and downed someone else in the meantime - in what world is it fair that this survivor still has a protection with DStrike or OTR? If they're half life and managed to not deactivate their protection by conspicious actions then it's okay. But getting full life again should be a conspicious action as well imo - regardless of whether you yourself or someone else healed you - because it's a way to progress the game as you would say.
Most of the time, these perks won’t affect you if you’re not tunneling. If a survivor uses them offensively, like for bodyblocking, they lose their protections as a consequence, making them just as vulnerable as before. Arguing that a perk shouldn’t exist just because it can be used offensively or in a way that isn’t intended is a slippery slope. For instance, Nurse can make almost any perk seem ‘OP’ due to her basic power that practically breaks every rule of the game other killers have to follow, but it wouldn’t be reasonable to eliminate perks based solely on her potential, as she doesn’t set the standard for all killers.
Disabling DS or OTR upon full healing undermines the core purpose of these perks, which is to deter tunneling—not just protect injured survivors. Their protections are designed to create a window where tunneling is inefficient, encouraging killers to focus on other survivors regardless if they are healed or not.
In order for these perks to work they have to basically be AFK. If they’re waiting around 60 seconds to tank a hit for someone else, that’s 60 seconds they were standing there unable to heal others, do gens, do totems, open chests, basically progressing the game in any way. If someone did choose to play that way, you are not only getting rid of that persons protection now that they used their OTR or DS to body block, but you also got 2 people off gens (the one you were chasing and the one who used OTR to block) and youre now in a chase with someone that already has a hook state. That’s good.
If people were still able to do gens, get saves, heal, etc. basically do anything to progress the game and still have protection, that would be a different story. But that’s not the way these perks currently work. Protection is immediately taken away once you make progress in the game. Someone standing with OTR injured or not, who wait for 80 seconds for the entire perk to time out is as useful to you ( as killer, not as a teammate ) as being slugged , so if survivors are playing that way it’s only making their game harder and yours a lot easier.
The perks already have strict requirements and restrictions. These anti-tunnel perks are not the cause they are the effect. They need to be strong, because tunneling is strong. You don’t even need a perk to tunnel but you do need one to counter it, so if you have to dedicate a perk slot to something the other “side” gets free, and those protection perks are also not free, and also have very strict restrictions and requirements to activate, you should get good value. Making it disable if another person chooses to heal you would severely lessen that value.
-
I was just about to ask about this as well. The game has crashed my whole computer 3 times this morning. I guess I can't play right now. It would get stuck on matchmaking, spending around 5 minutes without finding a match (never has happened before) before eventually freezing the whole computer and not even task manager would come up. I'm not sure what the deal is. I've been playing other games just fine as well. Here's hoping things get better soon.
-
@Leidenschaft90 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3825561#Comment_3825561
Okay, I give you that point but if you're able to get full life after being unhooked you have another life you can tank a hit with. So why do you need a second extra life with DStrike or OTR?
A killer determined to tunnel will do so whether a survivor is at full health or not. The purpose of perks like DS and OTR is to discourage tunneling by making it less efficient for the killer. These perks turn what would typically be a single hit into two, and if the survivor manages to get fully healed, it becomes three hits to secure a down. This inconvenience is intentional, because it encourages killers to target other survivors instead, as tunneling the one that takes 3 hits to down would take significantly more time and effort than going after someone else. And because these anti-tunnel perks have restrictions (disable end game, goes away the moment you progress the game with conspicuous actions), weakening them more would make them even less of a threat to tunneling killers, which is the opposite of the goal.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3824458#Comment_3824458
While perks help slow gens down significantly, killers can still kick gens without bringing a gen regression perk or a perk to be able to damage gens.
what, 4 times slower regression? that's going to do exactly nothing vs efficient teams. i think i kick gens like 2 times a game on average. the only time i kick gens is if i bring pop goes weasel+eruption, than i kick gens around 6 times per game.
Im unsure what you mean when comparing gens to tunneling, as there is no reliable way to counter tunneling without specific perks,
Yes there is. it is called being good at the chase. You know…. learning to loop, actually understanding the map and resources available on the map, how to use them. i won't deny that chase perks make the game easier for survivor but i don't think they're required to counter-tunneling. i'll have killer as survivor where they chase me first, hook me, lose 3 gens from first chase. come back tunnel me and than lose last 2 gens. I get left on hook because the soloq team doesn't know to do a proper bodyblock save vs m1 and the entire team escapes. Individually speaking, tunneling is not possible to counter but from team-wide escape perceptive, tunneling is counterable. in some cases… like leatherface tunneling, you won't get saved in the end game because leatherface is too good at tunneling off-hook and no anti-tunnel perks work vs end game.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3824882#Comment_3824882
trickster with main event also double taps pretty hard. sometimes i see trickster's run that cut through knife add-on and just camp all game.
Hm, I think we may just agree to disagree here. While looping is an effective skill, when a player is being tunneled, the chances of going down quickly are significantly higher, which is why tunneling remains such a prevalent and strong strategy. If countering tunneling was as simple as ‘just loop better,’ there likely wouldn’t be a need for anti-tunneling perks or mechanics in the game, and would indicate that in high MMR where survivors know how to loop consistently that tunneling wouldn’t exist at all.
I also disagree simply due to the difference in effort and skill required between tunneling and surviving tunneling is not comparable. A killer with minimal experience can successfully tunnel, while reaching a point where looping effectively enough to prolong tunneling (not survive because as you stated individually you can’t survivor tunneling) takes a much greater time investment for survivors. If tunneling were difficult to do, it would not be as prevalent or powerful as it is (nurse is a great example of this. Nobody questions her strengths but she has a skill ceiling so many do not play her) Tunneling happens because it is easy and effective, and it’s only effective because it is much more difficult to counter it than it is to apply it. ‘Just loop better’ can be seen as dismissive, much like telling a killer to ‘just kill better.’ It doesn’t address the core of a problem and isn’t a reliable or realistic solution. It’s a bit of an umbrella statement that can be used to justify almost anything.
In any case, I think we may just fundamentally disagree so I think it may be best to end the discussion here. I appreciate you taking the time to give your thoughts, and I wish you well in your future games.
-
@Leidenschaft90 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3824755#Comment_3824755
I think you misunderstand something: If you're able to get full life after an unhook, you're not getting tunneled - unless you have Second Wind and become full life in mid chase.
But I get your point with Deliverance, that sounds fine to me and I can live with it.
I am not misunderstanding, but where we may disagree may depend on what you personally define as tunneling. Tunneling, by the majority’s definition, is when a killer repeatedly targets and hooks one specific survivor, ignoring others, until that survivor is eliminated. Health states are not relevant to this definition. For example, if Nea is hooked twice, unhooked, and healed, but the killers focus remains on only Nea, injuring her, downing her and then hooking her again, that’s still tunneling. Regardless if she’s at full health, it is still tunneling because health states do not change hook count. (And thank goodness for that because the game would be miserable if all it took was a heal to take away a hook)
-
It’s very easy to get swept up in emotions due to bad experiences. I’m sorry you experienced some rough games, trust me, we’ve all been there. It’s important to remember that:
Toxic survivors are toxic killers, and toxic killers are toxic survivors. Because one role is not inherently toxic. It’s the people that are.
Claiming that an entire role or the majority of that player base is toxic tends to weaken what could be very valid points by making them seem dramatic or exaggerated. This kind of generalization fosters an ‘us vs. them’ mentality, which can make reasonable arguments appear overly hostile or unfair. I understand this was likely a vent post, but broad statements like these can be harmful to both those you’re generalizing and to your own credibility.Im sorry for your frustration, and I hope you have better games in the future.
-
Getting healed is not considered a conspicuous action, which is why it doesn't deactivate OTR or DS. If they deactivated after healing, there wouldn't be much point to bringing them, as a tunneling killer does'nt stop tunneling just because you're still injured or healthy.
When it comes to Deliverance, it has such specific requirements and is very situational that if it disabled in endgame, I believe it would kill off the perk completely. You already run the risk of it being a dead perk if you get hooked first, or don't get an unhook before you are hooked, which keeps many people from using it. If they manage to survive till end game, have Deliverance activated which meant they managed not to get hooked at all but still got saves, I don't think it's unreasonable for them to deserve a chance to use the perk, especially because it can only be used once. You can think of it like NoEd, it's typically high risk and potentially high reward.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3824140#Comment_3824140
Try using dh, ds and otr then
The point of my post actually was the critcism of having to bring perks to counter something the other "side" doesn't need perks for. That there is nothing survivors can do base-kit, without a perk that killers can't counter base-kit without a perk.
-
Beating a dead horse here (sorry Maurice) but Knockout. My absolute least perk in the entire game, there is nothing healthy about it, I find it extremely problematic. Strong contender is also Boil Over, I hate it for all the same reasons as Knockout but boil over does need specific map RNG to be miserable, whereas Knockout does not.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3824140#Comment_3824140
that question is like asking whether survivors should be able to efficiently do gens uninterrupted across the map regardless of how well the killer performs in chase. rushing gens in mild term. it would be me asking you whether killer should have any form of generator regression or base-kit game delay for successfully downing survivors.
in my opinion, i think dbd killer games for survivor are best when the game varies from game to game. my thought is that losing to exact same strategy or gameplan is dull. Tunneling should be the right play in some games but current iteration of tunneling is that it is becoming the only play for killer. there is some hints of like slugging here and there being a good play. to some regards, there is some merit to tactical slugging but at the same time, the gameplay of slugging for killer is too drawn out for killer in my opinion. for that reason, slugging as killer is not quite as fun as it should be. To go back to the question, i do not think tunneling overall is a problem but i would prefer if the game for killer had varied ways to win a team competitively speaking. In other words, i would like that spreading hooks in some cases is viable way to win, tunneling is sometimes the viable to win and slugging is sometimes a viable way to win. when one strategy becomes over-dominate, there is some reason to believe that said strategy needs adjustment to be worse. this applies for strategy that are less common/less effective on killer. for example 3 gen used to be dominated strategy before however it is fallen out of favor so perhaps defensive strategies need a bit of buff. Strategies that are too strong should be worse and strategy that become too ineffective should be buffed until all strategies are roughly even.
I completely agree that tunneling shouldn’t be as viable as it is, and it’s primarily on the devs for making tunneling the most efficient way to play killer. That said, individuals who tunnel still have a choice in how they play. Im unsure what you mean when comparing gens to tunneling, as there is no reliable way to counter tunneling without specific perks, whereas killers can stop gen progress without needing a particular perk. While perks help slow gens down significantly, killers can still kick gens without bringing a gen regression perk or a perk to be able to damage gens. I don’t think there’s anything in the game that survivors can do base-kit that killers can’t counter base-kit. When you mention gens not being affected by a good chase, I actually disagree. Good chases lead to downs which lead to hooks which force people off gens. It’s also why slugging can be so effective at adding pressure because you get enough people down or hooked then that stops gen progression because people have to unhook, heal, etc.
But thank you for explaining your perspective, and why you don’t agree with base-kit anti-tunnel. Even if we disagree I appreciate your opinion and time.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3824058#Comment_3824058
it is still in his kit. the borrow time makes endurence make his chainsaw go through survivors and it persists for 1 second. so in essence, if you just sit near his chainsaw, he can't double hit you. a silly change. survivor just don't know how to abuse it.
i think unhook system is suppose to prevent hook regression if the killer forces hook regression by camping. not necessarily prevent survivor from going down after being unhooked. The anti-tunnel borrow time is very low duration but it is suppose allow you to get to a pallet loop or a window. if duration of borrow time was longer… like 60 seconds than it would make less attractive to tunnel off-hook as killer because chase would be harder. I am sure BVHR will eventually buff anti-tunnel borrow time system and anti-camp system because survivor will likely continue to complain that tunneling is too strong, camping is too strong and that survivor don't want to equip anti-tunnel and anti-camp perks. they'd prefer them base-kit.
In your opinion, do you believe those anti-camp/tunnel should not be base-kit? If killers can tunnel or camp without needing perks, doesn’t it makes sense that anti-tunnel or anti-camp mechanics would be base-kit for survivors too? Relying on specific perks (some of which are not free) to counter something the other side can do freely feels difficult for me personally to justify.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3822908#Comment_3822908
First paragraph: That's a pretty weak assessment. Survivors and killers both can know where gens are easily without having any aura on them as long as they know the maps and tile spawns. You have to remember that the killer is trying to find up to 4 survivors at any given time: The gen auras give the killer guesses on where to go, they say absolutely nothing about survivor presence. They function as a vague objective: without any information on progress or occupation, every time the killer is making a guess when approaching a gen guided only by its aura (obviously they can make educated guesses based on tile layouts/3 gen setups/etc, but they are still guesses unless they have a direct visual line of sight anyway) so they don't provide as much information as you're insinuating. For perspective, imagine if WoO only lit up tiles with pallets(I'd say both pallets and tiles, but that would light up almost every tile, of course.) It didn't highlight the pallets themselves, just the entire tile that contains them. Thats the level of vagueness vs clarity in a nutshell. Your last point about survivors avoiding gens for an extended period of time actually kind of defeats your own point, especially with the gen kick limit: There is little to stop survivors from escaping/hiding the moment they hear the killer's terror radius (or has their position revealed through auras/chase indicators/etc) and the killer would only know if someone was there based on the gen progress (if any) and can often be discouraged from patrolling all remaining gens properly (be it due to the lack of survivor interaction, distance between remaining gens, finding someone with an aura perk/addon, etc.) They gain next to nothing from the gen auras themselves unless, again, they use perks or addons specifically designed for that kind of info. Without them, its still just a matter of patrolling and/or using other means to specifically locate survivors.
Second paragraph: I already stated that WoO is a perk that gets stronger the better the player is, and even said it doesn't necessarily need to be nerfed directly. I do have to mention regarding:
You say killers “waste” perk slots for extra info on gen progress, but survivors also have to “waste” a perk slot on WoO if they want to know whether the only pallet in a certain area has already been used.that you are missing my point entirely: WoO gives more value per perk slot than almost any info perks in the entire game, I'd argue even more than Nowhere to Hide or its cousins Bond, Kindred and Empathy (Though I will admit a case could be made for certain killer perks/addons paired with said killers.) You're also wrong about WoO being the only way to have that info: not only can other perks provide very similar info both directly and indirectly, but their primary functions are weaker than WoO's to boot. There are also multiple basekit ways to know that info (seeing debris where a pallet would be, knowing the tile and knowing that a pallet was supposed to have spawned in a particular spot, seeing an ally's aura via another perk while they throw it down or vault over it, etc.) so the necessity is a bit hyperbolic. People can play just fine and still glean a lot of its information without taking the perk, the perk just makes a lot of that info more obvious and considerably easier to process without having to rely on that level of deductive reasoning. Again, I think its an OP perk only because its value ratio is far too high, and don't necessarily want it to be directly nerfed. It just needs to be made to fit in line with the value of its alternatives.
As for your last paragraph, I completely disagree. You are the one overstating the power of basekit gen auras: Info like having an increased liklihood of a survivor being in that area is not guaranteed, and scratch marks/blood pools need to supplement that guesstimate to know if there even was a survivor there before you get LoS. Again, I would sooner compare it to the basekit auras of allies that survivors get while downed/hooked. This is also not even accounting for the amount of info the HUD update gives survivors now, while killers don't even have hook counters for survivors on top of all the other information they need to continuously account for while starting on the losing side of a time crunch. They're not on the same level at all.
Thank you for your insights. I believe this ultimately boils down to personal opinions on what is considered strong or valuable in the game, and I respect that we may see these things differently. From my perspective, having gens revealed at all times provides significant information that enhances a killers ability to plan, locate, and defend the main objectives of survivors. It reduces guesswork and allows for better map control, which I perosnally see as highly valuable. I get alot of value out of knowing where to be, and while some of it does involve guesswork, personally, it is pretty uncommon for a gen to hit significant progress and then be abandoned. At least in my games both as killer and survivor, if I come across a gen survivors have put alot of progress into, I can typically come back to it and find someone there time and time again, often resulting in chases/injuries/downs, which I am consistently getting value from because of my gen patrolling playstyle.
Regarding WoO, I fully agree that it's a strong perk. My point isn’t that WoO is weak or ineffective, I simply don’t think it’s overpowered. While WoO provides great information about pallets and windows, it still requires a perk slot because it isn't base-kit, can be somewhat map dependent if the map itself doesn't have many windows or pallets, and it demands skill to use effectively, which I believe balances out the value you get from it. In contrast, gen auras are base-kit and always available, and that information can be further enhanced with certain perks or certain killers if you want to focus in on them a bit more, which in my opinion helps to balance out the strength of the information provided by WoO in my view.
I personally don’t agree that WoO gives more info value than any other perk in the game, but I do think this has to do with just someone's personal gameplay as the value they will get out of a certain perk will be different in comparasion to someone else (especially different killers). For example, full aura-reading perks like Weave Attunement + Franklin's Demise or something like Wiretap provide full body auras, which I personally consider stronger than WoO because I have gotten more value out of both of those in my games. I also don’t mean to suggest that WoO is necessary to play well, and if that is how it came across, it wasn’t my intention. It’s absolutely possible to play without WoO, just as it’s possible to play without any perks at all. Afterall perks are designed to enhance gameplay, not dictate it.
In my original reply to the 1st person, (which was in response to someone else, and you’re the third person I’ve discussed this with—sorry if things have gotten a bit jumbled), I was comparing the criticism of WoO as a crutch to how similar criticism could be applied to gen auras. Some may disagree, but I think it's because they see the value of gen auras differently than the value of pallet and window visibility, not necessarily because the comparison is invalid. (no thought run to yellow, no thought run to red) I believe both provide valuable information in similar ways. The difference in opinion is more about how valuable that information feels to each individual player.
To put it simply, I think both gen auras and WoO offer useful information and good value, and I think that something that requires a perk slot should give good value, and because thers only 1 killer v 4 survivors it's fair that a perk slot is not required for that information. But I am aware that the value of WoO itself, just like gen aura value, can comes down to personal playstyle and preference. For example, some players might not care about seeing pallets or windows if they focus on stealth, while others might not value gen auras if they prefer a proxy camp or injure centered playstyle. And gen auras on a trapper may not be as valuable to him as gen auras for a wraith, just due to mobility, but I still think gen auras give value regardless, just as WoO will always give value but depending on who is running it that value will differ because it relies on personal skill. If WoO were base-kit, so all 4 survivors constantly had it, I’d agree that the value would be greater than gen auras, and OP, but since it occupies a perk slot, and still heavily relies on personal skill to be effective, I believe the trade-off for that valuable information is fair. We may disagree, and that is fine.
Ultimately, these are just different perspectives on what we each find valuable in the game. I appreciate the conversation and your thoughts, and how respectful you've been.
(edited to add in something I forgot)
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3822428#Comment_3822428
You would have a point if it weren't for the variable nature of gens. Basekit gen auras show absolutely nothing about gen progress, only the physical movement on the gen and its noise can be used to gauge progress, let alone regression status (only info on blocking is included basekit) while perks/addons need to be used for further information like that. The killer would benefit greatly from having that extra information, but has to waste a perk slot on perks like surveillance or addons on specific killers. Discordance is needed for info like if 2 or more are on the same gen.
Vaults are mostly binary, they're either there or not (though there is the variable on whether they are currently entity blocked of course) and likewise pallets can be either up, down, or broken (all of which can be gleaned from WoO of course.) Breakable wall status on top because why not? All of this information is provided in a way that allows for routing before/during chases, resource management information, general location of a chase if within the perk's radius, and even potential tile layouts (deduced by formations of auras , of course.)
By comparison, basekit gen auras are very simplistic, and offer little to no additional metadata. They can even get in the way regarding perks like BBQ. The only thing they give you is the location, if its done or not, and if its blocked or not. The gen aura is more comparable to basekit auras like downed/hooked survivors seeing their teammates/etc. Important, yet limited info. One could argue that the info WoO provides is still more than even gen auras augmented with perks/addons (unless stacked, which then ties into the build cost difference.)
Gens may provide "limited" information, but location is vital, especially when gens are the main objective for survivors. Knowing where all gens are at all times is a huge advantage for killers, even without progress info. Constant awareness of gen locations is crucial for planning movement, defense, and finding survivors in general. When survivors aren't on gens, it becomes painfully obvious how vital that information is. For example, when two survivors remain and are hiding, killers can spend over 10 minutes trying to track them down. Many find this frustrating and shows how hard it would be to find survivors without constant gen location awareness—because gens = survivors.
WoO gives useful info, but it still requires skill to use effectively. It doesn't stop killers from using mindgames or other strategies to win chases. Both gen auras and WoO provide important map-wide information, and both can be game-changing depending on how you use that information. You say killers “waste” perk slots for extra info on gen progress, but survivors also have to “waste” a perk slot on WoO if they want to know whether the only pallet in a certain area has already been used. Without WoO survivors have no way of knowing this. (Excluding SWF of course because we're talking about the majoirty of survivor players, not the minority).
I don't think it's accurate to overstate the power of WoO and understate the value of gen auras, which give killers constant crucial information about the main objectives for survivors. Knowing where the main objectives for the opposite side are can absolutely make or break a game. One good Sabo to a hook, one good Discordance, can snowball or flip pressure completely. I think the reason killers have base-kit gen auras is the same reason survivors don't have base-kit gen auras. Because that information is very important.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3822265#Comment_3822265
again, making this kind comparison really tells me you don't understand the basics of this game asymmetrical nature.
Yes, I made that comparison because the arguments against WoO can be made for gen auras. Gen auras and WoO are comparable because they both give their respective roles constant access to vital map information and limited resources/objectives. Solo or not both roles require map awareness. And while killers are solo, most survivors play solo too, meaning they also need to track what resources have been used not only by themselves but by their team. WoO is just information, it doesn't automatically make someone a better looper, just like gen auras don’t make a killer automatically better at defending gens. It's all about how you use that info.
WoO gives one player in a TEAM ROLE info on all resources on the map, gens aura give killer, a SOLO ROLE auras of all gens without letting killer know which gens are being worked on, which is a crucial counterweight to gen aura reading.
Gen auras eliminates the need for killers to memorize gen spawns
meanwhile, killers need to:
- learn survivor spawning zones;
- predict where survivors will spawn.
And additionally, aura reading for killer is much more comparable to the budget version of survivors HUD with info on what their teammates are doing, if they are in chase and their health states.
Gen auras mean killers never have to guess where survivors are working.
dude, killers don't have basekit Discordance for even solo survs working on gens.
Etc. In short if you argue that WoO is a crutch that removes skill from survivor play that same logic can be applied to killers and gen auras. Both make the game easier for their respective roles without requiring deep map knowledge, which in a game with as many maps, map variations, and map changes that are constantly happening is a very good resource to have.
if you don't understand the point from my points above, then i have some sad news about your macro knowledge.
If your point is that killers, because they're solo, should have access to more information (like gen auras) while survivors as a "team" role (regardless of communication) shouldn’t have comparable tools, then we're not on the same page here.
My point is that the criticisms of WoO and gen auras are the same. People argue that WoO "makes it easy because survivors don’t have to memorize loops or tiles" When the same logic applies to gen auras: they "make it easy because killers don’t have to memorize gen spawns."
It seems like you're focusing on the "solo vs. team" aspect, but that doesn’t change the fact that both WoO and gen auras give crucial map info that reduces the need for memorization. The fact that killers are solo doesn’t negate that both tools (gen auras and WoO) help their respective roles in similar ways.
I’m not saying killers shouldn’t have gen auras, it’s very valuable info and the game would be much harder without it. But I also don’t agree that WoO is problematic because the same criticisms people use to attack WoO could be used against gen auras. It seems like it just comes down to your personal opinion that it’s okay for killers to have this kind of info but not survivors. That’s fine, but since the criticisms are identical, I personally don’t agree with saying one is fine but not the other.
I'm not trying to insult you or question your intelligence and I would hope you're not trying to insult or question mine. So if my messages come across that way, it's not the intention.
-
Right now, there’s not enough incentive for killers to avoid tunneling, which I do find really unhealthy for the game. It just feels off that the only way survivors can counter something killers can do base-kit is by bringing perks—many of which aren’t even free.
Instead of trying to discourage tunneling with things like BP or Pips, I think the focus should be on something that directly impacts gameplay: gen speeds.
My idea is to introduce a built-in gen slowdown that activates when killers spread hooks across multiple survivors. For every unique hook, gens would slow down, rewarding the killer for spreading pressure. On the flip side, if a killer tunnels and hooks the same survivor consecutively, gens get a repair speed boost, making them quicker to finish.
This doesn’t remove the killers ability to tunne, but it makes it less viable and encourages spreading hooks as a better strategy for built in slowdown. Killers would have a real incentive to chase different survivors and create more dynamic matches.
-
Exhaustion perks/add ons are always handy, (Fear Monger/ Mind breaker makes survivors blind and exhausted while on a gen) but also keeping track of when it's in play and then predicting their next move. There's something called "lithe brain" where players with Lithe will sometimes always go for the window, and so once you know it's in play you can try to predict where they're running. You can try to force them to unsafe windows as well, where the lithe pretty much gets wasted because it sends them right into a dead zone or a corner of the map.
-
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3821606#Comment_3821606
did you really make a comparison with killer seeing gen auras?
Killer is a solo role playing against 4 players and is extremely reliant on macro knowledge, thus seeing all gen auras is important for planning what and how you will so (you DON'T see which gens are repaired at all which is crucial thing about why gen auras are visible for killer)) and comparing it to memorizing tiles as a role played as a team of four players is wild, sometimes i really wonder if yall are even aware of how counterweighting opponent in an asym game works
Yes, I made that comparison because the arguments against WoO can be made for gen auras. Gen auras and WoO are comparable because they both give their respective roles constant access to vital map information and limited resources/objectives. Solo or not both roles require map awareness. And while killers are solo, most survivors play solo too, meaning they also need to track what resources have been used not only by themselves but by their team. WoO is just information, it doesn't automatically make someone a better looper, just like gen auras don’t make a killer automatically better at defending gens. It's all about how you use that info.
I can further breakdown my points very simply.
"WoO doesn't require activation" Neither do gen auras.
"WoO elimates the need to memorize tiles or learn loops" Gen auras eliminates the need for killers to memorize gen spawns
"Windows and pallets aren't as important as gens" Windows and pallets are crucial for survivor to prolong chases and stay alive long enough to complete gens. Gens are just as important for killers because they are not only what slows survivor progress allowing them to get downs and kills, but also indirectly provide locations to where on the map survivors are at. Both resources directly impact each "side".
"WoO means survivors never have to guess where a window or pallet is" Gen auras mean killers never have to guess where survivors are working.
Etc. In short if you argue that WoO is a crutch that removes skill from survivor play that same logic can be applied to killers and gen auras. Both make the game easier for their respective roles without requiring deep map knowledge, which in a game with as many maps, map variations, and map changes that are constantly happening is a very good resource to have.
-
@Pelaan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3821606#Comment_3821606
Guarding gens is literally a killers jobs which is why seeing auras is basekit survivors main objective is to do gens not pallets which is why its not basekit and too strong as a perk
Defending gens is part of a killers job, and killing survivors is the other. They use gens to stop survivors from progressing so that they can kill them. And while doing gens is part of a survivors job, distracting the killer away from gens and avoiding death as long as possible (looping) is also part of a survivors job (the whole point of WoO). And unlike gen auras, WoO isn't basekit. It's a perk that takes up a slot, meaning players have to sacrifice something else to use it. That’s a fair trade-off, not an overpowered crutch.
-
For the cool cosmetics 😎
-
@Pelaan said:
WoO is a crutch perk the eliminates any need to memorize tiles and turns survivors brain to mush "just run to yellow"
How is that any different from killers who 'just run to red'? Killers can always see the aura of every generator on the map, no perk required. Following your logic, you could argue that being able to see generators removes the need for killers to memorize their locations. So why is it unrealistic to expect killers to know gen locations, but survivors have to memorize every tile on every map? It feels pretty hypocritical, especially since killers don't need a perk to see gens at all times. If WoO were base-kit, then we’d have a fair comparison, but it's not—it's just a perk, and it's not even on a free character.
-
@Bookern said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3820138#Comment_3820138
Im asking alot but then how do we make her accepted? We could continue chasing reworks but players will never be happy for them wasting devs time even if they curb all the problems with her originally they'll harp on the new things. Do we Revert the changes and tell the entitled players to stuff it and make more changes to stomp out the DCs and Going next on hook epidemic or do we just delete her and ruin what few people loved about her. I am lost
I understand the frustration, it’s a tough situation, and there are a lot of factors contributing to it. From SM gameplay mechanics to her lore and design. From the start people joked about her appearance, saying she looked more like Kris Jenner than a scary killer. And while her mask is neat and her claws, they still feel just like cosmetics that someone is wearing (wihtout having the benefit of being an iconic horror character like Myers or Ghostface) rather than something truly scary or dangerous. When you compare her backstory (a rich CEO obsessed with her father’s manga character who decided to become that character and kill people} to other killers backstories like Wraith, Nurse, Hilbilly, The Twins etc. it just feels lacking. She comes off as a spoiled rich kid who started killing one day.
Combine that with her mechanics, which made it easy to exploit 3-gen strategies, and she became both frustrating and underwhelming as a character. The problem with reworking her is that common direction suggestions you take risk her losing whatever identity she has left. If we make her drones more interactive, she ends up feels like Singularity. If we make her drones more like traps then she's Trapper. If we make her drones time out or restrict their placement so they cant be placed at loops, she becomes too much like the Knight.
And that’s kinda the problem—she’s never really stood out as her “own” killer. Her abilities feel like a patchwork of other killers, stitched together like a Frankenstein. And while other killers have similarities when compared, like Bubba to Billy, or Huntress to Trickster, they may have similar core mechanics but they both feel independent of one another and have a clear identity. The only real identity she has is being the most hated killer in DBD history.
People argue that since other killers like Nurse are stronger and more challenging, but don’t receive the same level of hate, that complaints about Skull Merchant are just entitlement. But I would argue the opposite. If it was really about entitlement, every killer would get the same kind of hate that SM has, but that’s clearly not the case. Not only has this never happened before her release but it also hasn't happened after, which I think proves that this isn't stemmed from people demanding special treatement, it's genuine dislike and frustration in every aspect.
So, to answer your question honestly, I don’t really know what the best solution is. Skull Merchant felt lackluster from the very beginning.. her design, her backstory, her mechanics, and the playstyle she encourages. I would love to see her reworked into something the community enjoys, but that would likely require a complete overhaul, not just in her base mechanics, but possibly in her design and lore too- a massive project. That being said, there are still players who enjoy her as she is, and there are people who liked those 45+ minute matches. It’s impossible to make everyone happy. But the majority has ruled in DBD for a very long time, and it doesn't make sense to make an exception here, because it doesn’t make sense to ignore the majority to please a small minority. All we can do is continye to voice our opinoins, try and communicate respectfully with one another and the Devs, and all work towards a solution together. It's nice to have the Devs even be open to changing the game this often, and I think people really take it for granted. They are listening, this is NOT the same game it used to be and it changed based on the Communities inputs. It's not unreaslitic to see a future where SM undergoes a huge change just like the game itself has over the years into something that hopefully people ennjoy to play as and against.
-
@Thusly_Boned said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3819708#Comment_3819708
This conversation is one of the most recurrent things on in the community.
No, killer is not just generally easy. Now it doesn't get really challenging until you're multiple hundreds (if not thousands) of hours into the game, but when you get to the point where you are facing predominantly strong survs (as in most teams have at least 2-3 with 2K+ hours), killer is a proper challenge.
At <100 hours, killer is a joke for anyone with experience in DBD, on either side. And only less of a joke from there to about 500 hours. Not to gatekeep, but anyone with less than a few hundred hours in killer talking about how easy it is doesn't have an opinion worth a #########.
Now because the game is imbalanced and not really designed to be fair, there are exceptions. If you're a Blight/Nurse main with a ton of hours who sweats and tunnels, there isn't going to really be a point where you're not winning most of your games.
But for 80% of the killer roster, once you hit that soft cap, that "kIlLeR is eZ" thing evaporates real quick. But most people saying that killer is easy won't ever see that, because they are almost all dedicated surv mains who aren't inclined to put in that much time. They will lie and say they did of course, but no one with thousands of hours in killer would say killer is just flat out easy.
As far a the solo surv experience (which I have thousands of hours with), the main determinant of how it's going to go is the experience of your teammates. There are other factors of course, but who you get paired with is king of the hill, and the only challenger is RNG, which is generally the god of DBD for either side.
This message was not directed at me, but I would like to ask about some of your points. To be clear I am not trying to come across as argumentative or disrespectful, I am simply trying to understand. We all have our biases, and I am not excluded from that, but I think it’s important to try be exposed to and attempt to understand other perspectives, so this is simply my attempt at it. If anything comes across as rude it’s not my intent.
You explain that killer is easy for the first hundred (or even thousand) hours and only becomes difficult after that. The question is, why is it considered okay for killer to be so easy for such a long time? In most games, the difficulty ramps up as you improve. Isn’t that the point of progression and challenge? If killer is easy for hundreds of hours and then gets more difficult once you’re facing experienced survivors, that seems like a natural progression that should be expected, otherwise the killer role would lack any kind of skill. It’s expected that things would become harder as you face better opponents. If it stayed easy forever, wouldn’t that suggest an issue with balance? So if it doesn’t stay easy forever but it does for hundred or thousand of hours, why doesn’t that attribute to balance? And when you pair it with tactics like Tunneling which is arguably easy to execute due to little risk and high reward, that can be done with any killer and can be done perkless, killers can climb that ladder even faster.So that being said on the flip side, that for survivors, the first hundred hours aren’t easy at all. SoloQ survivors in particular have a much harder time learning the game because of the team reliance, various killers with different counters, randomness in matchmaking etc. you know all that. So Comparing this to killer, which you admit is a breeze at lower hours, it doesn’t seem balanced when you’re suggesting killer only becomes challenging later. Shouldn’t the game have a learning curve on both sides rather than one being disproportionately easy for hundreds of hours?
The game should become more challenging as you progress, (like any game) and if killer only becomes difficult at higher MMR or after many thousand hours, then that sounds like how most games work. Survivrs however, seem to face difficulty from the start which suggests that balancing issues affect them more heavily in the games lifespan.It seems like those hundreds or thousandsof hours where it was easy should still be part of the overall experience of the role. So why is it that difficulty only seems to count once it gets harder? Shouldn’t the earlier, easier experience also be acknowledged when talking about killer as a whole, just as survivor experience as a whole is?
Thank you for your time, I hope my questions make sense, sorry if they’re worded weird.
-
Playing Solo is the hardest role so think of it like playing a dark souls game or playing on the most difficult mode. It can be absolutely miserable and it is designed for you to die ALOT. But when you win…it's ecstsasy! Quite the high. But then you'll forever be chasing it and…well…
-
@IronKnight55 said:
Some people are determined to quit playing against her no matter what. Still, it certainly doesn't help that most of the Dead by Daylight players I go against while using Skull Merchant is extremely toxic, even before the character was nerfed. I'm convinced that most people who play as SM are doing so to provoke a reaction from survivors and to make the game as miserable as possible for them. In my experience, this is common with SM players.
I just had a game against a SM player who kept slugging everyone, using knockout, and refusing to hook anyone for the entire game.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/YOTUWQNOWVBB/screenshot-284474-29.png
She finally decided to hook me just before the last survivor bled out, but I managed to escape from the basement hook (got the 4%) just before the last survivor died. The hatch spawned right beside the shack, so I was able to escape through the hatch.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/A0FJS7VPOI10/untitled-design.png
This is why I am no longer playing against her anymore :)
I've brought up a similar point before. I compared it to SWFs. People are very quick to denounce SWFs, even though statistically speaking the majoity aren't that good, nor are they very common, just like SM. But a good SWF looking to just BM the killer all match has soured SWF as a whole for alot of people, which is also the case for SM. She is like the SWF of killer when it comes to "bad reputations" It's true that not every SM plays that way, but it's also true not every SWF plays that way. That doesn't stop people from wanting to delete SWF from the game entirely, and many people have voiced a desire for some kind of way to be informed if they are playing against a SWF so they can lobby dodge, the way that survivors do in SM matches because they don't have that option in the lobby.
I don't endorse it, but I understand it.
-
…..😥
-
There's plenty of lose lose like this for both sides. An entire healing build? Well you're facing Plague or Legion. You didn't bring Unbreakable? Well you're bleeding out. You're spirit? Well they have iron will. You brought NoEd? Well they just cleansed it at the very beginning of the game.
DBD is a very chaotic mess that is anything but fair. But it can still be fun.
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3819386#Comment_3819386
The only issue I have with that is despite face camping Bubba being very prevalent, and untouched for literal years, people generally love Bubba. Even that is in spite of the fact he's a buggy, inconsistent mess. I don't think there's ever been a point where Bubba didn't have something bugged or unintended in his kit, even now, yet people still like Bubba.
Same for Huntress and Pyramid Head, who are still absolutely capable of their agregious and unfun gameplay...
Skull Merchant's agregious gameplay on the other hand has been nerfed 3 times. 1 with one AFC, 1 through a complete rework and then 1 through a butchering nerf to Skull Merchant herself.
What really gets me is Singularity can do pretty much the same thing Skull Merchant used to do, stall out the game by hard holding a 3-gen, only tempered by the very nerf Skull Merchant brought in... yet he basically gets away with no criticism whatsoever.
People hate Skull Merchant on principle. Nothing more... and while I acknowledge the long list of flaws with Skull Merchant, at some point it switches from a Skull Merchant issue to a community issue, and I'd argue we are far past that point.
Perhaps It really comes down to the level of irritation. Basement Bubba, Proxy Huntress, or Tunneling Pyramid Head, while frustrating, are over relatively quickly. In the height of Skull Merchant’s days, games could last 45+ minutes. This is a community that’s not known for its patience, even being bled out for 4 minutes or survivors taunting at the exit for 2 minutes can drive people crazy.
While tactics like tunneling or camping are annoying, and can be detriment, they don’t compare to an hour-long game where Skull Merchant could hold even the best survivor teams in the world hostage. That’s why her reputation is so bad, it wasn’t just frustrating to face her it was exhausting. Her ability to drag games out to such an extreme, especially against highly skilled players, left a lasting negative impression. It’s like getting really bad food poisoning. Some people can never touch that food again because of just how awful the sickness was, even if the chances of getting sick that same way are low. The absolute misery that you experienced that 1 time was enough to keep you away from it.
I’m not happy about the hatred, but I understand why it’s there. Especially when you consider how many people defended “chess merchant” it just gave this nasty reputation that the people who play her don’t care about anyone else but themselves and will go out of their way to make the game as miserable as possible just because they can. Kinda like with SWFs. More than likely the majority of SM players aren’t like that, and majortiy of SWFs aren’t like that either, but it happened enough to get a nasty reputation that makes people want to delete both things from the game entirely just because of how frustrating the memories of the bad ones are. -
Unfortunately, the SM still has a reputation that lingers, and even though recent mechanics and nerfs have changed aspects of her playstyle the people who leaned into those arguably frustrating tactics haven’t necessarily changed. Her “unfun”strategies, like 3-genning and slugging, became popular because so many players used them to stall games, and those same players can still do alot of that stuff today (just not for an entire hour).
It’s not unlike the stereotypes of Bubba with basements, Tunneling with Pyramid Head, or proxy camping with Huntress. They’ve all developed reputations for those things. Certain killers can attract certain players who rely on specific, and (at times) frustrating strategies because that killers base-kit mechanics make it easy to take advantage of those tactics. (a Ghostface tunnel vs. a Trickster tunnel will be a very different experience)
Of course not every Skull Merchant player uses these tactics, or those other killers with those tactics aren’t always used, but it happens frequently enough for that reputation to persist. (Survivors are a bit different since it’s just skins but there’s still reputations. Like Dwight’s in lockers, Claudette’s who hide, colorful Feng Mins who BM etc.)
It’s less about the specific changes to her mechanics and more about the frequency in the mindset of players that created the stereotype in the first place having not changed. -
@NarkoTri1er said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3808779#Comment_3808779
no, they stated that WoO is literally used as a crutch even for high hour players to make up for their refusal to learn mapa, even while in SWF
It does nothing but show limited resources. Just like how killers can see all gens aura at all times which are their limited resources or all survivor items in the beginning of the match. The information is only valuable if you have the skills to make it so. Just because a killer can see all the gens doesn’t mean they will be good at patrolling them, and just because a survivor is using a perk to see pallets and windows doesn’t mean they’re good at looping.
-
Statistically speaking SWFs only survive 3% more than solo. BHVR released the stats not long ago. Solo win rate is 40%, SWF is 43%. Since you say you have a couple hundred hours and not thousands, I would assume you’re not in the top MMR which is the top 5% of players, so you wouldn’t be facing top SWFs, which have a survival rate of 48%. Higher than Average SWF but not by much, only 6% more.
With you openly admitting that it’s extremely easy to win over Solo, which are the majority of the survivor role, then SWF seem to be the only challenging aspect of the killer role for you, which means you will win majority of your games because cracked SWFs are fairly rare like a cracked nurse. So you can see those SWF games as a proper challenge and work on your skills, which may take time since it sounds like you’re not challenged in the majority of your games. If you’re itching for a challenge try swapping to Solo survivor, you’re intentionally designed to lose more often than win. -
They're not really comparable. Someone T-bagging, humping on ground, pointing at or slapping on hook has nothing to do with gameplay. Slugging, Tunneling, and Camping have everything to do with gameplay. Tunneling, Slugging, and Camping are typically so difficult to counter and so strong that they have actual built in mechanics in the game alongside with purchasable perks to try and help with the balance of it. A T-bag or a slap on the hook will never be as impactful as any of the "playstyles" you are referring to.
When it comes to being a bad sport, yes, most of the time T-bags, humping on ground etc. is all very bad sportsmanship, because majority of players agree that it is. Majority of players (even the most baised) also aknowledge that things like Tunneling, Camping, and Slugging suck to go against, even if they are not against the rules.
If I were to T-Bag someone I would not be surprised they don't like it, and if I were to Tunnel someone I would not be surprised they don't like it. The two are not comparable game play wise, but both are acknowledged by the majority to be heavily hated.
-
That number seems pretty intense. If you could provide some kind of proof of it I think people would take it more seriously. That being said, I've been playing alot of killer recently and so far I've been surprised. I'm clearly still learning and I end up letting people go alot because I'm just trying to get better at chases. And once they realize they are actually really cool. They will run around a few times on one loop until i down them, then get reset and we practice again. I know this is just my personal experience, just as you're talking about your personal experience, but if I'm not hooking or if I only hook everyone twice, (playing nice) I have never had a survivor BM me or call me names after chat. I'm sorry that's happening to you. Sometimes a survivor doesn't want to play like that and they just continue to run at me and stuff but then I just chase them as normal and hook them as normal until they die cause I get they might not want to play a chill match like that.
Hopefully you get some nicer games. Wishing you luck.
-
Based on the only actual evidence that we have. The game is designed to be killer sided because killers are the selling point of the entire game. It’s a horror franchise. People don’t go to a horror movie for the survivor they go for the killer.
You have the kill rate that shows this, you have the devs comments on making Killer the power role that shows It, you have top killers going on nearly 2,000 win streaks that show it, etc. If you chose to actively deny or reject all statistical data that is out there you have every right to do that, but others don’t need to do the same and it shouldn’t be too surprising when people’s answer to this question match the evidence as opposed of just relying on personal biases.The game is killer sided but it should be.
(Not that survivor couldn’t use some help with QOL and things)
-
If it's an option people will do it. It doesn't matter how discouraged it is, how unhappy it makes other people etc. there are simply some out there that will do it if they can- period. So if things really shouldn't be allowed then it's on the Devs for letting it remain in the game. As far as keeping playstyles and perks and things enabled in the game but maybe not used certain ways, then there needs to be both an incentive not to use them in that way and more of a punishment if you do. But even then, for certain individuals, if they can, they will regardless, but the Devs certainly don't have to make it easy.
-
I really dislike facing Trickster and Spirit. Trickster because his theme song weirdly gives me intense anxiety lol and his ability to tunnel through endurance and proxy is really frustrating to face. And Spirit just because the counter play seems very dependent on bringing a very specific perk or having expensive headphones and no hearing problems. Being a drummer for like 5 years makes it hard to hear her whispers. But I LOVE both of their designs, and their cosmetics are just stunning. Plus some Spirit players are really funny.
-
@Bookern said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3812210#Comment_3812210
its not basekit its a Class with unbreakable
The live said survivors will be able to pick themselves up using their “active ability”. I don’t believe classes were ever specified or that this would only work for certain roles. I did just check the 1st pinned update on the discussion page that goes over the live and it doesn’t specify that the pick up ability is reserved for any class. I’m sure more clarifying details will come out soon.