hermitkermit
hermitkermit
About
- Username
- hermitkermit
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,625
- Last Active
Comments
-
I agree with wanting to give the cameras more meaningful gameplay. As it stands they’re simply not worth the risk. I personally find Springtrap really fun in a 1v1 and I don’t feel he’s particularly too weak or too strong. I also don’t mind different killers having different “strength” levels. But I can definitely understand why seeing Jason with all the stuff he gets for free could feel pretty frustrating when Springtrap, who is traditionally supposed to be a jump scare kind of killer, could’ve benefited from some of the same things Jason has. It would be nice if they leaned into the stealth strength a bit more for sure.
-
Personally I think he’s very fun to verse. Most of the time it’s a total team wipe because he’s so new and people don’t know how to play against him yet. I think my only concerns so far is that there doesn’t seem to be much cool down for his OE, it seems a bit short along with how quickly he can throw spear after spear because there’s so many of them around the map. So even when he misses and he’s slower he can very quickly get another one.
(Also it can hit 2 survivors at once which is kinda crazy. I had just unhooked someone in midwich upstairs and as we know those hallways are extremely tight with only 1 way through, he threw the spear when I unhooked and it went through me, and hit the freshly unhooked survivor. It was a tight hallway so there was literally only one way we could have gone so there was no avoiding it, and she lost her BT as soon as her feet touched the ground. So you can’t take protection hits, which is unfortunate. It was funny though, we were a survivor skewer!)
-
@Brimp said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4088638#Comment_4088638
People still slugged and tunneled because survivor stuff was also way stronger back then. Back at peak regression before 6.1.0 with ruin undying and 25% pop was easily dealt with if everyone ran dead hard which was easily the strongest exhaustion at the time. Also I never said anything about tunneling or slugging in the post you responded to I said people would hook more and it ends at that.
Also as for the 2v8 slugs. It's because 2v8 is just notoriously survivor sided unless you run specific killer combos.I think what I’m struggling with is that the examples I bring up gets dismissed with the same explanation, that in your opinion survivors were too strong. That regardless of the game state, it didn’t matter because survivors were always too strong.
And to be honest , I think your responses are unintentionally demonstrating my point. Every example I give still ends with a justification for why tunneling/slugging was the correct or necessary choice, in your opinion. Which is what I’m saying, that players who want to tunnel/slug will always find a reason to tunnel/slug, even if the game state changes.
That’s why I’m skeptical that simply making hooks stronger will solve the problem.Because if players already view tunneling/slugging as valuable under almost every game state we have ever had, then stronger hooks wont remove their incentive to play that way, it just make hooks stronger too.
That’s the part I think gets overlooked. We can’t say that people only play certain ways because of a specific game state, and then when evidence of other game states proves otherwise, change the answer to say people only plays certain ways because they feel survivor is too strong. If someone wants to play a certain way, they will always find a reason, regardless if it’s necessary or not.
-
@Brimp said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4088316#Comment_4088316
No bleed out has to stay. People are slugging because of the state of the game being, hooks simply arent worth it on a lot of killers. The issue is the GAME STATE not the players. So instead of nerfing slugging… how about we add incentives to hooking without the downsides they provided in the first batch of anti-everything ptb (9.1.0).
My issue with this kind of thinking is that we’ve never seen this happen in the game before. Back when Gen regression was at its strongest, people still slugged and tunneled. People still use full Gen slow down and slug and tunnel on nurse or blight. In the 1st iteration of 2v8, they didn’t have flashlights. They also didn’t have pallet saves possible, because the killer would just step on the survivor and they would teleport to a hook. There was no reason to slug, but full 8 slugging and bleed outs happened and they happened enough that they had to add some kind of anti-slug and flashlights and pallet saves to prevent it from happening again.
So I really can’t agree with the idea that if hooking gave you more rewards by even some kind of base-kit slow down, people would absolutely still tunnel and slug because history will repeat itself. -
Heartbreaking to hear :( Wishing for a fast recovery.
-
Well…they are just doing the Entity’s bidding. Putting the entity in a video game was how to expose us to its existence. And now, we are all addicted, and everyone is always angry about something and the entity feeds off our collective misery.
The cult was us all along.
-
Hmm.. that is certainly a tough one. I think I understand and agree with both positions here. On one hand, updating it all in such an intense way may cut off players whose systems simply can’t keep up. And that is unfortunate, some could even say a bit unfair to spend even more money to keep playing. On the other, the game is definitely in need of such updates as because it is 10 years old it certainly looks and runs like it. And if they were to instead do a DBD 2 as stated in the live stream, would mean that players would still have to spend more money to keep playing as you’d have to repurchase everything and grind it all a 2nd time.
I think the bare minimum must be better optimization and a huge bug fix overhaul, regardless of the game gets this graphical update or not. I do know there are other games that keep older systems in mind and people can still play them with the graphics turned way way down. Perhaps there’s a middle ground there?
-
As many others have stated, I don’t like spirit for accessibility issues. I drummed for a few years so my ears aren’t the best, and her counter is pretty much dependent upon hearing where she’s phasing, which means facing her already puts me at a disadvantage for something that is out of my control.
Krasue is very oppressive in 1v1, and I feel she is way too good at slugging with the way her power works. I haven’t faced very many of them, but when I have it’s been very memorable because trying to heal slugs with the infection keeping you broken is very difficult. I suppose my personal gripe is less with krasue and more so just the way so many play her.
-
@KingOfGhost said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4086127#Comment_4086127
Sure, that may work: remove the unhooked survivor completely from the equation so the killer has a chance to make a trade hook.
We know they can do that. My problem then becomes: what about the other second-chance perks the newly hooked survivor may have?
Yes, Decisive Strike would not be active, but what about Deliverance? What if they get the 4% self-unhook? In that case, the newly hooked survivor could still end up getting a free escape.
The reason I say Endurance should stop working once all five generators are completed is because it would force survivors to make the right play. You should not be able to run in, unhook directly in the killer’s face, and then have both survivors run to the exit gate with very little risk.
I also believe the unhooked survivor should not have a hitbox for the killer.
Respectfully, I think endurance is becoming less of the issue here and the discussion is shifting toward whether survivors should have any chance to escape after being hooked in the endgame.
Originally the concern was aggressive endurance body-blocking. I suggested removing collision from the unhooked survivor, which would solve that problem. But now we’re talking about Deliverance and even 4% self-unhooks and even labeling them as “free escapes”.
That’s where I get a little confused.
Deliverance isn’t a free escape. It’s a perk that takes up a slot, has a specific activation requirement, can only be used once, and does absolutely nothing if you don’t meet those conditions And a 4% is exactly that, a 4% chance, not a guaranteed outcome. It’s luck based, much like hatch spawning directly in front of you or closer to one person than the other.
I admit I’m also having trouble understanding the idea that endgame should fundamentally change the rules in a way that removes even more options from survivors. By the end of the match, survivors are usually at their weakest. resources have been used, they have hook states. Whether we agree on exactly how strong killers are in endgame, it’s hard to argue that face camping isnt easier when anti-camp is disabled, or that survivors are somehow just as strong in end game as they were in the beginning when all pallets were up and nobody had any hooks.
So if survivors are already in their weakest position during end game, I’m not understanding why we would want to make them even weaker by disabling all endurance.
If a survivor uses a perk they brought specifically for that situation, after surviving until the endgame and completing the requirements to activate it, its considered a “free escape.” But a killer being able to face camp a hook after anti-camp is disabled, and immediately being able to down that unhooked survivor because endurance is disabled in end game, isn’t considered a “free kill”? We’re talking about a 4% chance being too high?
-
@KingOfGhost said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4085899#Comment_4085899
With the current pallet density and the speed of the game, survivors almost always have resources around them. Also, I am not talking about defending the exit gates. I am talking specifically about Endurance no longer working once all five generators are completed.
Do you think it is fair for the unhooking survivor to be able to use Endurance aggressively to body-block the killer and stop them from hitting the survivor they just rescued?
In that scenario, both survivors can often escape because the killer cannot do anything meaningful. The unhooked survivor has Endurance, the unhooker can body-block, and with nearby pallets or the exit gate already open, there is usually no real counterplay.
When it comes to pallets and resources, we may just have to agree to disagree. I think claiming survivors have access to roughly the same amount of resources at the end of the game as they do at the beginning is a bit disingenuous. Killer is absolutely stronger when there are less pallets on the map.
As for aggressive body blocking with endurance, I think that’s focusing on one particular use case rather than the reason the mechanic exists in the first place. That’s like saying that because 4 man bleed out slugs exist, slugging can’t exist at all. We can talk about how things are used but we need to acknowledge why those things exist in the first place.
Personally I wouldn’t mind a middle ground solution. The unhooked survivor could temporarily have no collision, meaning they can’t body-block for others and killer can’t body-block them from the gate. That would address the issue of endurance being used aggressively while still preserving its original purpose; to protect someone who just got unhooked.
Because while I understand the frustration of an unhooked survivor using endurance to force a body block, I don’t think the answer is removing the protection entirely. Without it, an endgame hook would easily become a guaranteed kill. Anti-camp is disabled, the killer can stand directly in front of the hook, and the moment the survivor is unhooked without endurance they can be instantly downed with no way to react, no counter play.
In my opinion the goal shouldn’t be guaranteeing an escape or guaranteeing a kill. The goal should be creating situations where both outcomes are possible and both sides have some degree of counter play and agency. That’s where I think the healthiest middle ground is.
-
Because some people are jerks.
-
In all honesty I’m not really sure what kind of response you’re hoping for as everyones taste and annoyances and skills are different. The individuals that hate slowdown may prefer you to run aura but guess what? There’s people that hate aura and would prefer you to run slow down. The list is endless because survivors and killers are not a massive hive mind that all think the same and have the same preferences or gripes. Now does that mean that those that hate slowdown are wrong? No. Does that mean those that like slowdown are wrong? No. Its preference. It’s an option. It’s an opinion.
Just play the perks you want to play with and don’t worry about if someone hates that perk. You have to play against perks that you don’t like but they like, and they are playing against your perks that you like and they don’t like it.
The only way to make a game that makes everyone happy is to not make one at all.
-
I actually think the endgame is typically when killers are at their strongest. By that point a lot of resources have already been used up, survivors are often injured or have hook states, and you need to defend 2 gates instead of 5 generators. Anti-camp and anti-tunnel perks are no turned off, which allows you to face camp making securing an end game kill easier than a kill before the gens pop.
The reason basekit BT exists is to prevent an immediate down with no counterplay. I think it’s reasonable to say that the game is healthier when both sides have some degree of agency and possible counterplay.
-
@Chomperka said:
Remove hatch and replace it with some other objective that doesnt make last 2 survivors stealth hard. Calling for it for 3-4 years but somehow people still think giving win to a surv with 0% effort is a fair mechanic.
I’m not opposed to replacing hatch with some other endgame objective if the goal is to eliminate hatch standoffs but I disagree with the idea that hatch is “giving a survivor a win with 0% effort.”
If a survivor reaches the point where hatch is an option, they’ve already made it to the end of the match. In the overwhelming majority of those cases that only happens because they contributed enough throughout the game to still be alive whether it’s from gen progress or doing well in chase.
If anything, hatch is just the survivor equivalent of things like anti-camp and certain survivor perks being deactivated in end game for the killer sake, giving them a better chance at securing a kill.
You can argue that hatch should work differently, (and I agree!) but I don’t think it’s fair to single it out as some uniquely undeserved mechanic when DBD already has similar things to give both roles another chance to get at least one win.
-
@CorgiSploots said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4084747#Comment_4084747
My issue with that line of thinking is I can still run meme hex builds on killer with relative ease and still get a 4k. It's virtually impossible outside 2v8 even SWFs struggle with a meme build. 2v8 is saved by default as it's the game mechanics boiled down to basics allowing both sides some freedom which is why it's always ontop when it's out. Killers control the flow of the game and when they repeatedly treat those in the lobby like punching bags they forced the current meta. I firmly believe removing certain safeguards like no protection if picking up under pallet would help in the long run. Killers want to tunnel camp and slug then they have to deal with survivors able to punish said behaviors.
I understand the frustration. I do support some form of anti-tunnel and anti-slug as I don’t believe they are balanced the same way anything else In the game is. I also agree that killers can set the pace of the game because they are in the power position. If a killer wants to farm, they can do so, while if a survivor wants to farm it depends on if the killer actually wants to or not. But I don’t think that just because they have the option to go easy doesn’t mean if they don’t it’s wrong.
I do agree that killer is in the power position, which in my opinion is a good thing, but that doesn’t mean that the game isn’t stressful for the role. I think pacing and quality of life can be improved for both roles. I get we may not agree on everything but thanks for giving your opinions.
-
Hmm.. personally probably Spirit. I love her design, I love her lore, I love her as a character but playing against her feels dependent upon having good hearing or having very expensive headphones. I struggle against her very consistently and every time I look up guides or counterplay alot of it relies on you hearing where she is phasing. There’s no visual cue only audio so if you were a drummer for a few years so your ears aren’t the best (hello 👋) well just.. try not to get injured lol. Not really a fan of counter play that feels perk dependent or if it’s an accessibility thing.
(but also Twins for just unfun playstyle too lol) -
@CorgiSploots said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4084470#Comment_4084470
This kinda mirrors my thoughts on gen rush, I don't understand how killers can actually whine about it when they forced it into play with "Not responsible for your fun." You cannot sweat your balls off every single match then be shocked the other side does the same or refuses to even entertain different playstyles. Even Steagul was nerfed for no other reason than he annoyed killers. Nothing on actual gameplay nada just that his screams were annoying. I don't think touching gen speeds will do anything because they aren't the problem. The problem is survivors legit cannot play in any otherway outside 2v8 because it runs the near 80% chance of snowballing everyone. The game for sure should be slowed down but you cannot pin that on the side literally not allowed to play any other way. Survivors allowed to breathe a bit and experiment slows the game down naturally because one is a gen jockey and 2 are doing cheeky headon/boon builds and the last is running mettle of man.
I think over time the game has definitely restricted playstyles on both sides that have resulted in the current pace today. Killers feel like they don’t have a chance to breathe half the time because of the speed of gens, and in the same way survivor feels like the match can become hopeless so early on because of the snowball and no catch up mechanics.
I don’t blame one role or the other for the current mindset of today’s games, rather the direction of the way the balance has pushed it. Frankly, over time it’s the players who have shaped the game into what it is today, optimizing the fun out of it. I’d still love for things to slow down a bit or at least a casual option that has restrictions to ensure it stays causal would be very beneficial.
-
@Chomperka said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4084470#Comment_4084470
Second one idk bro, killer ratings will be oblivion unless they play friendly every gams. Survivors are also always pissy at each other unless they win(even if 1 person dies they still complain at each other and killer). Game is just wrong format for that kind of thing.
Respectfully , I think that kind of mindset is exactly what a positive system would be trying to push back against.
Saying “killers will never get rated unless they play friendly” or “survivors are always pissy with each other” is already framing the community as two opposing groups and generalizing them in the worst possible way, implying that all survivors are sown kind of toxic hivemind unable to comprehend good sportsmanship. That kind of thinking only pushes the division and negativity that I think should be discouraged in the first place.
Many people play both roles, and plenty of players can recognize skill, good sportsmanship, or a fun match regardless of which role they’re playing at that moment.
And to be clear, I’m not talking about a negative rating system. There wouldn’t be a “dislike” button or a way to punish people. There would be no “low ratings”. The idea is purely positive reinforcement. If you thought someone played well, was a good teammate, showed mercy when they didn’t have to , or simply made the match more enjoyable, you could choose to acknowledge that. If not, you do nothing, and nothing changes.
I don’t really see the downside in giving players more opportunities to recognize positive interactions rather than assuming everyone is going to be hostile all the time.
-
Hmm… not sure these are actually hot takes, but this is the internet, so I’m sure someone somewhere will be deeply offended lol.
1. More cosmetic expression!I know a lot of people hate the sillier cosmetics because they think it kills the horror vibe, but honestly, the art team almost always knocks it out of the park. It’s fun being able to dress your character how you want. Besides, there are already plenty of things in DBD that aren’t exactly horrorrealistic. We have neon scratch marks, glowing auras, and people getting impaled on hooks without dying of blood loss
2. Encourage positive player interactions.I’d love to see some kind of system that rewards good sportsmanship. Let players gift BP, items, charms, or make the thumbs up system actually mean something. Maybe enough positive ratings could earn cosmetics, BP bundles, or other rewards. Positivity should be encouraged, especially in a comunity that’s as passionate and famously divided as DBD
3. The community has wildly unrealistic expectations of what a casual player should know.
This is probably my hottest take so it’s really long sorry.DBD is a game that takes thousands of hours to become even competent at, and every new chapter adds even more knowledge to learn. We’re at a point where it’s almost unreasonable to expect a genuinely casual player to keep up.
There are over 40 killers, 300+ of perks, 22 status effects, 60+ maps, over 1,000 add-ons, and specific counterplay knowledge attached to all of it. Every map, every status effect, every killer, every add-on, every item has its own specific knowledge and counterplay about what it is, when/where to do it, and what you’re supposed to do depending on a hundred different variables.
That’s probably over 100 pages of reading material just to understand the basics of what’s in the game, and that’s before you’ve actually played a single match. Reading about something and doing it successfully are two completely different things.
If we want to attract and keep casual players, not have such hardcore sweaty matches that aren’t just 4stack SWAT teams and 5 gen tunneling giga Blights we need to be honest about how much knowledge DBD actually demands. At some point it stops being “most people suck at DBD” and starts being “you can’t be casual and expect not to suck at DBD” and expecting causal players not to “suck” is unreasonable.
I don’t know how anyone can look at this game and think, “It’s not that hard dude. You only need to learn 400+ things and do them all well” there is no beginner mode, there is no practice arena, there is no slow dip in the pool. Everyone is thrown in the deep end at the same time and it’s getting deeper with every new chapter and yet some still scoff at how people are struggling to breach the surface.
TLDR; The game really needs to be more accessible for casual players, and a bit more forgiving, and a lot more informative. How that should be done is a separate discussion/issue, but this communities definition of casual is not casual in the slightest.
-
@Sp00kyb0b said:
Most if the few BHVR members that do actually play, are survivor mains.. just saying. If they just had game testers if each role, a lot of issues might have been solved before they arise. But ofc. most people playing 80-90% of one side will be biased and think its ok.
Is there any kind of proof to the claims that most BHVR members are survivor mains? Do they stream or something? I think that’s a bit big of a claim.
-
Personally I’m not upset about Jason being added because I’m sure they’ll find ways to give him his own identity. But overall, it does feel a bit underwhelming to me. It doesn’t feel like something that really changes or evolves the game in a substantial way, it just adds another famous face to the roster.
Don’t get me wrong, Jason is incredibly iconic, but for the BIG 10 year anniversary, I was hoping for something that impacted the game as a whole moving forward. Not just a new chapter, but something that made the anniversary itself feel special and significant for DBD overall
If you told me Jason was the next random licensed chapter, I would’ve believed it because this doesn’t really feel “anniversary big” to me. It kind of feels like the same thing we get every chapter cycle.
That said, I’m excited for the people who have wanted Jason for years. This is just my personal opinion.
-
My least favorite survivor perk is probably head-on. I don’t like when it happens to me but I also don’t like when my solo mates have it because usually they spend more time trying to get value out of that perk than they do on gens lol.
Least favorite killer perk is probably infectious fright. It’s interrupted so many totem cleanses, ruined skill checks, gave away me injured or my teammates injured who I’m trying to heal or save etc. Just not a fan of the concept in general either. Survivor screams are loud.
-
@zonkednb said:
He's not OP.
He's not unfun.
I get why people want to play him.
But I'm… Just… So… Tired of him in 2v8. He's guaranteed every game at the moment. If I'm killer my buddy is a Wesker. If I'm survivor I'm running away from Wesker. Switch to 1v4, I recognise that terror radius, it's Wesker.
Sometimes the burn marks on my toast look like Wesker.
I hear a smug chuckle at 3AM, it's Wesker under my bed.
Went cloudwatching with my partner, every cloud was Wesker. When I tried to point this out to her, she too, was Wesker.
Help.I can try to help, but 7 minutes is all I can spare.
-
@TropesDaMan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4079647#Comment_4079647
i feel like Unknown would be a great pick in 2v8
That would be fun! I could definitely see unknown doing well with how many targets there would be.
-
Personally I definitely feel the Wesker fatigue. That and Oni. Before Wesker was fixed it was mostly Drac, Billy and Oni but ever since he was fixed it’s been nothing but Wesker. I don’t mind the 3 dashes, but he does seem to get it back extremely quickly. I’ll manage not to get hit by them and make distance but that distance is instantly destroyed because he ends up getting another 3 dashes back so quick.
I dont want him removed from 2v8, and while a killer rotation would be nice In theory I think it would bum players out because the killer options would be even smaller. They can do the same thing they do to entice survivor to play though, and add BP incentives to specific killers. The incentives could swap from killer to killer encouraging more options without limiting the small amount we do have.
-
@Abbzy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4079560#Comment_4079560
You will see it after time that post brings people close to it in wawes and then the others arive with different opinion and downvote the hell from previous wawe it works like this.
But mostly theres more survivor sided people in opinions on this forum than otherwise even the ones that are here the longest (meant that they have like x thousand posts like that awa guy with 18k or else) are more survivor sided sith opinions but if you will be here for some time you will see it yourself that bigger half is survivors and even the people with most posts that are here for very long time are which this supports this.
Now I will get smoked because I wrote it.
I think it really varies. There’s been peaks of both roles getting a lot of support and hate on here, and it can also depend a lot on the platform. For example most big names in the DBD space are all killer mains, so YouTube tends to have more killer leaning takes. Reddit I feel it depends on which sub you go to as there’s a decent blend in there. TikTok is mostly survivor leaning. And the forums I feel is also quite a blend. I think a lot of it has to do with tone as well. Often times the more negative the tone the more negative the response. There’s a difference between respectful criticism and just being a jerk because someone doesnt like a side.
-
@ThePromethean said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4079350#Comment_4079350
Such a system can never exist. Reasons being:
1. it's impossible to tell if it's a pattern of toxicity or a pattern of inexperience. You basically have to prove intent. "Oh I got grabbed off a gen again" did I not see the killer coming or did I intentionally remain on the gen to get grabbed?
2. It even says in-game that survivors have a choice, work as a team or go at it alone. If a survivor is going at it alone and not working as a team they shouldn't get punished for playing the game their way in accordance with the rules.
3. People want to have fun. Going against ghoul 6/10 matches is not fun so I can see why they would want out of the match asap to try their luck in the next match. Forcing people to play a match they don't enjoy won't go down well.
I do feel like there are instances when it’s very clear someone is just throwing. I’ve had a player do nothing but run around the entire match and throw all the pallets down just to grief. Players that spam lockers or windows the entire time till they get downed.
There is a difference between a selfish survivor player and one that is intentionally griefing. And while I understand people not always having fun in a match, you can’t just quit without punishment. Crows exist to stop players from just standing there, the anti-go next system to discourage people from going next, they even stopped self unhooks on the first hook to discourage just throwing the match even if you’re unhappy.
Cheaters intentionally ruin people’s games and rightfully get punishments and bans, players that intentionally ruin your games shouldn’t get a pass just because they’re not using cheats. -
@Mrpugalug916 said:
Technically tunneling and camping arent against the rules either, but just like on this forum and on reddit, if you do it, you'll be punished lol. They made their stance when they bent the knee to the survivor rulebook. I dont feel sorry for players when they get bad teammates anymore. Killers need to have fun too
This is such an.. interesting response. Someone talks about teammates throwing on purpose and your response is that objectively bad sportsmanship is fine as long as it hurts the side you don’t like. Were you the Ace or the Cheryl? Lol
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4079190#Comment_4079190
Oh no that's not what I'm really getting at, I'm on about the survivors who've came in are just as iconic if not more than some licensed killers.
Like I get what you are saying, but there is nothing stopping them from giving the survivors more unique animations and emotes and the like to make them FEEL like the character you are playing. rather than just an outfit.I feel like Nic Cage was a great example. He’s a pretty iconic actor, and his voice lines felt really unique for him. Jamie Lee Curtis is just as much of an icon as Michael. She is THE scream queen. I agree that some survivors can be just as iconic as their killers.
-
@TropesDaMan said:
"keep your eyes open" sounds like slender to me, i even heard they were thinking of concepts for him, but thats just a rumour. If Jason ever came what do yall think he would be like? like power and what not? personally i want a camp crystal lake map as well
I feel like Jason would be like a teleporting trapper with the silence of Michael. He is a slasher at his core so if they were to change that for the sake of gameplay by giving him some kind of super power it would feel really off. Kinda like how people feel about the new Myers rework. It just doesn’t feel like him.
Personally I would much rather have slender man in the game. A mysterious entity that can cause paranoia, hallucinations, and teleport around sounds much more entertaining to play in my opinion. That, or a Wendigo similar to the ones from Until Dawn. That would be sick.
-
@POwUmbra said:
Survivor mains always downvoting posts like these makes me really wonder whats the point in posting at all?
Not really that deep, downvotes are just a way to disagree.
-
Oh geez, I’m so sorry to hear that. I hope they weren’t in the content creator program. Regardless, you did nothing wrong. Reporting was the right thing to do.
-
Imagine Nemi with his zombies and knight with his guards! lol pure chaos I love it.
-
@Shinkiro said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4078542#Comment_4078542
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4078565#Comment_4078565
You think its fair to tie tangable rewards to others bias, flawed and arbitary opinions? I don't.
Let's be real, this will just be survivors abusing it to farm each other for passive bonus rewards unless they are trolling. A completely pointless system to have that serves zero actual purpose. Even then you'll get people denying likes for the most petty, pathetic and dumb things because something happened that didnt benefit them.
On the flip side, do you really think people are going to be giving likes to killers when they win? Especially if they have to play "unfair" in the survivors eyes to stop themselves losing? Or when they take advantage of bad survivor plays? Even if thats a totally fair and correct thing to do in a PvP game? Or if they play a killer people dislike for whatever random BS reason? Because they dont follow the "survivor rulebook"? There's atleast one survivors raging in endgame chat every game for no reason except ego.
There is a ton of reasons why letting other people decide what you get is an awful idea, not least of all because a system like this obviously benefits survivors infinitely more than killers who will never get a fair or equal opportunity to benefit.
There are already plenty of games with endorsement, honor, thumbs up, or commendation systems tied to small rewards. The idea itself is not new to gaming.
What I don’t understand is that your argument about “survivor bias” is itself incredibly biased. You’re essentially arguing that survivor players are incapable of recognizing skill, sportsmanship, or impressive play from killers or one another. You’re criticizing the hypothetical bias of survivors while simultaneously assuming survivors are inherently too unfair or petty to ever use the system honestly. That’s the exact kind of bias you’re accusing others of having.
A huge portion of the playerbase plays both roles. Many even main specific killers themselves.You’re telling me a Huntress main playing survivor wouldn’t appreciate seeing an orbital? Or a Billy player wouldn’t recognize a really skilled curve just because they happened to queue survivor that round?
And again,this system already effectively exists. There’s already a thumbs up/props feature in the game right now. The data already exists. The suggestion is simply giving that system some actual purpose.
Nothing about this negatively impacts players. It doesn’t punish you. It doesn’t reduce rewards. It doesn’t affect MMR. It’s literally just positive reinforcement for players who leave a good impression on others. Encouraging positive interactions is not a bad thing.
-
@Shinkiro said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4078527#Comment_4078527
Rewards like extra BP, Cells, Banners, even exclusive cosmetics that are tied to rewards given to you by other players.
Nah thats an awful idea tying rewards to strangers opinions of you, especially with how irrational, misinformed, bias, hateful and salty this playerbase is.
Hm, I mean I get why anything with punishments would be abused but that’s why I feel thumbs up certainly can’t be? If someone doesn’t enjoy that person then they just don’t give a thumbs up? If you get extra BP or cells it’s just a bonus?
Are you saying that if some people get rewards because other players liked playing with them that it wouldn’t be good? I don’t see how rewarding other players by players could be a bad thing.
-
I can definitely see how it would be abused even though I do agree that some kind of system similar would be cool. Personally I think using the thumbs up rating, and it resulting in some kind of actual in-game accomplishment would be great, and would not be abused. Rewards like extra BP, Cells, Banners, even exclusive cosmetics that are tied to rewards given to you by other players. It would encourage more people to think of some of the positives in the match rather than just the negatives and reward players for being great teammates or opponents. BHVR has the thumbs up data, just hasn’t used it yet.
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
I’ve said this in lots of other threads already, but slugging is only a problem in the survivors don’t pick up their teammates. In fact, survivors should be glad killers are slugging and not hooking, because hooks mean that you’re closer to dying. I’ve only had a handful of matches ever where the whole team was slugged, and I was far angrier at my teammates for not picking anyone up than I was at the killer for slugging. If my teammates are actually picking people up, the slugging killer very rarely wins the match in my experience.
For the downvoters who disagree - go play some matches as killer, don’t hook anyone, and see how it goes. You might be surprised how ineffective it is.
I feel this is kind of an intentionally reductive take on slugging.
At its simplest, sure, slugging only works if survivors don’t pick each other up. But that’s like saying SWF is only strong if killers can’t down them. Technically true, but it ignores all the layers that actually make those things difficult in practice.A player that’s building around heavy slugging don’t just randomly leave people on the ground. They usually bring specific killers, perks, and strategies designed to make pickups difficult or unsafe while slugging is really strong on them. Meanwhile, survivors often have to preemptively dedicate perk slots to anti-slug just to combat it, and those tools come with restrictions and cooldowns, while slugging itself is completely base-kit. Someone slugging with twins, or Billy is going to have a different time than someone slugging with pig or trapper and I feel it’s disingenuous not to acknowledge that.
And this isn’t just low MMR pubstomp stuff either. Highlevel killers maintaining winstreaks slug when matches start slipping, because it’s an extremely effective form of pressure even against strong teams. Just saw this in a recent compilation by our otter friend who was trying ti maintain his kill streak and secured it by slugging the team.
You can absolutely argue some teams misplay against slugging, they do! But then that logic has to stay consistent elsewhere too. “Just pick up” is no different from saying “just down the SWF.”
BHVR has already acknowledged there’s a difference between strategic slugging and abusive slugging. They experimented with basekit anti-slug systems before, and in 2v8 they had to add anti-slug measures after the mode became heavily slug-focused (for no justifiable reason) the first go round.
So regardless of where people personally rank its strength, if slugging keeps becoming more normalized and oppressive, history suggests BHVR will probably step in eventually like they have with other unhealthy gameplay patterns.
-
@Rickprado said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4077889#Comment_4077889
Yeah, people don't seem to - or want to - get that. The current "slug fest" that some killer players are doing doesn't come from nowehere: it an answer to a meta that let killers in disadvantage if they hook. It easier to deal with 4 Unbreakables than with 4 DS, OTR, DH, Resurgence, and some Shoulder the Burden.
The devs can't just slap "anti-x" system without thinking on what consequences it will bring to the game, specially long time consequences and on high level. People already weaponize enough Anti-tunnel, anti-slug perks and even the basekit BT. Adding new systems without thinking on consequences will just make the game worse.
I do think the same could be said about the “go next” epidemic. Some people believed it didn’t come from nowhere, that it should be seen as a massive red flag. Other people believed it was nothing more than entitlement, and not that it was indicative of anything deeper. Regardless, an anti-go next system was put in place, egregiously so the first time so that even those that weren’t trying to go next but just got tunneled out were flagged and penalized. It was toned down since then, but still exists. The system is still in play, and it was a result of the go-next epidemic. I see no reason why if slugging really does become the next epidemic, it won’t receive the same kind of criticisms, treatment, and consequences.
-
@Mooks said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/IASM0N80EJKA/image.jpeg
Charlie, the Shadow Queen (Don’t Starve Together)
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/JSNBL5LB4QA0/image.jpeg
The Lady (Little Nightmares)
Wait omg a little nightmares collab would be amazing! I’ve never thought about The Lady before, what a good suggestion.
-
I’m sorry you’ve had this kind of experience, that would certainly be enough for me to log off for the day. But please know that it’s not a killer specific issue. The players that are toxic killers are the same people that are toxic survivors. I do think there are different standards for both roles, and things one role is criticized for doing is not for the other, but that goes for both and anyone that tries to say otherwise is just biased past the point of communication (which is the real entitlement lol) There are plenty of people who will excuse anything if it happens to be their preferred role, and will say something isn’t toxic when it obviously is, but that’s something both roles suffer for. It’s not killers as a whole, it was a guy that was a jerk that happened to be playing killer at that moment. Still, your frustration is understandable and I’m sorry you went through that. I wish you better luck and better teammates in your future games!
-
I do agree they are very frustrating, especially when there’s only a few gens left and the killers and zombies are both hovering around them. But I don’t think nemesis or the zombies are OP. Annoying, absolutely, there’s plenty in this mode that is. But I don’t think it’s comparable in any way to why legion was pulled.
-
I think it would be cool to add weather and time of day modifications to maps. It’s all RNG which you will get, could be foggy, could be stormy, could be bright and sunny, could be late at night or early dawn. Obviously this wouldn’t really change indoor maps much, but maybe the lights could flicker every now and then or something.
-
Yes! I was hoping Julian would make an appearance the same way the girls have. We need an emo boy.
-
It would be nice if you could turn down survivor screams a bit. But as the user above said, maybe turning volume down overall is the right way to go.
-
@NeverSolus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4076761#Comment_4076761
Cog nailed it, I think. He and I have bickered back and forth a good deal but it's always been civil and respectful. We don't often agree, but I appreciate that he has been direct and respectful every time. Often enough our voting reflects that. But some of the other… let's call them less tone-minded folks in the forums tend to eat downvotes like calories.
Additionally while I dislike admitting it, many people are seeing recycled posts and sentiments that they have argued and argued and argued, only to reach no result. Eventually it's to be expected some number of those folks will just downvote to say 'I disagree' without offering actual context. As much as that seems unkind and to a degree it is, they are not obligate to explain their vote either.
It's not a perfect system, but it works well enough for the purpose I think.Just wanted to tag along and agree with your point of the same arguments being regurgitated over again and just wanting a quick yay or nay to that. Not that those topics aren’t important but there comes a point where you get tired of saying the same thing. That, and that there’s plenty of posts that are clearly a rant/vent or that the OP is so clearly.. let’s say passionate about whatever they’re talking about that you know they aren’t actually wanting to engage in any kind of points. And that if you do attempt some kind of counter argument or different perspective it is immediately written off because you’re not agreeing with them. I think downvotes are a quick way to disagree without “taking the rage-bait” so to speak in what can sometimes be nothing but an argument loop because they never intended for their point to be challenged in the first place.
-
@cammoking123 said:
Why not just let us see our teammates perks in the lobby? Seems less useful to see perks once the game has already started.
I believe this was avoided due to the possibility of your teammates lobby dodging if they don’t like your perks.
-
@ShanoaLegendaryPlz said:
Perhaps they could change anticamp altogether. Like one example being how ghost face gets revealed by close range line of sight, if you can stare directly at the killer in a certain range it fills the bar seperately alongside the main anticamp range. This makes it so killers can pressure hooks but have to stay out of sight or actualy go after people. And can still have immense pressure on basement hooks
That could be an interesting flip. I like to imagine that one day kindred will be basekit, only as far as seeing teammates and not killer aura, because it would be a perk that helps Solo pretty much exclusively. But I know many people have a concern about what kindred would become if a variant of it became a base game feature. It might be neat if it turned into a revealing killer aura perk depending on proximity to the hook and the one on it. If you can see the killer for “x” Amount of distance, their aura shows up for your team. The counter to this being hiding out of line of sight of the survivor on hook or not proxy camping. But maybe it would be a good replacement if the teammate aura aspect of kindred ever became base kit.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4076579#Comment_4076579
As much as I detest full team slugging I'm reaching the same mindset. It's already happening to me at least once every time I play survivor, by killers running Infectious and Coulrophobia. It's almost always p100 killers (often Unknowns) on Twitch too. At this point I can only hope it gets so bad they finally do something about it.
Last month's excuse was FT but nothing's changed. Now it's apparently the fact that survivors have perks at all.
Yeah, 100%. When people started to explain that the reason for the slugging was because of FT, I pushed back only because the “reason” for slugging is always changing. It was never about denying 1 perk, it’s about denying as many perks as possible, as many people who advocate for slugging explain. FT happens to be another perk that could be rendered useless by slugging, but it was absolutely not the cause of it. And as I said already, the fact that it is even possible to deny so many perks from ever even activating, whose only counter to it involve perks with cool downs and restrictions, compared to the actual act which requires none of those things, should not be possible. And while I don’t want to face it anymore, there’s a glimmer of hope that hey, if it starts to become an issue then we know changes will come along so, maybe a very distance twinkle of light at the end of that very dark and long tunnel.
-
I’ve said something similar on another post; that while I don’t support this kind of playstyle because I don’t think it should be possible to be able to disable dozens of perks from ever even activating, if it ends up getting enough attention then maybe it will be just what is needed for changes to be made.
If BHVR doesn’t see it as a problem then there won’t be a solution, so until it reaches a “problem” status, it’s best to just move on to the next match. If it really does end up becoming the new meta, and then possible a probe, there will more than likely be base-kit anti-slugging feature implemented in the same way they had to do for 2v8.
-
@KingKongBubba said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4076562#Comment_4076562
You can write a whole essay when I only have to write to you this game has MMR and everything you just wrote is meaningless.
…you asked for counter arguments and I provided some? If you aren’t looking for that and just wanted to rant about how you personally feel, that’s fine too. But I tried to give you what you specifically asked for.