jesterkind
jesterkind
About
- Username
- jesterkind
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,633
- Last Active
Comments
-
She just put herself in timeout...
Nah, I agree, Nemesis could use some help and the zombie AI is one of the biggest areas to be focused on. They're already a pretty nice tracking tool, but they could really do with being more consistent.
-
@JonahsTablet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2967378#Comment_2967378
Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way, but the reward is literally all I care about, however, the difficult place I'm in right now is whether I should continue P3'ing characters.
The real question to ask when it comes to P3'ing characters would be: Do you want the actual bonus for doing it, which is having all those perks unlocked without needing to get them in the bloodweb?
Or, maybe, the question is: Do you want to have everyone P3'd? Would that, alone, give you a sense of accomplishment?
It would definitely be nice to find out what the bonus is beforehand, but you said it yourself- it's not a cosmetic and it's almost certainly not auric cells, so is it really going to matter?
-
Not really? The bonus that they're being secretive about is hardly the main draw for prestiging, it's just something to acknowledge the efforts of people who prestiged before the change.
We know plenty about the stuff that actually matters, so I don't really mind that they're saving something as a reveal. Maybe they don't have it fully finalised yet, or maybe it's meant to be a surprise, it doesn't make much of a difference either way.
-
There's good cause to restrict how much players can affect their own FoV, but I do agree that it should never be on a perk.
In my opinion, the settings menu should have a toggle for whether you want default FoV, or Shadowborn FoV, and the perk can be reworked to do something else entirely. That way the problem can be addressed for people who are affected by it and need the perk, without needing to sacrifice their loadout slots.
-
@Adjatha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2965384#Comment_2965384
You're missing the main point: The game, as it is, ISN'T set up to play casually. The perks, buffs, nerfs, items,, and so forth have next to zero internal balance to the point that they would have to overhaul nearly every aspect of the game to fix things. And, like it or not, the game with MMR always-on is Perma-Ranked Mode. There is no option to opt-out of Ranked, but there are also no limitations that make Ranked actually balanced.
Perhaps your mind is too set in what these kinds of differences look like in other, better balanced games. I'm describing a "Fun Mode" or a "Just Relax and Play" mode. Something that can be done CASUALLY, without feeling like going easy is going to leave you blown out of the water.
So first: what we have isn't Ranked. What we have is a normal Casual, without a Ranked to compare it to. Ranked would have limitations, pick/ban, and a connected ranked ladder with seasons that reset. We do have a ladder and a reset, but it's not based on queue, it's just your account's level-up system. Maybe the game would be better with a Ranked mode - grades would definitely make more sense then - but we don't currently have it; it's more than a technicality, it's about how those queues function.
Both use MMR. That isn't, and can't be, the distinguishing factor.
As for the game's balance, I don't agree fully but I do agree that currently the meta is such that if you want to go easy, you're almost certainly going to get stomped. Something to fix that would be great, and it'd probably look like a lot of basegame and perk changes, as well as maybe something like different modes or more robust custom game tools - what it wouldn't look like is a "casual" mode that functions more like Ranked, which just slaps bandaids on some problems.
I feel like your view is a little too narrow in scope. The problem isn't fixed by just adding in a second queue that puts heavy limitations on things some players don't like, the solution has to be more far-reaching and nuanced than that.
-
@Adjatha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2965377#Comment_2965377
The core design of this game relies on things that make the game less fun. And being afraid of a second queue to add new gameplay options is why DbD gets so incredibly stagnant and loses new players so constantly. DbD needs MORE game types, not Less.
I'm not saying a new queue is a bad idea in general, I'm saying that if you think there are things that need limiting, they should just be limited, or they should be fixed at their core.
If you want a casual mode, you've got one. If you want a mode with more restrictions, that's Ranked. I'm not passing judgement on those concepts (though, for the record, I do think a Ranked mode isn't a great idea), that's just how it is.
-
@Adjatha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2965367#Comment_2965367
That's why I asked, at the beginning, 'what IS a casual mode?'
Because "no restrictions" does not make the game loose and fun. It makes the game "you play to win or you play to lose."
My definition of 'casual' is "Putting limits into the game to remove the parts of the game that players hate."
I'm... pretty sure that just makes your definition wrong, though.
Again, look at other games that have a Ranked/Casual split. The one with the limitations is almost always the Ranked mode, at least off the top of my head. If there are things that make the game that unfun, they just need to be fixed, there doesn't need to be a whole second queue devoted to limiting them.
-
What you're describing is far more like a ranked mode? We have a casual mode, it's the one we have.
In a ranked/casual split, typically the ranked mode is the one with more restrictions, a pick/ban phase, and more efforts made to correct for 'cheap' or unfair gameplay. The casual mode, by contrast, is the one where anything goes and there are no restrictions on characters or tools.
MMR does not make what we have a ranked mode. Casual modes in other games use MMR too.
-
You're right.
The problem with NOED isn't that it's too strong, the problem with NOED is that it's annoying. Evaluated on its merits as a tool, compared to the other perks in the game, it's aggressively mid-tier. Very flimsy, requires good play throughout a match with only three perks active (without accounting for bad survivor play at the last second, of course), and only active during a very short window, on top of being the most counterable perk in the game. It simply isn't OP, because it's barely even good.
But, it's still annoying to be hit by NOED, so I support it getting changed. Just not nerfed, it doesn't warrant that.
-
@Kaitsja said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2963782#Comment_2963782
Don't make me dig up a quote from @jesterkind on why hexes and boons are not the same thing.
I have a reputation now...
But also yes. Hexes and boons are not the same mechanic, and cannot be balanced the same way.
-
Because it's completely counter to the core design of boon totems, would be my guess.
Granted, there's also no reason for it to be a perk, but I suppose it's nice to have the option.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2962356#Comment_2962356
I thought the goal is to entice people to use more perks out of the 100 + I'm existence. And not stick to the same old 5-6. The same thing will happen. The same 5-6 beat perks will be used
People are always going to use the best tools available, that's why a meta forms in the first place. What an ongoing game like DBD can do is make sure there are a lot of viable options, and to tweak things whenever it gets too stale.
No game developer can stop a meta from forming, but they can stop it from getting too stale. Hence their current attempt at nuking this meta and letting a new one form, hopefully one that's a little less restrictive and stale.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2962344#Comment_2962344
The problem is. The meta is the meta. No matter what happens. While I agree the meta needs shaken. There will just be a new meta
...Yeah? That's the goal.
They want a new meta. That's quite explicitly what they're trying to achieve here.
-
@Alexmon70 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2960994#Comment_2960994
Right but, does being a very balanced perk suddenly mean you HAVE to change it? are people that sick of BBQ that they want it to be changed entirely?
If the problem you want to solve is that everyone brings the same handful of perks into every match, properly solving that problem is going to require changing those perks.
That being said, I still maintain that I don't think they really are going to change BBQ beyond making its BP bonus basekit. That alone will drop its pickrate to something healthier.
-
@BenZ0 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2961408#Comment_2961408
Ye well but again why is it then called like the exact mechanic and also now still works like this exact mechanic like one of the biggest game genres implemented. There is nothing wrong with using ideas of different games, especially something as big and known as prestige. Changing the actual mechanic will just be unecessary confusion. Ask a friend of you that never played dbd and (obviously this person should also be a gamer) tell him dbd has prestige, he will most likely think of the exact same thing of what Call of duty has.
I think you're overestimating how much people know about specific CoD mechanics, in general. I doubt any of my gamer friends could tell me what CoD's Prestige mechanic does, or even give me a unified single answer on what Prestige is in a video game, because it's pretty dependant on playing that genre of game.
But that's not really the point. Rather, I'd like to highlight that taking things from other games is absolutely valid, but when you do that, you will inevitably change it. For a lot of games, sure, Prestige is hitting the level cap, going over it, and losing progress. But I don't think it's fair to say it must work like that.
The core of it is still there- you hit the level cap and you keep going. That's the achievement, the losing progress thing is just to emphasise that you're "starting over", it's still a prestige without that.
-
I don't think resetting the progress is the important part of the Prestige concept. Personally, I'd say the bragging rights is about hitting the level cap and going over it, which is still maintained with the updates.
-
Do I gotta bust out the "boons and hexes are not the same mechanic and cannot be balanced the same way" deal again?
-
Honestly, I think Scarecrow would make for a good killer in his own right, not just a skin.
-
@ThiccBudhha said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2960985#Comment_2960985
No. Barbecue does not define the meta. Maybe it defines the BP farm meta, but that is not the meta of the game. I guess from a certain point of view, lol.
The problem with nerfing off meta perks that have high pickrates is that you would REINFORCE the actual meta. It makes the problem objectively worse.
If it's got a high pickrate, it is part of the meta. The meta isn't just the strongest stuff hypothetically, it's functionally the stuff that people use to be the most effective. That means it provides the value people want and it provides it more easily/consistently than other tools.
BBQ is meta. The value it provides is for bloodpoints farming.
-
@Alexmon70 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2960933#Comment_2960933
I actually agree entirely with your first statement. If it were made basekit it would incentivise going after everyone, not just you know, camping one.
However, If BBQ isn't meta defining, just used for the BP wouldn't that make it fine? Like I understand its used a lot but maybe its because of the BP bonus, not simply the aura reading which, again, is still not overtuned. its not really fair imo
It is meta defining. It's one of the most used perks, making it by definition a meta perk. If you want to change the meta, you have to change the meta perks, even the ones that aren't actually causing any problems on their own.
But like I said, if I were them I wouldn't bother changing it beyond just taking the extra BP off it and making that basekit. That seems like the most logical choice to me, and I'm sure that's at least been discussed at BHVR.
-
If I were them, I'd absolutely make that part basekit. Hell, I don't think they'd even need to touch BBQ after that- it'd be a nice tool for mid-game tracking, but it definitely wouldn't be used as frequently as it is now.
Though, the reason it needs to be touched is because it's overrepresented and they want to shake up the meta. That means things get changed, even if they're okay in a vacuum.
-
It's not because of the mysterious rewards, but as soon as the PTB is over, I'm gonna P3 some killers in preparation of their teachables being given to everyone else-- especially Leatherface.
-
I think it's just a knee-jerk reaction to change.
Personally, I think it's fine. I can't say it looks nicer than the old one, but I don't think it's worse, either; just more of a standard game menu. The background still looks cool, and that's what matters imo.
-
I'm a big fan of her visual design. Facial scars are such a good vibe to use for characters, I really like it.
Wouldn't say she's "main" material, I don't pick survivors to main, but she's definitely one of my favourite designs for original characters for sure!
-
Hexes and boons aren't equivalent, and thinking that they are is why this supposed hypocrisy is annoying you so much.
Now, hexes aren't in a particularly great spot and could use a little love, that much I'll agree with, but old Undying did warrant a nerf, and boons aren't the same thing. A boon is supposed to be replaceable because the idea is that you're dragging more and more slowdown out of survivors by forcing them to reset their buffs multiple times, since snuffing takes a second and resetting takes fourteen(? I think that's the number).
That's the goal. I'm sure people can point out multiple reasons they think boons don't reach that goal, but none of those reasons are going to be that they're replaceable- that's the core that everything else must be balanced around, not a problematic aspect getting in the way.
Also, in general, the game isn't actually survivor sided. If everyone brings their strongest stuff and is of equal skill, it's mooooostly balanced and generally tips one way or the other based on map RNG, if it tips at all. The problem is, bringing your strongest stuff on killer means locking yourself in to one of three killers, and if you don't like how those killers play, tough luck, you're always going to be at a slight-to-extreme disadvantage when your opponents do bring their strongest tools.
-
@GlamourousLeviathan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2957141#Comment_2957141
Ikr, it's probably the single most questionable choice they have made since deciding to create Trickster.
Trickster makes perfect sense, fits into DBD's aesthetic and tone perfectly, and has a really compelling story concept to boot.
Wesker is legitimately the weirdest and least fitting thing that'll have ever come to the game, at least based on what I know. I won't pretend to be an RE superfan, but I've picked things up here and there and I've seen some clips.
-
Hopefully they understand what to do with it, and don't just nerf it. A mediocre, inconsistent perk like NOED needs a full, ground-up rework if you're going to change something about it, not just more limitations slapped on its current effect.
-
While obviously Lady D is the best choice (with close second being a tie between Jack Baker and Heisenberg), I do think the sheer deranged insanity of picking Wesker is entertaining in its own way, so I'm not that upset.
-
He deserves it, I saw his performance in that adorably ill-fitting jacket. Masterful.
-
Well, if you're concerned about pure numbers, survivors got double the generic perks that killers did when the Stranger Things perks were made generic, so it holds up on that end.
-
I think it makes sense that you won't be able to do challenges or achievements while you're in a custom game, but I would like to see some bloodpoints and XP. Maybe at a reduced rate, like 50%? That seems fair to me.
-
If I had to guess, the timer is probably to make sure the stream is up and running while they prepare the content of the stream, so they've got time to handle any technical difficulties?
I really don't see why they couldn't announce the actual start time though, that's beyond me.
-
Assuming it's not baseless trolling, which it very well may be, it could be to make sure your attention stays on them so their teammates can keep progressing the objective?
Genuinely not sure, can't say I do it myself.
-
As much as I'd love to hear that too, I don't think they typically announce that kind of thing in anniversary streams?
Maybe I'm wrong, I've only been around for one previously to this, but it feels like this is more a celebration and a teaser at future additions, rather than somewhere they'd announce a single perk change.
-
My guess is that it's just an oversight. That kind of thing happens, though the map offering should prrrooobably be killswitched? A single uncleansable totem is a bit of an edge case, but it's not great even if it isn't abusable.
-
@AetherBytes said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2953858#Comment_2953858
I didnt suicide, I held out because im not a #########, but these images should speak for themselves
They really shouldn't, and they don't. There are a variety of things one could infer from this image, and all of them lack proper context.
If your point is that solo queue teammates don't rush to save each other, this image doesn't inherently convey that nor support it. I don't even disagree with that sentiment, though it by no means justifies suiciding, it's just that this image has nothing to do with it lmao.
-
@AetherBytes said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2953798#Comment_2953798
I was totally abandoned, and after spectating, so was the other guy.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2953781#Comment_2953781
Being totally abandoned.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2953782#Comment_2953782
I agree. Yet heres why a lot of people do it. Cause no ones gonna come ######### save them anyway so why bother?
...But why would they go save you if you're suiciding?
Or, conversely, how would you know you were abandoned if you started suiciding? They could've thought that allowing you to hit second stage while they were finishing repairs was a tactically wise move, which it might've been. There were only two gens left, prioritising a generator that's nearly finished over an immediate save is not, by any stretch, "abandoning" the hooked player.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2953781#Comment_2953781
I'm only guessing, but I think it might be that there are 2 people hooked, and neither of the other 2 are coming to save them.
But the context is suiciding. Why would they be going to save teammates who started giving up and suiciding on the hook? That'd be a giant waste of their time.
Especially since there's two gens left, and those two players are both seemingly working on one. Maybe one or both of those are very close to finished, and the plan - in the head of the survivors who aren't hooked, anyway - was to finish it and then book it to the hook to get a save. That'd be a smart play in that situation, surely you'd agree, and the fact that the two who got hooked are suiciding is making everything a lot worse.
@Sumnox said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2953781#Comment_2953781
Person who never plays solo queue survivor spotted.
I only ever play solo queue when I play survivor, that doesn't give this image any of the context it desperately needs for any kind of salient point.
-
...Help me out, what's supposed to be wrong with this image that'd warrant suiciding on hook?
-
I mean, even if it's announced on this stream (which I somewhat doubt?) it wouldn't take effect until the next update.
I wouldn't expect to hear anything about Dead Hard, though. I don't think that's the kind of thing that normally shows up in anniversary streams, but I might be wrong.
-
Twins, which is nice since they're up next.
After them, though... I'd say probably Myers. He's not the weakest killer in the game, that isn't what I'm basing this on, but rather he could desperately do with a little modernising to help him be less clunky and outdated. I'd also like to see a proper overhaul for Freddy, not a ground-up rework but something to shift his focus and give him a bit more of a unique identity.
-
I'm not sure if "power role" is actually a real term within game development, but my understanding of the concept of the power role isn't, like... whichever one happens to be stronger?
The killer cannot be removed from the match, and can only be ran from or briefly stunned. They are, regardless of balance, the power role, because the inherent mechanics at play imbue them with far more sturdiness and inevitability than the survivor role. The fact that certain survivor tools are too strong doesn't make them the power role, it just makes those things too strong.
I also feel like a lot of people think being the "power role" should mean you win by default and only lose chases if you mess up, which is... pretty obviously silly? It's a video game, skill expression should matter on both sides. In a more balanced version of the game, survivors are still going to have agency in chase and the killer is still going to have to try.
-
Surely this joke is getting old by now?
Even if the statement were something worth mocking, surely it's been beaten into the ground by this point?
-
If we're going by sound, I'd say the map that sounds the most eerie would be the Artist's map.
Eh? Ehhhh?
I'm wasted on you people.
More seriously, I'd say the most is probably either Midwich or Lery's, the sound design and visuals for those maps are legitimately unsettling. Least would probably be... any of the McMillan maps, honestly. They're pretty inert, in terms of creepiness.
-
I'm not sure I see the comparison being drawn here?
Dead Hard is a problem specifically because it lets you get to a new loop and extend the chase for free. It's actually less useful against the "anti-loop" killers, because you're already not really spending much time in loops and the only way you can use DH is to dodge a hit, which is its weaker (but far more fair and balanced) use anyway. So, if you nerf DH to take away its free distance for a reset, anti-loop killers aren't affected nearly as much as M1 killers, who are the ones who struggle more against it.
Like, obviously there's the fact that you don't need to change anything else when bringing something overpowered in line, but even if that were a thing- the one-to-one just doesn't stack up. M1 killers would be the ones most improved via a Dead Hard nerf, not the anti-loop killers.
-
@Ethromel said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2951034#Comment_2951034
I'm not sure if you read my whole post, but I believe I already noted the incentive you mentioned. It's literally my first sentence. And, yes, it is supposed to be a scary experience to some extent. That's what horror is all about. There is no "stretch" there. If YOU are not the type to get freaked out in nervous situations well then kudos to you, but when I play as a killer I actually scare players.
My point was to respect both aspects of play styles to acknowledge the stealth player that is more reserved, just as much as they reward the upfront players. There is no timer in these trials, so the need to rush is not entirely necessary.
People are going to make mistakes naturally, so there is no need to force the narrative and game mechanics by incentivizing players to be reckless and speedy as they want to be. They need to reward both styles because both accomplish something, and most survivors DO spend their time hiding from the killer so there is an emphasis on stealth, but not a point towards it other than UNBROKEN in the emblems.
For the record, I play VERY well as a survivor and a killer. However, I want both approaches to be recognized.
But if the stealthy player doesn't ever do the things that earn the most points- save their teammates, get into chases, stun the killer, and so on- then the way they're playing shouldn't be rewarded. If their goal is to simply avoid the killer, do the generators, and get out, then they should be getting fewer points because they're avoiding all avenues of expressing their skill and they're not being particularly active players. That's what I mean when I say win and play well - you can't just do your objective and leave, and expect to get a lot of points out of that. What did you do, actively, to warrant more points?
I also refer you again to my first point: This is a PvP game. People shouldn't be rewarded for hiding from the killer because the point of the game is for the killer player and the survivor players to interact. There are situations where stealth is a good idea, but you don't need a BP reward for it in those situations, and if you reward stealthily avoiding the killer (more than simply ticking up Boldness while hiding in the terror radius), that means survivors are in some way encouraged to avoid some pretty integral parts of the game.
Finally, I'd like to acknowledge that the BP grind for survivors is materially worse than it is for killers, and that it's a problem for everyone even with that gap. That does need to be fixed, but the solution isn't to reward players for avoiding engaging with as much of the game as they can, pretty obviously.
-
Is the game intended to be scary? That seems like a bit of a stretch, considering the kind of gameplay that it has.
Regardless, the reason for that is that the killer is a human player, not an AI. As the developer of a PvP game, the absolute worst case scenario for you is a match where your players aren't interacting at all and the match just ends. How fun is that for anyone involved, really? There needs to be incentives for the killer and the survivors to interact, and for the survivors to be helping one another, because that's where the meat of the gameplay is supposed to come from- powering the exit gates and escaping is your win condition, yes, but there needs to be more texture and action within a trial than just sitting on a generator for multiple minutes and then leaving. This isn't a stealth game, after all; not fully. That's just one aspect of it.
It's better that it's done this way, where it's just an incentive instead of a hard requirement. If you want max points, you need to do more than just win- you need to win and play well. I don't see anything wrong with that.
-
I might be slightly curious to see my own, but that information isn't exactly relevant if I had it. What difference does it make to me to know what position I'm in for a matchmaker system? It's not a ranked ladder, so there's no actual point or benefit to seeing what my number is. There'd be no upside at all for myself or for anyone else other than satisfying idle curiosity.
There'd be downsides, though. There's the elitism thing that people like to pretend they can simply handwave away, but even more pressingly than that, it'd make people think the MMR system is what they should be basing their tactics and playstyle on when it's not built for that. There's absolutely no reason to even try and "climb" the MMR since it's only a matchmaking tool, but if people could see the number, they would want to try and make the number go up.
The problem the game currently has is that its actual ladder, the grades system, isn't really given as much attention as it should be. If people want to know their own skill, if people want an incentive set to have them playing in a certain way, if people want a clear goal and clear rewards for that goal, that's what the grades system is for- it just isn't very interesting right now, so people kinda just ignore it. Obviously the current flaws with the system should be fixed, something that does seem to be happening somewhat slowly, but in my opinion we also do need to provide a viable set of incentives and structure for those who'd want to treat the MMR system like it's a ranked ladder.
-
@Coordi said:
I currently rock what I like to call my SoloQ mom build most of the time: Botany Knowledge, Borrowed Time, Empathy, and Prove Thyself. Prove Thyself tends to be interchangeable depending on how I am feeling.
Depends on the killer for what I run, like Huntress I really love Thanatophobia, Fearmonger, Iron Maiden, with the last perk interchangeable depending on my mood. But for Blight I enjoy a Ruin/Undying/Tinkerer with a 4th. Several killers I enjoy Lethal Pursuer on to get a strong start, been loving Call of Brine/Tinkerer on Freddy and Sadako!
Lethal Pursuer on killers with a slow start like Myers is severely underrated, it's a really nice perk to have in your arsenal for certain situations.
-
I've been experimenting with Legion builds too, I figured out two pretty cool ones!
There's one that I call the "Anti-Gideon's" build, that consists of Julie's Mixtape and Iridescent Button, with the perks Spirit Fury and Enduring. The build where you don't have to care about pallets whatsoever, at the cost of making it considerably less likely you'll be chaining hits since getting stunned resets you. Secondary perks are normally things like BBQ and Jolt or Pain Resonance, still experimenting with that.
Then there's the "Empowered Endgame" Legion, consisting of BFFs and Mural Sketch (for easier chaining) and the perks NOED, No Way Out, Deadlock, and the fourth perk of your choice. If you can get BFFs to proc and No Way Out to full stacks, it makes the endgame far more potent in your favour.
All in all I love that Legion has this room for experimentation now, the buffs were a huge success.