jesterkind
jesterkind
About
- Username
- jesterkind
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,633
- Last Active
Comments
-
@DattPugg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933841#Comment_2933841
But here's a counter argument to that:
Whether or not survivors feel like it's a necessity to run BT, its still a perk slot that could go to something else. If that perk slot is emptied, they could run ANOTHER meta perk, maybe a prove thyself, an iron will etc. And again, killers (with a couple exceptions) get ######### on most matches already, so buffing the average swf without helping out the killer would be a laughable decision.
How would simply gifting killers a free perk fix that, though?
It's just not a good way to look at game balance. There's a problem that needs fixing, and something like a basekit BT would fix it. Any problems killers have, or problems with the game's current meta, are related but not identical; they need different solutions.
-
@DattPugg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933820#Comment_2933820
This is somewhat cryptic but what I'm gathering is that you think survivors should buffed by basekit without any compensation for killer? I'm sorry, but you have to be joking. A solid swf will beat a solid killer (minus a nurse) 10 times to 1, especially if they can run ANOTHER meta perk instead of BT.
The counter argument, though, would be that BT isn't actually what makes survivors strong. It's a meta perk because people feel they have to run it to save their teammates from tunnelling, because there's no answer to hardcore tunnelling in the base mechanics of the game- the same reason that new DS is run, that perk isn't overwhelmingly powerful anymore but it answers a genuine need.
If survivors were getting one of the perks that's meta simply because it's strong (Dead Hard, CoH, Spine Chill, etc) as basekit, absolutely. But what's being talked about is a perk that exists to cover a gap in the game's core mechanics, not one of the actually absurdly strong perks that make the survivor meta so robust at the moment.
Granted, if it really was just the literal effects of BT, that would be quite a lot- but the answer to that isn't to give killers a freebie in an escalating arms race of things being OP, it's to nerf the basekit effects to something reasonable.
-
Not voting but weighing in here, because the right answer is "SBMM has some flaws but it's better than grades, which were fundamentally unfit for purpose from the start".
I find a lot of the time, people's objections to the MMR system we have stems from one of two main misunderstandings- either a misunderstanding of matchmaking versus balance (IE, those who complain about 'sweaty' games or only seeing meta perks, not understanding that what they're complaining about is the result of good matchmaking and a flaw with the game's overall balance) or a misunderstanding of single-game skill versus overall skill (IE, those who say the MMR system doesn't measure skill because they can't grasp that it measures your consistent skill, nor your skill in one specific match).
I've simply yet to hear a reason why the grades system would be better, beyond either one of those misunderstandings or a frankly revisionist-level rosy view of grades.
-
We know that the developers pay attention to how specific perks, addons, items, etc influence the kill rate, so there's no worry of NOED inflating the overall kill rates and preventing the devs from seeing any potential imbalances there.
...There's also no worry of that anyway because NOED is a bad perk that only inconsistently gives value, but still, the devs pay attention to this kind of thing.
-
I miss it. It was always my favourite map, and I've been bummed to see it go since day one.
The new maps are great visually, though, it has nothing to do with "old DBD".
-
It doesn't work that way.
BT being basekit would be done to achieve a very specific goal- namely, to give survivors more of a basekit tactic to use against hard-tunnelling, since it's a genuine flaw of the game that they're helpless to prevent a tactic like that. With some variation on BT basekit, it'll help them at least get a few metres from the hook so they can start having some kind of input in the situation, even if they'll probably go down to a smart killer anyway.
What killer perk would achieve a comparable goal- that being, a flaw with the game that prevents killers from having input in a situation? I'd argue none; the closest would be some kind of slowdown, since gens can go by very fast in the early game, but even the best possible pick for that - Corrupt Intervention - is not a pure upside for all killers. Hag and Trapper won't like their ability to set up hamstrung like that, for one...
The killer side absolutely needs some changes too, but it's not as simple as "survivors get a treat so killers get a comparable one too". Balance is more nuanced than that.
-
I don't think so, not in any way that's a problem,
The two addons you mentioned are good, but hardly their only viable ones- they have a lot of genuinely good addons that can be incorporated into actual builds instead of just being good in a generic way. Running them without any addons is probably not a good idea, but that's true of every killer, so I don't view it as a problem.
-
It's better for you, while you have medkit charges.
CoH is better for your whole team and doesn't require medkits to give acceptable speeds.
It's more of a lateral choice now- do you want guaranteed value for yourself, or potential value for your whole team?
-
@MauriceMaverick said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931911#Comment_2931911
Yes, because we RALLY would play as Surv in this mod.
Some people would, it'd be good practice.
Besides, the survivor bots would still need to know how to play against every killer power. That's just as much work, if not moreso.
-
The current explanation iirc is that while they don't dislike the idea, it'd take a lot more work than people think- every killer bot would have to know how to use every killer power and the survivor bots would have to know how to play around every killer power, on top of potentially using perks and items if that's something present in the match.
So, it's a huge amount of work upfront and more work every time they add new killers. Maybe they'll do it sometime, they seem to be working on their bots in general, but that was their explanation in the last QnA based on my hazy recollection lol.
-
I have a fondness for Brutal Strength since it also applies in other areas - faster generator kicking and faster wall breaking is a nice bonus on top of pallet breaking - but honestly, I don't think either perk is particularly fantastic on its own.
Enduring is good with Spirit Fury, and I don't know that Brutal Strength is ever really super viable in the current state of the game, so I'd say Enduring is probably a little better overall. Neither are actually good though, strictly speaking, so use either.
-
Both is necessary, in my opinion.
Dead Hard being reworked would indeed help out... let's say Clown, he's the absolute bottom, but it's not going to mean he no longer needs some changes. At minimum plenty of killers deserve an addon pass, completely disregarding the strength of Dead Hard.
The same can be true of survivor options, too. Plenty of perks need buffing, and items in general need an overhaul.
-
@Emeal said:
I think you misunderstood them, I think they are referring to the reason they had to 'BM', not that its actually deserved morally.
Bad manners don't exist in Dead by Daylight during a game, except a refusal to play the game.
Tunneling/Camping etc while unpleasant, is not bad manners, its a part of the game.
I disagree, BM within a match absolutely exists, for both sides. Facecamping + repeatedly hitting on hook is BM, and hanging around in the exit gates long after anyone else is left in the trial just to teabag is BM.
Neither of them are huge deals, but they're still bad manners. Something to roll your eyes at and move on.
-
Nah.
I consider it cocky, and sometimes kinda annoying, but it's not toxic. People just assume that anything which irritates them in the moment must be toxic, instead of just being kinda irritating and nothing more.
-
I'd really love to see a test where aim dressing is disabled, similar to the Bloodlust test. Right now, it feels like it causes more harm than good, and having that confirmed or denied would be nice- I'm willing to stomach the few missed-hits I get if the game genuinely is worse without it, but I'm sceptical that's the case.
-
This is a legitimate pet peeve of mine, because it's not auto-aim, nor does it work like auto-aim.
It turns your camera if you already got the hit. Auto-aim would turn your actual hitbox to give you a hit that otherwise would've missed. They're different things.
The aim dressing system sucks, for the record, I'm not defending its inclusion in the game, but it legitimately isn't auto-aim.
-
From what we know, it's not in BHVR's hands, so it's honestly hard to say.
Maybe it'll get okayed within the week, maybe it'll take years. Business deals are a weird and inscrutable thing.
-
@Furgoe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2928526#Comment_2928526
Fair point, 'this bad' isn't very descriptive. Basically going from playable to mostly unplayable re; server connectivity issues. Pair that with the weird happenings with the chat filter and it's enough to give a newcomer some justifiable concern imo.
And yeah, if the toxicity of the actual game has any measure of spillover into the forums I'm sure there is bound to be some ridiculous overblowing of actual issues.
It's very possible that is a patch thing, but hopefully it'll be fixed pretty soon.
It happens, DBD isn't the most polished and stable game that's ever been released, but usually it doesn't last too long- at least on PC. I've heard console has pretty consistent performance issues, but to be fair, those wouldn't have started post-patch so they're not super relevant here.
-
I'm not sure what you mean by "this bad", but thankfully that leads into my answer to your question anyway:
There's usually something, but it's usually minor and doesn't usually affect everyone. I genuinely haven't noticed any diminished performance or major bugs (except for Bitter Murmur not working for some reason) on my end, so even if you're noticing something this time, you might not next time.
There'll be hotfixes for some things, though. Those usually don't take too long to come out.
General rule of thumb for this community is that any complaint you see is either not really a problem or being blown at least somewhat out of proportion, if that helps.
-
"Most likely" seems to be a stretch.
I wouldn't mind a collab between those two, though. Maybe not a full chapter with a killer, but some charms and skins and such might be nice.
-
Hopefully never. I'd hate to see them backslide just because the improvement over the old system was minor instead of major.
Better to fix the current flaws than go back to the worse system.
-
Personally, I would love to see trans Susie.
But yeah, we've got a lot of good options for LGBT killers, a lot of them have stories that'd line up reasonably well with that kind of lived experience.
-
I have to disagree, honestly. Their basekit may only feel smoother (I don't think the five-hit instadown is intended to happen reliably, I think it's supposed to be a bonus for things going well), but they both dealt with Legion's single biggest basekit problem, their horrible fatigue, and gave them a suite of addons you can actually use to combo in specific builds now.
Julie's Mixtape + Spirit Fury + Enduring, for chewing through pallets. Maybe slap Iridescent Button in there too, for easier SF charging.
BFFs + NOED + No Way Out, for an extremely empowered endgame.
Stylish Sunglasses + Stab Wounds Study for really reliable tracking.
Builds like these just weren't possible before, and even if their basekit is only moderately better, the fact that they have this much more versatility makes this update a resounding success in my eyes.
-
@kate_best_girl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2926791#Comment_2926791
The fact they needed to devout an entire tome and make a huge twitter announcement over the fact a character is gay. It literally makes LGBT people look more like a spectacle and a zoo animal then it makes us look like normal everyday people who you'd see walking the street.
I disagree. If the tomes don't make any other subject look like a spectacle, then a tome about a character being LGBT doesn't either, and the twitter announcement is at least partially because people were asking about it up until now.
The other part is that representation is an important thing many, many, many stories are lacking, or not taking seriously. If it were just a twitter post announcing David to be gay and that's it, sure, I'd agree, but it's announcing the story being told, which is a very different vibe.
-
@kate_best_girl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2926771#Comment_2926771
It really doesn't though? Who cares if his ex boyfriend isn't talked about anymore like its really not a big deal. LGBT people aren't only LGBT my life doesn't revolve around me being gay so why should Soldiers and Tracers or David's? Why should it be a huge ordeal and spectacle that anyones gay especially when no one in DBD was even confirmed straight just at most bi?
It shouldn't revolve around that fact, but if they're going to be holding it up as representation and not just a side detail, it should be relevant to the story being told.
Which is the major difference between something like Soldier 76 and what BHVR's doing with David. It's not just baseless spectacle for brownie points, they're telling a story with it and letting it matter.
Now, I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with them also having new or even existing characters simply exist as LGBT without that facet of their identity having a whole tome devoted to it, but there's also nothing wrong with them choosing to take it seriously and tell a proper story with it either. Personally, I like that it's more substantial than simply noting his orientation and moving on, and I certainly don't think that makes it a "huge ordeal and spectacle"- it's obviously a good and reasonable thing for stories that are about LGBT people to exist, so what's the issue with it happening here?
-
The thing is, it's not as though survivors haven't had useful or fun perks in that time period. The Resident Evil DLC alone had some great perks, ranging from goofy fun ones like Flashbang and Blast Mine to legitimately useful ones like Bite The Bullet, Resurgence, and Counterforce.
The problem is that those perks, while fun and perks that bring noticeable value, are not enough to counteract the current meta perks. They're either not as overwhelmingly, overpoweringly strong as Dead Hard or old CoH, or they don't cover the same base-game gaps as Borrowed Time and Decisive Strike. Why run something that's just good and fun, when you can run something overpowered like DH and in a lot of cases must run something you'll feel punished for not running like DS and BT?
You don't fix the stale meta by piling on more perks trying to compete with the current top tier. You fix the stale meta by changing things about the game to make half the meta feel less necessary, and you nerf the other half of the meta, alongside a few key buffs to elevate a few underpowered perks.
(It goes without saying changes would have to be made on the killer side too to keep things in line if this happens, obviously.)
-
@kate_best_girl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2922485#Comment_2922485
The way soldiers and Tracers was handled was probably best. They didn't make it a huge deal, they didn't make it some big reveal, they didn't even talk on it they just casually mentioned he had a boyfriend. How isn't that a good way of handling it?
Tracer yes, Soldier no- at least within the context of their game.
Tracer's girlfriend is a named character, she's in some of the comics, and Tracer has some voice lines about her in-game. It's pretty lightweight, but Overwatch has pretty lightweight stories and lore anyway so it's in keeping with how the rest of the game's characterisation works. It's already not enough for DBD since DBD handles its characters and stories differently, but for Overwatch it was perfectly adequate.
Now, I might be mistaken since I stopped paying attention after a while, but as far as I'm aware Soldier being gay has never come up again? Does his boyfriend even have a name? It's not exactly particularly exciting representation when it's mentioned almost like an afterthought and nothing is ever done with it.
Either way; the reason to make it a big reveal is that it matters. Representation is lacking overall and especially in this game, so making a tweet saying that they're fixing that flaw is perfectly reasonable. Besides, it's in a tome, it makes sense they'd wanna show off the cool new revelation in their stories.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2920151#Comment_2920151
That would be absolutely amazing (as long as it's...classic Constantine, not the silliness that he's become since Vertigo was acquired). Maybe Nergal or The First as a killer?
Yeah, I can dream...
While we are at it, Rize from Tokyo Ghoul would be awesome.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/320417/next-big-license
Going by rumors, we're going to see a xenomorph, Pennywise and Chucky in due course. FNAF is somewhat inevitable.
I'd love a 'The Thing' chapter, possibly Candyman and I would never say no to a big spoopy spider.
Oh absolutely, we're talking classic Vertigo, not the DC integration. Even if you're a fan of the DC version, he's a little too big-time to really justify, whereas classic Constantine relies on his sly canny wit. Perfect fit.
Honestly, I don't think a killer's even necessary for this license- and hell, maybe BHVR could make up their own demon for it, that'd be pretty radical.
-
Oh damn, did they change it? It felt pretty good on the PTB.
-
@Kurri said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2923101#Comment_2923101
I think you're misunderstanding, or I'm not understanding you. Like yes it would be interesting, matter, and relevant to the story of the character. Subtle as in "Not everything about this character is being gay and LGBT+" and not "We're making this character because we have to get a gay character". It's not really easy to describe professional story-writing as a person who hasn't studied professional story-writing, but what I am trying to get across is that it's easier to slap a "This is gay" sticker on an already made character, and then have in the next lore chapter "by the way I'm gay, and here's how it went" than it is to flesh out a whole new character with an elaborate story that apart of their background is being LGBT+ and that having some kind of impact (but not entirely what the character is about etc).
Maybe in simplest terms, take the time to research the LGBT+ community, their backgrounds, their stories, and more than just them being LGBT+. Create a character around that. Flesh out their reality, etc, story writing, character creation. Instead of just "this is gay" sticker like other game companies did.
Heck they could of brought a natural LGBT+ character to the game, and then just mentioned David's gay in his lore later on and that may have been more fitting, but it appears they chose to go slap a "I'm gay" sticker on a fan favorite and then announce like they did a good job. Then if it comes up that it was forced they turn around and make another character gay the same way because they don't understand what real representation is like. The connected feeling you get with the character reading their lore for the first time, and inclusiveness - I can't really describe it because again I am not a professional writer, that can explain great character creation.
While I certainly see the value in what you're describing, I think there's a gigantic chasm between what we ended up with and it being "slapping a sticker" onto a character.
David makes sense as the character they chose for this, and depending on how the tome is written, it could be just as impactful and stirring as a new character designed around being LGBT - hell, it could be more than a new character, because people already know, identify with, and like David King. There's merit and value in expanding on existing characters in this way, it isn't inherently cheap or crass marketing.
That's not to say I don't think they should also be making new LGBT characters. I'm just saying that since expanding on existing characters is fine in theory, it makes sense to do that first since it's the tactic they can use to write a more direct and interesting story. They have more room to do it properly, and it's more of a big show for those who've been waiting for it.
Either tactic can be fine, and they should absolutely utilise both going forward. I empathise with feeling burned before with games like Overwatch, but context does matter and this is what doing it right would look like on BHVR's end.
-
I've always got some feelings of Gender:tm: from Jake, could be nonbinary after spending a long time in the woods figuring some stuff out. Hey/They icon.
-
@Kurri said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2923023#Comment_2923023
You said yourself "new character who has base lore mentioning a partner of the same gender." sounds about right. Most likely the path I would take. Natural and subtle enough that it fits in the world that's already been established.
I would sooner ask you what isn't forced about this? It looks like a classic move by BHVR's marketing. Same kind of move made by other gaming companies that don't care enough to put in the effort. "We need an LGBT+ character. How do we do this the easiest way possible? We know that a lot of LGBT+ ship Dwight and David, and a lot of LGBT+ are attracted to David. David it is", then they called up Phil Swift to slap "THIS IS GAY" on the character. Then get their lore team to write about it, and then got their communications person to tweet about it.
Hey Blizzard why isn't there a LGBT+ character? Blizzard marketing "Alright we need a LGBT+ character. A lot of people ship Tracer and Widow, and a lot LGBT are attracted to Tracer. Tracer it is." hen they called up Phil Swift to slap "THIS IS GAY" on the character. Then get their lore team to write about it, and then got their communications person to tweet about it. It continues for Blizzard "Tracer being gay seems to be forced, what's up with that?" and Blizzard responds, "no - not forced at all, and guess what Soldier 76's gay! haha" while in their notes they recognized that most people considered him Daddy, and a lot of the LGBT were attracted to him.
It's not just them, other game companies did it too. It's easier than making a whole new character - I get that. At least it's some representation too. Beggars can't be choosers, especially when money is involved.
But if the goal is to have something more substantial than simply making a character gay because of a marketing stunt, then surely you'd need to write something more substantial than just noting that a character has a partner of the same gender, right?
If you want some legitimate representation that's taken seriously, then for this game specifically, it'd be in a tome. Tomes, by and large, are for established characters, and if you're going to pick a character to expand on in this manner, who better than a character who is already considered a good pick by the community and is explicitly from an area with a huge LGBT community?
You say that a new character with a passing mention would be subtle, and surely that's not a good thing? Surely it'd be better, more impactful, more interesting representation if it actually matters and is relevant to a story being told?
-
@Kurri said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2922462#Comment_2922462
My feelings exactly. The only thing I asked for when it came to representation was it not to be forced. Like Blizzard did in Overwatch. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth when I see an already introduced character made gay as a way to basically say "Alright shut up about it now", and with this big announcement like "give us credit for forced representation, because representing you naturally was too much to ask for".
But whatever I already assume all these game companies are the same at this point. BHVR is no different than Blizzard. At least it appears they didn't do it for marketing gain, which has been another problem with representation.
May I ask, genuinely, what about this is forced?
I'd argue that doing it in a tome where there's room to actually explore it and make it a relevant part of a story is much more natural than, say, a new character who has base lore mentioning a partner of the same gender. I'd very much like to hear the opposing side here, because I don't see a more natural way to do it than this.
It's certainly better than saying Soldier 76 is gay and then doing nothing with that fact, surely?
-
As a noted trans myself, I would definitely also like to show my appreciation for the updated charm!
I already run the original pride charm all the time, and I'll definitely be running this one too.
-
@F60_31 said:
Representation in a horror game…
Anyway, it is pretty cheap just stating an existing character is suddenly gay.
But people have to be careful what they say to this, otherwise they are called homophobic by the woke bubble, like always.
Just saying that is cheap, yes. But the implication is that this announcement comes alongside the tome exploring it to some degree, which isn't cheap.
There has to be a right way for video games and other longrunning media to do representation, and doing it like this is probably going to be it; integrating it into a proper story so it's natural and part of the character.
-
@CkMongler said:
Representation is great and all, I had just hoped they would’ve focused their efforts on, you know, actually making the game better instead of addressing the horrible issue of nobody being canonically gay. Does it have to be canon? There’s been DbD gay porn for so long, I don’t get why this is important, but not addressing annoying imbalances on both sides is not.
I think I should make a version of that "don't make me tap the sign" meme, where the sign says "balance and writing are completely separate teams and one doesn't cannibalise resources from the other".
It'd be useful!
-
@[Deleted User] said:
A new survivor would have been better but BHVR have clearly chosen David because he’s established and very popular.
However stupid to anyone who isn’t a bigot it may seem I can fully imagine BHVR thinking that whilst many players would, a large number of other people would not purchase (even with shards) or play as a newly released confirmed LGBTQ+ survivor. Much better to choose the guy who many people main and will have P3 on. Plus if you want dead hard you have to level him up.
So the stats for people playing their confirmed gay character will probably be great and will grant them some imaginary internet brownie points from people who care about this sort of thing.
Whatever their reasons it’s still incredibly lazy.
I'm not sure I agree- if BVHR wants to do this properly, IE, make it a relevant and integral part of a story being told, they kinda have to do it in a tome. There's simply not room to do more than mention offhand a character's sexuality in base lore - and while there's absolutely no reason they shouldn't also do that, if they want their first big push to be something substantial, it's gotta be in a tome.
So, it was always gonna be an extant character, and while there are a lot of good choices for who, David is also pretty clearly up there. The dude's from Manchester, even, it definitely doesn't clash against his character in any way.
-
@humanbeing1704 said:
Feels disingenuous to make an already existing character lgbtq+ always felt like a half assed attempt at representation
Would it be disingenuous if they wrote a tome for David that made him straight?
Existing characters are perfectly valid, and since BHVR like doing lore through tomes, it makes more sense to make their first big push for representation an existing character so they can use a tome to explore it.
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
Cool?
As a fellow gay person myself, here's the part where I don't really care. shrug lol
Ohhhh they retroactively made a character gay. Big POG. It took them YEARS to do that. But yes, let's give them all the praise in the world, for taking this long, do to something as important as representation, and half-assing it like normal.
I dunno, considering that they're doing it properly (IE, making it a proper part of the story and not just mentioning it offhand a la Soldier 76) I think it's a little more defensible that it took time.
BVHR work slowly in general, but at least this delay was for them to do something substantial, not just confirm a character as gay and leave it at that, y'know?
-
Pretty decent choice, I probably would've chosen the same dude if I were in charge of expanding on an extant survivor's story with some LGBT themes.
I look forward to reading the new archives for him, I'm curious to see what the story is!
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2921157#Comment_2921157
I was very obviously being facetious. But like, it's not untrue. The things I mentioned are actual things in the game.
Yes, my comment was about what you were getting at.
Killer powers should have limitations, this much is obvious. A limitation designed to dissuade, but not outright prevent, uninteractive gameplay is a very reasonable limitation, this much is also obvious.
It's not a punishment, nor is a second chance perk a "reward" either.
-
@JimbusCrimbus said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2921127#Comment_2921127
In a game where survivors are rewarded for bad plays (because that's when all their second chances activate, and hatch exists), it only makes sense for killers to be punished for getting a successful hit.
What a stunningly unhelpful and limiting way to view game design.
-
I'd argue that the cooldown after downing someone with Victor is quite necessary to prevent promoting slugging too hard. The problem is that it actually ends up causing slugging more often because you have to commit to the three thousand year waiting period before you can do anything again.
The solution isn't to remove that cooldown, though; it's to let the Twins player swap back to Charlotte during it.
-
After Twins, yes, he's absolutely the one that needs the work the most. Thankfully, he doesn't need much- make his tiers a little less clunky, give him an addon pass, maybe a new facet to his Tier 3 (holding out hope for walking straight through dropped pallets and breakable walls, personally), and he'll be golden.
He just needs a fresh lick of paint, nothing dramatic.
-
I think in situations like the ones you're describing, you're absolutely right- genuine bully squads who just want to click their flashlight and constantly swarm the killer are my favourite matches, because nobody's doing generators and they're all dicking about getting themselves killed. I had a match against that kind of squad as Hillbilly the other day, and it obviously resulted in a 4k.
However, there are situations where "bully squads" actually do constitute a problem, and it's when they abuse certain concepts. Old Boil Over before it got adjusted was a huge problem with these squads, and there's the odd video you'll see now and again of survivors abusing lockers + flashlights + Head On to trap the killer in a loop of blinds and stuns, or just lockers + flashlights to make ever grabbing someone a guaranteed blind. Those things are more of a problem and I think complaints about them are legitimate- it's just important to separate them from the average group just being kinda annoying to you.
-
They have multiple times before, so there's no reason to assume they won't do again.
Killer is always going to be more stressful than survivor, though, so that stress can't be fully eliminated. They'll just continue to make balance changes to give killers a slightly easier time.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2920046#Comment_2920046
There's little point in continuing this conversation because we're talking about completely different definitions of "viable". I know my definition of viable is usually different than others, even though it shouldn't be, so I shouldn't have to preface what I mean by "viable", but I will do so again anyway. To be viable, a killer needs to be able to beat survivors who do gens fast, because tournament-level gen speed is achievable by the average Joe if they just do the gens. You will see this when you lose games purely because of gens; try playing without Corrupt at high MMR. So to be viable, a killer needs to have near-instantaneous chases, which leaves a majority of the killers/perks/add-ons, that you people mistakenly call "viable", with a lot to be desired. It's why nerfing Engineer's Fang and Pinky Finger made no sense, because even with those the killers weren't viable.
And yes, Myers does have a brown add-on with a downside. Can't make this up: Blond Hair, which increases the stalking amount to get to tier 3 by a whopping 50% for the first time, in exchange for a mere 10 extra seconds of tier 3. No wonder I always lost when using Myers' browns.
You know what? You're right. If you redefine "viable" to mean "game-winning on its own", yes, nearly nothing in the game is viable.
I'm sure I don't need to mention that this definition of "viable" is very, very silly.
-
@dugman said:
I think my actual favorite chapter ideas for this right now would be
- Supernatural. Winchesters as survivors, a Demon that can briefly possess survivors, the Bunker as the map.
- It. There's a pretty spiffy concept piece floating around of an It chapter with the sewer as the map and Pennywise able to create various zones using floating balloons.
- Medusa. A killer that is a classic Medusa which, when a survivor can see her, they suffer negative conditions. So the survivors would actively try and not look directly at her while running away or doing gens, etc, which I think would be kind of tense and fun. 🙂
- Werewolf. A good old fashioned werewolf killer. They could have a Lunge attack similar to Demogorgon, an out-of-chase sprint burst, and if they hold the Lunge they could get a killer instinct ping on the closest survivor to them using their heightened predatory senses.
- The Observer as both a killer AND a survivor. Basically the theme would be the Observer accidentally has subconsciously created a killer version of himself, a creature of the id so to speak, and is determined to stop it somehow. You'd have a survivor version of the character and also a killer version, both with abilities that pertain to their intimate knowledge of the Entity and ability to sway reality to their own ends.
That "killer and survivor are the same character" idea would also work super super well for a Hotline Miami chapter, which I'd personally be all for.
-
Allow me to spread the good word of a Hellblazer paragraph with John Constantine as a survivor. It was in one of the previous surveys! I'm sure it's possible!
If we want to bring new players in, though, I think our best bets are FNaF or Alien. I have no feelings either way about the former, but the latter has a lot of potential from my perspective!
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2920002#Comment_2920002
Why is their viability right now irrelevant? Why would you design an add-on that can't get results? Those add-ons don't encourage people to pick them; they push people away because of how weak the drawback makes them. Engineer's Fang is not a phenomenal pick, because all it does is injure, making him a worse Legion. If you try to use his power for anti-loop, you'll be wasting your time.
Why would I use Myers' browns? For the same reason you said above. They don't have to be viable, they just need to be fun and unique, right?
But if we're being serious, if the add-on isn't viable, then why is it there? It's just a wasted game feature. And it skews people's sense of balance too. Notice how survivors only ever focus on "What OP killer add-on are they using this time?", the Engineer's Fang, the Iridescent Head, the Adrenaline Vial. They never once point out the browns and yellows, because killers have no potential of winning against good teams while using them. They're just there for show, and to give survivors easy matches when the killer doesn't feel like winning.
If an add-on exists, it should be viable. If the drawback makes it unviable, remove it. What are we even trying to do otherwise?
Myers' browns don't have drawbacks, though? Does he even have a meme addon? The Mirrors are purple, not brown, so bringing up those addons is a little weird- they're just weak, they're not weak because of drawbacks.
And again, they do have to be viable. The point is that drawbacks don't inherently make them unviable- Engineer's Fang is a very good addon because it's a ranged injure through walls and because you aren't loading into the match with only that addon equipped, you can match it with other tools. The Mirrors are just viable enough to be fun even if they are weaker than bringing more Tier-3-oriented addons. Plague's Prayer Tablet and the addon that gives you Vile Purge when a generator is completed at the cost of how long it lasts are viable addons. Even Iridescent Head and Pinky Finger are viable, they're just kind of boringly designed.
Some of them aren't! Most of the meme addons are just straight downgrades, and there are definitely a few upside/downside addons that are quite questionable, but the core design philosophy is perfectly valid. We aren't talking about all addons here, we're talking about the ones designed with drawbacks, and those actually tend to be pretty good on average.