jesterkind
jesterkind
About
- Username
- jesterkind
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,633
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Edilibs said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2770813#Comment_2770813
Yeah i got that about Pig now. Too bad she still sucks haha.
Why do you think Blight and Nurse was untouched and characters like Myers not buffed?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2770825#Comment_2770825
Right, got it, thanks!
I know you didn't ask me, but I can answer this- it's because these changes are all numbers-only addon tweaks, and the other killers you mentioned need much more than that.
Aside from Nurse, they absolutely did touch Nurse, they rewrote her code almost from the ground up. Bit unreasonable to expect balance changes on top of that.
-
The problem with your MMR suggestion is twofold; first, building and maintaining a system that accurately measures all of those things seems to be nightmarishly difficult- look how complex and nuanced the Emblem system is, that clearly took a lot of work and a lot of resources and it just straight up fully doesn't work for a few killers and isn't capable of properly measuring the nuances of every match for anyone.
The second problem is that it would be based on how you did in that one specific match, which to my understanding isn't how any matchmaking system works- a matchmaking system looks at how you play in general, across a large number of games. I think what's tripping a lot of people up is that they hear "MMR" and they think of like, the Overwatch ranked mode ladder? But that's a progression system as well as a matchmaking system, whereas the one we have is just a matchmaking system with no reward incentive or progression tree associated with it.
-
This patch is aiming to address the fact that patching times for this game can take forever. To do this, they've changed a bunch about how the game is stored on your PC, which will result in two things: The game will be smaller overall, and patches will be quicker in future.
The downside is you have to redownload the whole game again this one time because so much of the storage structure has changed.
-
@kate_best_girl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2770706#Comment_2770706
well that was my point when I say the threads have stayed up for days (not talking about any current ones as far as Im aware) but some threads are still up in general. It doesn't bug me but I've always wondered the reason why some very obvious feedback or literal 'chapter ideas' were still up or an active thread for days before simply dying. And no, if they were considering it they'd keep it up in general discussions to see player feedback since feedback and suggestions is a very dead chat
The only thing to say to that is that more people should be checking Feedback & Suggestions, that's hardly the mods' fault. If the thread is feedback or suggestions that's where it should go, they shouldn't stop moving things just because fewer people feel inclined to go look at that section.
-
Surely if they moved things to feedback and suggestions that'd imply they do want to consider it?
Also, I honestly think it's just a case of whether a post is caught while a mod is actively browsing or not. I figure it it's active it gets moved quicker, too, since it's at the top for longer.
-
Agitation and Starstruck is also a good combo!
-
@Kurri said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2769697#Comment_2769697
Wait a dev seriously told it's player base to just play a different game? 🤣
During one QnA stream (or some kind of stream it may not have specifically been a QnA), they got a question from a player who was, frankly, complaining and whining a lot about feeling burnt out and not respected as killer. The response was to say "if you're burnt out, try playing survivor for a bit- or play something else for a while, I hear Civ is pretty good".
People meme on it because they don't like accepting that it's just the correct answer, though to be fair it was not a great idea to answer that question honestly from a business perspective lol
-
This is actually one of the few maps that could use a few breakable walls, though they might look visually out of place in the places they would be best suited.
Hopefully they at least tone down those fences, maybe take a crack at the house of pain.
-
@Harold_Shipman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2769415#Comment_2769415
unnerving presence should work like old ruin in terror radius but less oppressive (for example, hitting a good skill check pauses progression briefly rather than actively regressing)
Oh hey, that's my idea too! Agreed!
To the topic of the thread, I think the other two both just need a lingering effect and they'll be perfectly acceptable niche perks. Not meta, obviously, but usable.
-
I basically agree - now that we understand (or at least have good cause to assume) that the problems are more in the realms of prioritising speed over accuracy and not handling groups or backfills particularly well, I think it's time to at least shelve complaints about what the MMR number is derived from.
Not to say that things shouldn't be criticised, but I think it's not too much to ask that criticisms be both civil and correct.
-
I think that's a pretty huge false equivalence. One perk is a pretty mediocre spike of efficacy in the endgame that can both be prevented from ever activating and can be removed from play as soon as it does activate, and the other is an incredibly potent boost to a pretty vital mechanic that's present throughout the entire match and has tricky counterplay.
That being said I'm not making this out to be an us vs them - there are unbalanced things on the killer side too, and CoH is orders of magnitude stronger than pretty much everything else survivors have access to, so this is really just to highlight how powerful CoH is in the right hands.
-
As a beginner character that's mechanically easy to pick up and immediately available to anyone who plays the tutorial, Wraith does need a counter like that to keep his power in check, and it serves as a nice incentive to try and play a little more sneaky instead of running straight at people and uncloaking in their face.
Wraith is struggling, but Lightburn isn't why.
-
That's something I'd like to know too- I hope it is an option, just for the sake of keeping people happy. Not everyone likes doing skill checks, after all.
-
It depends on what the BT basekit thing actually looks like. If it's just something like BT where survivors get no collision for a few seconds, taking a hit for them can still be practical to try and draw some aggro- and sometimes killers go for whoever's unhooking anyway, so you may tick it up without intending to.
Regardless, it's apparently very hard to change achievements until they're literally impossible to achieve (not functionally impossible- the difference between the Left Behind achievement and the "everyone escape through hatch" achievement), something to do with consoles. It's unlikely it'll be changed, unfortunately.
-
It's a side effect of the validation system, specifically- there's a bug where you still hear the scream even though the hit didn't actually register on either side. You don't go through weapon-wipe, they don't get downed, it's just the scream and the blood splatter effect that plays.
They're implementing a partial fix for that in the next update, though by their own admission it won't eliminate it completely.
-
@Sparxlost said:
Isnt this like the exact change they were going to make to the Kindred perk?
It wasn't ever an official (or even unofficial) plan, but it was in Scott Jund's fake hypothetical patch notes video, so you might've seen it there.
-
I like the look of what Trapper's getting, I love that machete.
-
@fblurbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768422#Comment_2768422
"if you're the kind of person who excels at looping and runs the killer for five gens sometimes, that means you're going to escape more often than you're not, or you're going to slide down to the point where you will start escaping."
And the proof is in the pudding. We can see that their measurements used for calculating a 50% win rate game in the MMR system are bad because that isn't happening. That's why people are still complaining, because the system isn't doing what it's designed to do. Matches still have wildly differing results across all the brackets, and when they are consistent, they're not consistent in the way BHVR wants, usually resulting in strings of 3-4 kills or strings of 3-4 escapes, instead of the "ideal" 50% kill/escape ratio.
I can attest to this myself: When I play Killer, I should be averaging 2 kills across my games. I'm not, and I haven't been since the release of MMR. I've been averaging 3 kills most of my matches—and at least 80% of those 3k's are 4k's where I purposefully let the last Survivor escape. I don't run even the slightest bit of sweat in my builds, I play a variety of Killers, and I play as fair as I can—and yet I'm still vastly overperforming in 9 out of 10 games according to the ideal MMR system. Does that mean I'm good at the game or some kind of comp player? Not in the slightest; I'm actually quite mediocre and deliberately choose to play suboptimally for the sake of fun. It means that MMR does a terrible, terrible job of matching me with players of even remotely similar gumption for a 50% win rate. None of my matches feel fair when they're 90% me stomping and the other 10% me getting stomped.
Sure, some players report having more "fair" matches (though if it's BHVR's definition of "fair" that they're using, then I use that term very loosely), but the vast majority of players are not experiencing this, hence the ceaseless complaining and contant clowning on the devs. More often than not, the system fails to do its job and create the ideal matchup for anyone in a given lobby.
"It's not really a skill based system, it's a system designed to produce matches where the default assumption a 50% chance for you specifically to achieve your win condition"
That's the thing. BHVR is asserting that their matchmaking system is a skill-based system. That was what the entire snippet from the QnA was about, is Patrick arguing that the things the system measures are accurate proxies of skill. Their ideal is a skill-based system that results in a rough 50% win rate for the playerbase—and neither of those ideals have been realized. It is not a skill-based system, and it doesn't average a 50% win rate for most players.
Of course, none of this is getting into the debate of whether or not BHVR's ideal is even a good one—which I don't think it is. I think even if their system functioned on any level, what it accomplished would not be a good thing.
I don't think even OP is trying to say that this system is actually working? Even in the message you're responding to I point out that this is all hypothetical since the actual matching half isn't working properly at the moment.
What we're saying is that it's not because it's based on kills and escapes, it's because the number you're boiled down to - while accurate - isn't being used properly when you're actually in a queue.
And yes, BHVR shouldn't be using the word skill, it has a clashing definition here. My understanding is their use of "skill" has more to do with aggregate games and general brackets of players, not the minute-to-minute skilful plays that people generally use it for. They aren't lying or broadcasting a lack of understanding, but it is poor communication at this point.
-
@SilentShepherd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768422#Comment_2768422
And? That person who hides to escape, STILL got to a rating they do not deserve. bad system.
And the person who actually tries to play the game and is doing everything for the team, this player puts themselves at risk more, and WILL die more, but they are an overall NET POSITIVE for the team in every game they play, as they take the heat away from others and help the team accomplish many things. This should be taken into account.
Since this is a team game, and the Lead Ded used a hockey analogy, I will use a basketball analogy.
Plus/Minus +/-
A player who does 3 generators, 3 safe unhooks, puts up 3 boons, and escapes 4 chases is an overall NET POSITIVE. And we could assign numerical values to all of those efforts and find a +13, for example. This person should climb MMR and not be held back because they died.
Yeah, I think this is where most people's problems come from. This system does not reward or punish anyone, it does not "hold back" or "elevate" anyone, there's no "deserve". It's not a progression system, there's no reason to assert that players who play very aggressive and cocky "deserve" to be elevated higher. If you're not escaping, you should be going down until you can, that's how matchmaking works.
It's not actually a strict, game-to-game evaluation of your personal skill. That's what the emblem system is for, not the matchmaking system.
-
@SilentShepherd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768401#Comment_2768401
Then we need a new system that goes on a GAME by GAME basis. After each match, you are given a final overall grade. Yes, Surviving counts heavily, but someone who hides all game and waits for team to die so they can find the Hatch, will NOT get as good a grade as the guy who died but did 4 generators, put up 3 boons, 3 unhooks, and escaped 4 chases. All of this information is ALREADY recorded by the game for the end game badges and the Tome achievements. Why is it not being used.
As in any other MMR system (assuming that the number is actually used, which tbf it currently isn't, the matchmaking compromises on it too quickly as the devs have admitted to), the person who hides all game and waits for the team to die so they can open the exit gates (as hatch doesn't count for MMR) will climb up to the point where that no longer works. That's how MMR systems should work, if there's a cheap tactic it should let you climb so you get to the point where it stops working.
@fblurbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768387#Comment_2768387
Nothing about what they said shows that the MMR system's standards is actually a good indicator of skill—which it isn't. In a game like DBD where there is more RNG-based variance than there is player input-based variance, not only is a skill-based matchmaking system a bad idea in the first place, but when you throw out all that variance and the infinitely huge list of factors that came into the situation and instead boil it down to a small number, it's not going to be accurate. And it isn't. MMR does not do a good job of indicating your skill or if you are even remotely close to as good or as bad as the other players in your lobby. And even if it WERE a good skill indicator, it doesn't matter because the system is broken and doesn't match you with players of similar MMR ratings anyways.
So what we have is a skill-based matchmaking system that does a terrible job of rating your skill and also does a terrible job of matching you with people of similar ratings. It is, objectively, a trash, broken system and should be revised from the ground up.
I have no reason to disbelieve the devs when they say that it does. It makes sense to me- if you're the kind of person who excels at looping and runs the killer for five gens sometimes, that means you're going to escape more often than you're not, or you're going to slide down to the point where you will start escaping. That's how it should work, that's what a hypothetical perfect matchmaking system would look like.
That, or you're hiding to escape every game, which I addressed above.
As for skill-based matchmaking being a bad idea, that's why I generally agree with the assertion that they shouldn't have ever used that term, that was a massive mistake. It's not really a skill based system, it's a system designed to produce matches where the default assumption a 50% chance for you specifically to achieve your win condition- and from what I'm hearing, that part works, it's the sorting and matching half that compromises too quickly.
(All of which is in this post, btw.)
-
@SilentShepherd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768387#Comment_2768387
Those are clearly assumptions that may or may not come to fruition. And it penalizes a player by forcing them to play a large amount of games in the hopes it "evens out", and it pisses away amazing games in which you did not survive. I have had this happen to me when my teammate decided to hide in a locker until I was dead. She found the hatch and escaped.
No, the system sucks and there is no reason for it to suck. The game ALREADY records statistics like unhooks, generators completed, etc.
The post still addresses it, which is my point.
No MMR system is going to work on a game by game basis, they're all supposed to place you over time. That's just how matchmaking works- progress systems often go game by game, but matchmaking takes much wider pools of data.
-
@fblurbg said:
I still don't see how this post succeeds in addressing the two biggest issues with the SBMM system, which are:
- It doesn't matchmake based off of an accurate measurement of skill.
- It doesn't match you with players of a similar rating.
- Yes it does, that'd be the part where it explains that the system matches you over large batches of games- if you're cocky enough to go for the kinds of plays that can get you killed first after a five-gen chase, you're not going to fail that every time, and you're going to escape more often than you don't.
- That'd be the matchmaking half, not the MMR half itself, which is the focal point of this post. I don't know if OP would acknowledge the matchmaking portion being broken, but they don't have to- the devs did, in the QnA stream.
-
@AngyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768225#Comment_2768225
My complaint is not that it would do something. Apparently you missed half my comments.
It's that SURVIVORS would pick to force the Killer to stay near a hook or allow an unhook. Let me repeat that: THE POWER ROLE would be forced into a lose/lose by this perk. Either lose extra gen progress or lose a hook and MAYBE trade, depending on if Pallet City had a discount on pallets that day.
Not to mention Dead Hard, D.Strike, and other million-chance-perks stopping the Killer from trading.
Stop with punishments for camping. Encourage Killers to not camp. This is not rocket science; people do whatever benefits THEM.
Make a perk that rewards Survivors for the Killer camping? Survivors will force the issue.
Make a perk that encourages the Killer to leave the hook? Killers will stop camping.
So, I'll address your very last point first since it's a quick debunk- "Make a perk that encourages the Killer to leave the hook? Killers will stop camping."
No they won't. Killers who feel that they have to camp may stop, but there's no way to know if they're the majority and often that isn't the right call anyway, so we'll just take that completely off the table- perks like that are absolutely still good design, but that's a separate matter to toning down facecamping, which is the goal here.
I'll also remind you that this is still not a punishment, it's still a counter.
Now, to address the more salient point of forcing a camp by lingering around the edges of the hook radius: That is a risk. Survivors aren't untouchable gods, and depending on your killer, perks, addons, what have you, it may be that you have a severe edge whenever they try and pull something like that- and if you don't, contesting the hook like that probably isn't your best bet anyway, because survivors already pull this trick to try and lure someone away from the hook.
Survivors getting unhooks is not a dramatic fail state for you, my dude, and it's not even guaranteed even when they do that, no player is perfect and they can get pretty cocky to rush in and be caught out of position if you look like you're walking away.
Also, why highlight power role? Last I checked this perk didn't give survivors the ability to remove killers from the match, so the killer is still the power role. Being the power role doesn't mean you're in control of the situation 100% of the time, if it did this game would be tremendously boring.
-
@AngyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768202#Comment_2768202
But those survivors still aren't doing anything
But the one who IS is getting a boost that negates some of the progress being lost by Survivors 'not doing anything', therefore rendering this fact pretty much moot.
No. Stop. No. No. No. No punishments. This is still rewarding Survivors for forcing the Killer to camp. It's not a good idea. It's abusable. I don't care how people try to pretty it up; it's a punishment for camping that Survivors can leverage for either gen speed or a free unhook.
It astounds me how people can't see how easy this would be to abuse. Or they know and want it BECAUSE of that. Just knock out the one solo gen on the map with a free speed boost plus purple toolbox! After all; can't do that with more than one person anyways! Or finish off the gen your friend was chased off of! It's 50% done already!
It's a bad idea. Nothing can be said to make it less bad. It's fully abusable by Survivors to get gen speeds or a free unhook. How many times do I have to say that before it sinks in?
I mean, you never actually have to camp. You can just take the trade by going and downing whichever of the two people trying to bait you feels like a better option, or you can just leave the hook straight away anyway because you have something else to do.
The worst case scenario here isn't free value for a survivor, the worst case scenario is that you fail to achieve a trade, which is still the worst case scenario for facecamping anyway. Camping - especially proxy camping - is a valid strategy, and because of that, it is also perfectly valid for the other team to have tools that can deal with it.
Seriously, your complaint really seems to boil down to the fact that this perk would do something if survivors are getting camped, which... yeah? Of course, it's supposed to do something if the killer is sticking to the hook, the only way it'd be a terrible idea not worth considering is if it also punished you for not facecamping- which is why I suggested removing the lingering effect and making it build up over a few seconds.
This isn't a punishment, this is a counter.
-
@AngyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768186#Comment_2768186
But other Survivors would not have to be nearby, or buzzing the hook. They stay far enough away that they can be SEEN, but not CHASED.
They stand 50 meters away; outside chase distance. One to the North & one to the South. (Or whatever the map allows, but in opposite directions.)
Now, if the Killer chases North; South creeps towards the hook while North runs away. No chase has started.
Killer resets. North & South reset.
Repeat if Killer goes for South.
Now, the Killer is either standing by the hook to prevent a save (but the game thinks he is facecamping, because the Survivors are sufficiently far enough away to avoid the game saying 'You saw them!'), and thus Survivors get gen speed rewards, or he's chasing one person and allowing an unhook by the other. Lose/lose.
Punishments do not work. The game can't figure out 'facecamping' from 'He saw 2 Survivors nearby' because said Survivors are far enough away to prevent a Chase from starting.
...But those survivors still aren't doing anything. The killer in that scenario can just wait out the death timer, or if they want to be nice just let the survivor on hook progress to second stage before committing to a chase for the sake of making sure the game isn't just standing nearby, and like... two generators would be done? I haven't done the maths, maybe it works out to more maybe it works out to less, but a 6% boost for one survivor isn't that big if what the killer gets in exchange is the knowledge that the other three straight up aren't doing anything.
This doesn't seem that bad to me, this basically already happens anyway if you facecamp even at the endgame and it doesn't actually work. The hooked survivor normally still dies, and the other two survivors achieved absolutely nothing.
-
@AngyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768165#Comment_2768165
But they're still getting a BOOST that they can force the Killer to either allow, or force an unhook. There should not be lose/lose situations the Survivors control if Killers want to be even a little bit of a threat.
This perk would absolutely turn the Killer role into more of a joke, as it would encourage bullying Killers at the hook so others could slam gens with purple toolkits and now a perk boosting genspeed even more.
No. It's abuseable, unfair, and we don't need camping PUNISHMENTS. People need to get that in their head.
Give Killers perks that reward him for multi-hooking or for leaving the hook. Stop woth the effing punishments, because every one. Every. Single. One. Has been either something so totally dirty that it would ruin the game, or something Survivors would pull out of their arse to force the Killer to either lose the hook or lose the game.
Stop. Punishments for a tactic that has valid use is stupid. It's people demanding the game be changed to punish what THEY hate instead of actual balance.
Eh, yeah, but it's a pretty small one for only one survivor and it requires two survivors be in a position where they might get downed, while one of their teammates is actively dying. I don't consider that a lose/lose, if I realised survivors were doing that in a game I was playing I'd be pretty stoked with the situation, same way I enjoy it when people buzz around the hook right now- that's value for me, that's them messing up in a pretty big way.
Regarding the "punishments" point, do remember that this is supposed to counter facecamping, which while valid, is a pretty unhealthy and boring tactic that only works because it forces every other player to either be bored out of their skulls or play into it. I'd also like to point out that this isn't necessarily a punishment anyway, because it's a perk. If this were a basekit mechanic I'd absolutely agree that it's a nonstarter, but as a perk it becomes more open for discussion because it's something survivors have to give up other value for- a valuable slot that may get zero value if the killer doesn't facecamp.
And again, if you're really worried about it, surely putting a stipulation that other survivors can't be nearby would fix it?
-
@AngyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2768123#Comment_2768123
No. It's still abusable in the exact same way the old 'Survivor dies less/not at all' that was IN THE GAME was abused by 2 Survivors forcing the Killer to either camp or give up a hook, while the 4th did gens.
This is not a theoretical; a punishment for anti-camping was tried, and Survivors found a way to force the Killer into a lose/lose situation.
So no. This idea is the same thing as before, and should not be tested, because we already know how it goes.
I feel like in this scenario, two people buzzing around the hook while one does generators is kind of the dream scenario for a killer? The boost that the one guy on gens gets isn't enough to really counteract that three survivors are being taken off that vital job.
Contrast to if it's used for its actual purpose, where three survivors are doing gens as one dies, and the boost helps them make sure that facecamper isn't getting all that much value- as well as having the extra effect of not helping in the endgame, which a simple "survivor dies slower" change would hurt.
It's absolutely still a possibility that it's abusable, but I think it's different enough that it warrants entertaining as a theoretical instead of discarding out of hand. Hell, it could always have a simple "unless another survivor is within [x] meter radius" stipulation added on top to make sure it's less abusable.
-
I think this is all very useful information, thank you for explaining it all! Even if people still have issues with the MMR system, it's very important that we're all on the same level regarding what the system is designed to do and what methods it uses to do it.
-
Hm. I don't dislike the idea of tools to aid with facecamping, but I think this one needs a little work.
I actually don't think the three-second persisting is necessary- you want killers to walk away from the hook, even if it's just to interrupt this effect, so having the effect cancel when they're out of range at least allows survivors a chance to time their save properly so they don't have to take a hook-trade the way they currently do.
If you add onto that a brief leadup where it isn't active until the killer's close to the hook for a set amount of time, I think it's a perk that could at least be tested!
-
I'd support that, just to make it a little smoother and easier to realise that your hex is gone. It's not always obvious, especially when it's a hex that isn't always lit up on the perk area like Devour.
-
I do approve of a nerfed variant of Borrowed Time becoming basekit, but I don't know that Corrupt Intervention would actually give the same value when made basekit- it's already kind of inconsistent, which making it basekit wouldn't fix.
I think a better fix to generators flying would just be to take a hard look at how many repair speed boosts there are, and whether some of them could be scaled back or reworked to do something else.
-
Hard disagree. It would be an extra perk for the team, at the cost of a limited range, time to set up, and the ability to be snuffed by the killer.
Though, if it's actually the default healing speed (IE, 16 seconds) instead of the Self Care penalty to self-healing speeds, that would be a lot more justifiable. There should be some reason to run CoH and spend time setting it up, it just shouldn't be broken.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766687#Comment_2766687
Boons don't have counterplay. That's the crux of the whole problem.
People keep saying that, but of course they do. I've been having a whole conversation about their bare-bones counterplay and how I think it needs work, so clearly it exists- and that's not even mentioning the specific perks you can bring to help counter the mechanic as a whole or the individual perks themselves.
We can argue about how fun or effective that counterplay is, but the one thing we can't argue is whether or not it exists.
-
This poll is missing a third option- that the MMR made no difference. That's the one I'd be voting for, otherwise I wouldn't mention it.
-
@JoByDaylight said:
How about making it like a healing Ruin?
If you are injured, healed up a bit and then cancel healing then the healing progress will regress when you are in the terror radius.
This comes on top of slower healing of course.
I like this idea, it'd still be niche but it'd certainly be a more interesting perk than it is right now.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2767034#Comment_2767034
Considering that it takes them eight months to a year to change anything significant, I don't think anybody has to worry about power creep, or an arms race as you term it.
I don't think they're going to do that, no. I do think everyone on the forums is going to get increasingly angry that they're not, though.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2767021#Comment_2767021
Closing the information gap IS a buff, regardless of how much you apparently don't want it to be. There are items and perks that survivors sacrifice that give information, if that information is freely given then ya, that's a buff.
Well, part of why the specific change they've mentioned is such a good idea is that it doesn't cannibalise those perks or items. They'd still get far, far, far more info from the aura-reading abilities in the game, this just helps them get brought more in line with the generalised callouts a SWF team can give.
But yes, it is a buff. It's just important to remember that the point isn't just to buff them for the sake of making them stronger, and so the next move can't be to blindly buff something else in a continual arms race, it needs to be done carefully and with the actual point in mind.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766999#Comment_2766999
Yeah, I agree completely with buffs to one not necessitating buffs to the other. Like when folks say "oh yeah boons can be relit so hexes should as well". Like that's ridiculous, the two things aren't remotely equivalent.
However greater information would be a huge blanket buff to survivors in general. It's gotta come hand in hand with something for the other side precisely because it's a big thing. Maybe bigger than you think, depending on how much information is presented and how slowly behavior rolls out changes.
In this instance yes, I think more net information for solos would be enough of a leg up that some other things would have to be changed to keep pace. It's just important to remember that while this will improve things, the intent here isn't to buff something weak - it's to close an information gap that makes balancing the rest of the game tremendously more difficult.
So, it's not a case of "one for them, one for us", it's a case of making sure the entire game feels better for everyone, and is in a healthier state for future balancing decisions.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766809#Comment_2766809
It's exactly that simple. Survivors have been getting the lion's share of buffs and exemplary perks all last year. Combined with MMR, the killer experience is getting more and more hostile all the time. Anything that positively affects survivor efficiency and gen times is gonna be problematic because it's already close to a tipping point.
In this instance I think it's fair to say the changes to the overall game's health would include things that help out killers too, yes, but you can't assume that all changes the game would need can be boiled down to buffs or nerfs to """either side""". Sometimes it won't be that simple, and it may not be in this case! It might be that the changes made aren't strictly buffs or nerfs, and something that benefits everyone rather than one player.
Game balance and design is much more than just buffing or nerfing things.
-
The option I'd pick would be "because I enjoy playing this game", which doesn't seem to be represented here. Nor is "the feeling of increasing your skill/knowledge", which would be the other reason I'd pick.
-
I'd caution against assuming that game balance works that way- that "one side" gets something, so the "other side" must get something too. It's not really that simple.
That being said, if there were some things changed to make the killer experience smoother, I'd probably be looking in the realms of bonuses to healing and repair speeds. Those values are fine without any perks or items changing them, but there are quite a few things you can stack quite aggressively to boost them. That, or maybe just survivor and totem spawns, those things could be looked at for the benefit of everyone, not just killer players.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766766#Comment_2766766
Its logical when you're willing to acknowledge parity between the two systems: The Undying nerf was done specifically because people hated ruin-undying on blight, but in turn it nerfed every other hex totem since they could rely on undying to try to extend their usage possibility. Thrill of the hunt got nerfed similarly as well. Regardless of how you feel when comparing them, if you consider them apples and oranges respectively, they're still both fruit. And the way the devs have been handling them in terms of feedback and backlash, it is extremely clear that they are being biased in balancing them.
Right, but the Undying nerf is the perfect example- what they didn't do when they nerfed Undying was reduce the number of dull totem spawns, or make cleansing faster, or show survivors hex auras, or anything that would help with what old Undying was doing but demolish weaker hexes. What they did was change the effects of Undying itself, and that's what they should be doing with CoH- not make sweeping changes to the largely functional but slightly flawed boon system, but change the perk itself.
The second point is where it kind of falls apart- Undying is a support totem and CoH isn't, so nerfing CoH itself won't actually indirectly nerf the other boons because they don't have in-tandem effects in that way.
Also, Thrill was reworked, not nerfed, and it did that to be a more fair and slightly more potent counter to boons. People sleep on Thrill, it's not worse now, it's actually worth running.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766736#Comment_2766736
With your shadowstep example, all that really says is that its a bad perk. there are tons of bad perks, and these imbalances are just proof that they often don't understand what makes a perk meta or not. Think about how many perks there are, and then how many you never see (outside of an occasional player memeing.)
CoH being so good while being tied to the same totems as its less fortunate siblings creates a massive balancing paradox: You now need to nerf already mediocre perks to address what makes the good perk turn into a broken good perk. I'm glad you agree on a lot of the oversights in boons in general, but if CoH isn't redesigned entirely (removing the self care, or removing the healing speed buff. It just can't have both with how boons work atm) then the boon system itself needs to be changed.
Also back to things we disagree on, I still say that Boons are much more parallel to Hexes in terms of design than you say. They even carry the same "strong perks ruining it for bad perks" balance with stuff like third seal being absolutely pointless compared to the impact ruin/devour/haunted/etc can have. Pentimento feels like an attempt at trying to make parity between the two, but it has considerably more counterplay (just don't do bones) meanwhile killers can't even break a blessed totem. In the end, a lot of the differences between boons and hexes is, ironically, a lot of QoL improvements that killers wanted on hexes for years. That might be why so many killers have such sour grapes over how free boons feel.
To be clear, yes, CoH needs a lot more changes, but you don't need to nerf its weaker counterparts at all. That seems like a kind of weird thing to say, honestly- in what way is Shadow Step or Exponential affected if you cap self healing speeds, or you lower the numbers on CoH, or you give CoH its own unique cooldown, or any of the other things that would actually affect CoH and not boons as a general concept?
Boons aren't continual slowdown if you could break the totems, which is part of what they're designed for- because again, they're not hexes. They're limited range, they take time to set up, they're all on one totem instead of being spread out, they're not active at the start... the design differences between boons and hexes are greater than the design similarities.
Also, Shadow Step is pretty good, I wouldn't call it a bad perk. It's worth bringing but it's not broken, the problem is more that survivor meta perks are so strong right now there's no reason to bring something that's just pretty good.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766706#Comment_2766706
You're right, Hexes actually punish the killer far more and half of them aren't even worth the risk. A lot of boons are kinda meme tier, but CoH singlehandedly made the mechanic disgustingly broken due to the concessions it gets vs hexes. They are similar enough to the point that boons flat out can override hexes, and directly counter perks like pentimento just by existing (since survivors avoid doing dull bones now.) The ripple effects they cause are far worse for balance than hexes ever were, even at their "worst" (pre-undying nerf.)
Even without taking CoH specifically into account, the other problems with their implimentation like being able to cover multiple floors, killers needing to waste precious time to remove them, the fact that up to 4 can be placed around the map at a time, and their impact on killer map pressure (something most killers suffer from to begin with) make them pretty not ok.
Gliding past the false equivalence to hexes again, you are touching on part of the problem, so let's focus on that part.
Things like going through multiple floors actually are a problem, and it's why I'm kinda bummed to hear the devs aren't looking that closely at the mechanic as a whole right now. The way a hex is supposed to work is pretty simple- using Shadow Step as an example...
You spend the fourteen seconds not on a generator (plus however many seconds it takes to find a totem, though that's often not many) setting up your stealth field to help you out next time you're in a chase with the killer. When that does happen, you run towards your totem and loop in a general radius around it- at some point during this, the killer will notice that you have a boon totem up. Two things happen from there- either you go down because lost scratch marks is a detriment but not an unwinnable scenario for the killer, at which point the killer snuffs your boon and then goes to hook you, forcing you to wait out being saved and then go spend another 14 seconds blessing, or you do successfully get the killer to drop chase... at which point the killer can choose to snuff your boon, at least gaining either that same 14 seconds or the knowledge that you're playing with three perks until that 14 seconds is spent.
There are problems with this setup, even setting aside that CoH doesn't require the killer to be nearby (which is part of why it's so broken rn). Elevation is the biggest one- a boon on another floor requires a lot more time from the killer, and there are too many totem spots like that for it to just be considered a prime boon spot instead of a problem. There's also the problem that the audio cue for the killer is pretty close to the boon itself, I'd like to see that expanded a little.
Those problems, however, do not point to boons being broken. That hypothetical up there is a very good idea for the game, and I'd like to see them play out like that more often.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766687#Comment_2766687
Hex totems can be destroyed in the first 30 seconds of the game with zero counterplay from the killer, and can't be used by 4 different players in the match. They also can't be replaced when destroyed. I think my suggestion is extremely generous compared to that.
TBH it is CoH that is the most problematic one, but as the devs have shown with its upcoming nerf, they don't even understand what it exploitable about it.
Hexes are not boons, and boons are not hexes. They're different designs with different intents that require different balancing.
I also actually agree that hexes are weak! I've posted about it quite a lot, it's just not relevant to the topic of boons. Beyond both involving the totem mechanic, they aren't directly comparable.
-
@Ryuhi said:
Easy solution: If a Boon gets stomped out, at least 1 gen needs to be made before it can be placed again. Doesn't have to be done by the person who placed the totem, just... at all. Would completely stop the exploitable aspects of CoH, make it worth destroying, and still not treat it as harshly as Hex totems (which it should be, but apparently that would be heresy)
Alongside completely stopping the exploitable aspects of CoH, it would completely ruin Shadow Step and Exponential, which would quickly become laughably terrible perks there'd be no reason to ever run.
It'd also be abandoning the intended counterplay to boons instead of fixing the current flaws with that counterplay, but that's a separate discussion.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766676#Comment_2766676
By making MMR be based solely off of kills and escapes, they have flat out endorsed it as the win condition. With emblems win conditions were vague enough that they were more personal: my person win condition always revolved around pipping more than kills/escapes. This is where the Hooks>Kills argument for killers comes from, and explains why many killers have instead opted to go for the "facecamp and tunnel to guarantee 1-2 while being happy if you get 3 or 4" style of gameplay that has absolutely surged lately. When people are playing to win with the newly standardized definition, they are effectively making the game less engaging for every one else they play with.
I really don't know where this idea that the win condition was vague or uncertain came from. Maybe for killer since there are variable numbers, but for survivor the win condition has always been to escape and for killer the win condition has always been based around getting kills?
I always thought the discussions about what counts as a win before were more about proving personal skill, not about what the game's actual win condition is. The win condition is very straightforward and intuitive; escape, or stop them from escaping, respective to your side of the game.
As for "Hooks better than kills", sure, but you obviously can't base the matchmaking system on how many individual hooks the killer gets, so it's a bit irrelevant.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2766657#Comment_2766657
I've literally never had it work properly, so I can only tell you based off my experience. I can only usually play between 11pm-5am EST, and while survivor I get extremely random matchups. As killer I almost exclusively get sweat squads though, which is wrong because I am not very good at killer and generally only play it for dailies/challenges.
The biggest problem then goes back to the "win" metrics. Bad survivors are terrified to do things like get chased on purpose to ruin a killers map pressure, or bring perks like kindred to actually have map knowledge while solo queue. Those same people will crouch walk around doing nothing while you do 3+ gens solo and max out boldness in a match, then let you get one hooked and saunter out the exit gates without even trying to make a save while all 3 are uninjured. The current system flat out encourages that, while punishing players who make strategic sacrifices.
This is where the flaws do pop up- as I said, I think emblem score should be used to see how far up/down you go after the match- but it is important to note that the system does not encourage anything. It's a matchmaking system, not a ranked ladder- you're not supposed to be playing with it in mind, you're supposed to be playing with things like dailies, archive challenges, emblem score, and any other personal things in mind.
This system isn't particularly good, but the emblem system was noticeably worse.
-
I think this is exactly what the developers wanted, and exactly why we didn't actually know how the MMR system worked at first.
I don't think you're supposed to care about your MMR. It's not a ranked ladder or anything- it's supposed to be puttering away in the background while you focus on emblem scores or other personal win conditions/tests of skill.
-
To be fair, I think it probably needs both. The current healing speed is very, very strong, even toning it down by a few seconds as they're doing is going to be an improvement.
I'd be on board for a cooldown. I'd even be okay with only CoH having a cooldown, since at least the other two need to be near the killer to work, so reblessing is going to be a risk.