jesterkind
jesterkind
About
- Username
- jesterkind
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,633
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623751#Comment_3623751
Watch a tournament sometime. There is a reason they always run 3-4 slowdown perks.
Eh? Why would a tournament be relevant here, we're talking about the game as a whole.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623496#Comment_3623496
All it is going to do is change the meta again, but still maintain functionally the same meta.
Right now the main build is corrupt + pop + pain res + flex perk
The new build will just become: corrupt + Grim embrace + deadlock + flex perk (probably something like nowhere to hide). So now you can still kick gens, you get your 5% and you get passive slowdown without having to think about it. So functionally this changes nothing. Also "stacking 4 slowdowns" is basically required at a high level because of how efficient survivors can play, so again its not changing anything. If anything the change to grim embrace makes the meta even better here because its all passive slowdown now.
Stacking four slowdowns is a detriment at all levels, it is not a requirement.
As for the meta, yeah, people are always gonna run slowdown for as long as slowdown exists, so I don't think it's fair to judge any general change to the game on whether it's achieving the impossible even when it isn't trying to.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623692#Comment_3623692
The “short bursts of repairing + excessive hiding” strategy also works at the very beginning of the game.
And there’s no “just chase a survivor”, if the survivors are literally just repairing for only 4.5 seconds, then running far away until the killer has patrolled past the generator. Against many killers, the survivors can use their voice comms, or the visual terror radius, to excessively hide from the killer.
Im already playing against many survivors that pre-leave generators at the first sign of a terror radius. This anti 3 gen mechanic just makes that the optimal way to break any 3-gen, at any point in the game.
And another survivor strategy would literally be “hide around the map, and repair various generators for 4.5 seconds, then hide some more”. Imagine how frustrating it would be, as killer, to just patrol generators over and over, and never finding survivors, and instead finding barely any progress on any of the generators. This would be a valid strategy, because eventually the generators would become damage immune if the killer tried to kick them repeatedly.
I don't know, man, this seems like a really, really unlikely scenario.
If that ever happens, I don't even think adjusting this system is even the right call for fixing it? Surely the better option would be to improve killer tracking, both through perks and the basekit.
I'll be honest, this seems like a giant stretch.Even if survivors do this, it's still within the killer's power to stop them by just choosing not to defend that generator cluster. It's not even throwing, that's honestly better in general.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623664#Comment_3623664
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623668#Comment_3623668
Survivors can use the “short bursts of repair + excessive hiding” strategy, to break a 3-gen at the start of the game.
In this scenario, the only generators the survivors are repairing are the 3-gen. And since it only takes 4.5 seconds to lock in generator progress (and it’s even less than 4.5 seconds if multiple survivors are repairing the same generator), if the 3 gen isn’t all in line of sight of each other, many killers won’t be able to patrol them fast enough to catch the survivors anywhere near the generators.
So why's that a problem?
That's only if they're at one gen remaining, so you've had the rest of the match to get work done, and in the worst case scenario you'd just chase a survivor and let the gen get done, since the survivor is your objective and the generator isn't. What's the issue here?
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623623#Comment_3623623
Coordinated teams could purposely target the easiest generators first, and purposely leave a 3-gen for the end. In other words, a coordinated team might find a 3-gen, and purposely refuse to touch any of those 3 generators, until all the other generators have been repaired.
I thought we were told this new mechanic would only punish killers that purposely tried to defend a 3-gen from the start of the game? This new mechanic can clearly punish killers, even if the survivors were purposely creating a 3-gen.
Right, but doesn't that kind of assume that the killer isn't doing anything to like... stop them?
They still need to get to one gen remaining to even start the process you're describing. That's a pretty big chunk of the match, probably about half of the overall time you spend playing. The killer doesn't achieve anything in this time, doesn't get anyone killed, doesn't create deadzones, doesn't observe patterns in what gens the survivors are prioritising, doesn't have perks to help slow the game down...?
Honestly, even if we assume this scenario you're describing happens, what's stopping the killer from just committing to a down, letting the survivors finish the last generator if necessary, and making the rest of their play during the endgame?
I don't see this as a real problem with the proposed system. Maybe one in a thousand games you have to put yourself in a slightly worse position by prioritising a survivor instead of gen defence, but even then, it's not like you're being forced to throw or anything.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623513#Comment_3623513
I truly honestly don’t understand how this is fair, if coordinated survivors decide the optimal strategy is to extend the game to 30+ minutes by repairing a 3-gen in short bursts, then hiding very far away.
When survivors are excessively hiding, then the problem isn’t that killers are refusing to commit to a chase. Instead, the problem is the killers keep patrolling generators over and over, and repeatedly find zero survivors and zero scratchmarks, and the survivors will be so far away from the generators that it’s unrealistic for many of the killers to be able to find them without the help of tracking perks.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623469#Comment_3623469
No. Once survivors figure out that perk is in the game, they’ll repair for a minimum of 4.5 seconds, then will literally run so far away from the generator that Nowhere to Hide won’t reveal them.
And if the killer is forbidden to kick generators that can’t be damaged anymore, then the survivors won’t even need to worry about that perk being used on damage-immune generators.
I'm not sure how this strategy could even come about unless the killer's protecting a 3-gen early on, though?
If you're being active and getting work done as killer, those survivors aren't even going to be in position to try that when there's one generator left.
Overly-stealthy survivors can be annoying to face, sure, but I don't see this change making that any worse.
-
My understanding is that you still progress the generator immediately after a Pain Res in this scenario, you just have to be repairing for 5% of progress or it'll start regressing again when you let go.
It's also not literally a buff even if that weren't the case, but that's nitpicking.
-
@GroßusSchmiedus said:
Sadako: The stacks getting "locked in" has me nervous, especially on smaller maps like the Game, it also might encourage tunneling since hooking someone with say 4 stacks might be eliminated quickly once unhooked, the fact that it affects everyone within any TV is also questionable in my opinion since survivors are generally near gens and it will just encourage spamming teleport. I'm really sceptical about this one.
Billy: These changes are great and well deserved, but the biggest problems was always cluttered maps with weird detection that makes you bump into nothing. I hope the collision reduction helps with that a lot.
Perks:
Grim Embrace: I would change numbers a bit, say 32 meters and block it for 15, then it'd be a great perk that rewards Killers for not camping, 16 meters isn't enough if that is the intention of this perk. But even without the change Grim Embrace might become the healthiest perk in the game, perks that encourage spreading the love and leaving hooks should be very powerful.
Quick Gambit:
Its still bad and doesn't adress the main issue of the perk, it needs a complete rework.
Also do perks trigger "regression events" because if thats the case Ruin will become a liabiliy that exists to help the survivors.
The way I understand it is that only perks which take the percentage off "instantly" affect this new mechanic. So, Pop and Pain Res would, as would a dry gen kick without perks, but something like Ruin or Oppression that just starts the generator regressing over time won't.
-
Interesting changes for sure...
I'll see how the generator stuff shakes out, but on paper, I like it. It (further) disincentivises stacking four slowdowns, incentivises thinking about your regression more, and also maybe kinda-sorta encourages some currently decidedly not-meta picks like Ruin, Oppression, Thrilling Tremors, etc. I'm all for those things, so I'll have to test and see if it has any major flaws.
Billy changes look great, even if Overdrive turns out to be nothing just altering his collision and speeding up his chainsaw by default should help him a ton. Big fan of that.
Onryo... I'll test her, but moving back towards her worse iteration isn't a great idea on paper. These changes look like they should at least preserve the better changes made to her, at least.
Ormond is pretty interesting. I do agree with the changes listed, but they're not what I would've done- addressing that godawful window on the top floor of main and maybe putting a hook or two on the second floor to prevent unhookable-build abuse would've been top priority for me, but cleaning up the front area so it's not as dead should be good too.
Not much I really dislike here! I think the STBFL change is unnecessary and Quick Gambit is still going to be a bad perk, but I wouldn't consider those real detracting factors. Excited to test it!
-
I do think it'd have to not be a Loud Noise Notification, but something more akin to the sound Distortion or Alert make when they trigger would probably be a nice little buff.
Though, on the other hand, Gearhead is already a pretty good perk, I don't know that it really needs this buff.
-
Recently I've been getting into fighting games, and there's on in particular I picked up especially recently that I'd like to contrast DBD with here. Blazblue Cross Tag Battle has, alongside its basic tutorial and the practice mode standard in the genre, character-specific tutorials that just take you through the character's special moves in a demonstration-based series of lessons prompting the player to do each input in turn. It's a great system, and I think a lot of other games would benefit from a similar one.
Now, a strict one-to-one conversion of that concept wouldn't work, obviously, but I think DBD could do a lot more to teach specific killer concepts to both sides. A practice mode like you'd find in fighting games for every killer would be pretty helpful for new players wanting to learn how stuff works and established players who want to hone some skills outside of a live match. Hell, you could even implement it as a try-before-you-buy for killers you don't own yet. That's just one example, too- there's surely plenty of ways this could be achieved, even as basic as a more in-depth explanation page for each killer that breaks it down through text.
The basic tutorial is honestly fine, these days. The problem is that it's just a basic tutorial; there's a lot of things players are expected to just sort of pick up through osmosis, and that's not ideal.
-
Off the Record has a tell and is designed to help avoid a killer who doesn't immediately know where you are, whereas Borrowed Time both throws off a hard-tunnelling killer's timing because they expect the basekit timer as well as increases the time the unhooked survivor is given Haste for.
They both have a niche. I think the main reason you see OTR more than BT these days is because OTR is personal, whereas BT is altruistic. You'll know for sure if OTR is working for you, but it can be hard to tell with BT.
-
@Kruddimus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619463#Comment_3619463
Oh yeah because consoles got different chapters for free. I always forget that.
While that is true, it takes significantly less time for newer Survivors to get Deja Vu and a decent toolbox. Which is the issue, Killers either have to fork out real money or spend significantly longer to get the Killer with Iri shards AND on top of that, get those killers to at least Prestige 1, whereas Survivors have access to good progression perks right out of the gate, no additional charge or grind required as every new Survivor has access to Deja Vu and Dwight, and Deja Vu is the 6th most used Survivor perk. You have to see how skewed that is, Killers don't have that equivalent is the point I'm making. Except on consoles but you mentioned yourself that those regression perks aren't very good.
Also Prove Thyself is the 10th most used perk according to Nightlight at 9.58%, in my own experience playing Killer and Survivor, that perk is still strong enough to have a significant impact. It's still a vital piece of gen rush builds which you still see at higher MMR levels.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/IA2ME2ATZFCS/perk-png.png
Sure, but it's not as though killers need to put that effort in to counter the survivor tools. The only unbalanced progression tools that exist right now are toolboxes, and even those aren't in every match and aren't entirely insurmountable. A team with one or two toolboxes can still very much be beaten normally, you don't need to go full ultra-sweaty meta build to achieve that.
As to Prove Thyself, I'd counter that by saying that the number one most picked perk, in both Nightlight's list and the real list BHVR put out, is Windows of Opportunity at a whopping 35% pickrate. Clearly, a perk doesn't have to be strong to be picked frequently, because Windows barely even does anything.
PT can be okay in solo queue especially since you can't really control if your teammates know to split up and bringing PT is usually more efficient than sprinting away from the generator when your teammate joins you, but it's not all that good otherwise- it's definitely not a vital part of genrushing builds, you almost can't genrush if you're grouping up on generators like that.
-
@Kruddimus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619460#Comment_3619460
Basically Killers like Nurse or Huntress, who were added later but didn't cost money at the time.
Ah, gotcha. Well, for the record, your statement is still technically wrong, but not in a super meaningful way.
Overcharge and Ruin for console, and Huntress Lullaby for everyone, are regression perks. They're not good ones, but they do exist.
There's a couple other things I could respond to there, but I didn't want to wordwall at you immediately when I wasn't sure of your original take. I'd point out, regarding this particular take, it doesn't exactly take long to get the iri shards for Clown or Artist, so killers absolutely have access to regression perks (which aren't necessary to begin with) pretty quickly.
Also, Prove Thyself is not even good, let alone very strong. That's the biggest glaring flaw with your post, I wanted to mention it quickly.
-
@Kruddimus said:
So from what I've skimmed so far from this conversation I feel like the elephant in the room hasn't been addressed yet, the reason why you see a lot of strong regression perks comes down to two factors, gen efficiency is still too strong even after the changes to the total number of charges and after the penalty for 2 people got changed, the other being the strength of progression perks and how they haven't seen any significant changes in YEARS. Prove Thyself was the only one and the change was barely a nerf as it's still not only really strong in SWF but also has a significant impact in solo queues as well, I mostly play solo Survivor these days because Killer can get a little stressful and the rate that I can hammer out gens if someone on my team is running Prove Thyself is ludicrous.
Survivors have access to more than one decent progression perk without needing to purchase a full chapter or a singular DLC character, but since the reintroduction of the Stranger Things chapter, Killers lost the single general regression perk they had, not to mention that they don't have access to any regression perks from any free DLC Killers or the baseline roster, unlike Survivors. Prove Thyself is still incredibly strong and doesn't need a fully co-ordinated team to work, you see it a lot less now but during the MFT meta people would just stay injured because of MFT + Resilience, so they had faster progression on top of being able to run and vault faster. Gen rushing is still viable yet Killers keep losing their regression perks, and then people wonder why Killers play in a way that's not enjoyable to go against like tunneling on 5 gens, or pick Killers who are super strong and unfun to play against like Nurse or Blight, Killers have no way of knowing if they're gonna get genrushed or not so at a certain MMR ranking, that's just how the game is played because Killers wanna play the game too.
I know that the BNP nerf might get brought up so to head that off at the pass, was that really a nerf? At least with the old BNP you can undo the progression with a Pain Res pop, it was rare but it could be done, the new BNP is permanent with zero counterplay available for the Killer and since it permanently removes 10 charges(which also stack so you can remove up to 40), it also makes regression weaker as regression is calculated based on the total number of charges available in a generator. So, was it really a nerf or more of a sideways buff?
I'm not here to start the "Survivor bias vs. Killer bias" discourse because quite frankly that whole discussion is exhausting and goes nowhere, but I thought it was important to also look at this issue from another angle rather than hyperfixating on just the Killer side of things.
Can I ask, what do you mean by "Free DLC" characters here? Your statement about there being no regression perks available through those avenues seems very surprising, but I'm not sure what you're actually referring to.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619376#Comment_3619376
If a survivor is purposely bodyblocking, or otherwise purposely trying to bait the killer into eating a DS, then they aren't being tunneled. DS is supposed to be an ANTI TUNNEL perk. Slugging is unacceptable, because it's basically giving the other survivor an extra health state, because the killer has to waste an attack on someone else.
Let's be honest. People are concerned that they might not be able to weaponize the perk. I'm sure BHVR could find some way to determine if a DS user is the primary chase target, or if the killer is chasing someone else, and the DS user keeps following the primary chase target instead of running in a different direction. And if BHVR couldn't figure that out, then having false positives would be better than allowing survivors to weaponize a perk that shouldn't be weaponized.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619431#Comment_3619431
5 second DS was a problem, because many people were weaponizing it. That's the reason it got the conspicuous action nerf. And when survivors STILL weaponized the perk, it's why it ultimately got the duration nerfed.
And it needs to disable on entering a locker, because that prevents the killer from being able to slug the survivor. If people honestly want to say "just slug the DS survivor", then the killer needs the option to actually slug the DS survivor.
Right, and when they use the anti-tunnel perk in this scenario, they lose value. They are put in a losing scenario, because they're slugged on the ground and their teammate is still being chased, keeping them both off generators. That is not an unacceptable scenario, it's a winning one.
This just seems like a really arbitrary line to draw. It's not okay for a survivor to bodyblock and need to be slugged, even though that's good for the killer, because it arbitrarily counts as weaponising DS, even though DS hasn't actually done anything? I don't understand this logic.
I think everyone else understands better that DS currently can't be weaponised in any meaningful way, which is why they're wary about trying to nerf it in that regard. That kind of attention is both unnecessary and prone to backfiring, so not wanting to go that route is pretty reasonable.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619435#Comment_3619435
The end game isn't meant for pity kills nor escapes. Like I said, no one is entitled to anything just because all the gens got done.
Lets say the gates were open, the killer gets hit by DS, but the gates are blocked because the killer happened to have Blood Warden. Those are both fair scenarios, where players used powerful perks they had at their disposal to try and get an advantage.
That's exactly why DS should disable. It being active is a borderline guaranteed escape, but it being deactivated is not a borderline guaranteed kill. There's still the basekit anti-tunnel protection and the possibility of bodyblocks from your teammates that can help you without DS, but there's nothing the killer can do (except the highly specific and niche scenario of Blood Warden being active, I guess) if DS is active.
-
@NerfDHalready said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619391#Comment_3619391
i'd support an idea of perk categories and limiting the number of perks one can run from one particular category so then they can freely buff perks like oppression and even surge.
It's not just about how fast your downs are, it's about your wider map pressure. How many survivors you're occupying at once, for how long, how many resources you're getting rid of, how many survivor mistakes you're seeing and capitalising on... these things are aided by smart use of slowdown perks, but it doesn't require any and it's harmed by stacking your whole build full of them.
majority of killers can't have that big of a map presence and this means without downs they can't create any pressure or have any means to slow the gens down. i agree 3 or 4 slowdown is not required and is too much even but again, against efficient survivors that are not a bunch potatoes at least 1 or 2 slowdown is imo, required for non-top like 5 killers. that is assuming they play "normally"; no tunneling slugging or camping.
I agree- so perks that help get downs are surely more impactful for those killers than the perks which only slow down generators after those downs are achieved, right?
Info and chase perks aren't a nice luxury, they're just as important and sometimes more impactful than slowdown perks. Until the playerbase as a whole realises this and stops putting slowdown perks on this completely unearned pedestal as the most powerful and most necessary perks in the roster, the problem OP describes isn't going to go away on its own and it'll be quite difficult for BHVR to fix it.
You don't need those slowdown perks. One, maybe two, to help accentuate the slowdown you generate from your other perks and good play, that's what I'd recommend for most players, because it is quite hard to keep up pressure without any slowdown at all, but I'd still not consider it necessary.
-
This would do the opposite of what you're aiming for, it'd make players pick fewer survivors that they have access to. They'd pick the ones with the strong abilities (or just the ones they prefer using) and never swap off because they'd have legitimate reason to never swap off.
I'd rather not see it, personally. I like seeing a variety of survivors in my matches.
-
@NerfDHalready said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618839#Comment_3618839
but unfortunately they actually do, that's not a perception or view thing. they might not need to stack 3 or 4 slowdown but running none isn't the move. killers can run info or chase perks that will enable them to get quick downs but even if you get instant downs and never need to look for survivors gens will get done at very few hooks, if survivors are efficient enough.
I will freely admit and support the idea that running no slowdowns is harder, but running slowdowns is by no means a requirement, not even close.
The perception is that you need one or two slowdowns but three or four is the best outcome for you, but this is incorrect. You don't need any, one or two is the sweet spot (ideally ones with actual build synergy), and three or four is going to give you diminishing returns as well as the lack of other tools harming you substantially.
It's not just about how fast your downs are, it's about your wider map pressure. How many survivors you're occupying at once, for how long, how many resources you're getting rid of, how many survivor mistakes you're seeing and capitalising on... these things are aided by smart use of slowdown perks, but it doesn't require any and it's harmed by stacking your whole build full of them.
So, it's going to be a hard problem to fix. Some would suggest a simple "git gud" mindset from BHVR with the nerfing of slowdown perks and the expectation that players will simply learn what they're supposed to be doing or otherwise go on hefty loss streaks, but that has the risk of alienating the playerbase, so I don't personally support that fully. Certainly they won't fix this by giving players even more strong regression tools, though.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619364#Comment_3619364
Aggressive body blocking isn't always avoidable. Sometimes the survivor is blocking a narrow path. And "just hit the DS survivor, and leave them slugged on the ground" is unacceptable, because that still counts as being weaponized.
If you honestly think weaponizing the perk is a bad idea, then you should be fine if that part gets nerfed some more, because it obviously wouldn't affect you, right?
Well, hang on- why is slugging them unacceptable? It's both denying them value + giving you value, and it's a situation that we could be in right now without DS at all. OTR would actually help the survivor trying to do that by blocking them going down, but DS wouldn't do anything - couldn't be considered weaponised, to be clear - until the killer picks them up, which isn't guaranteed to happen.
I don't see how that's an unacceptable outcome. It's a situation you could be in right now, and it isn't giving the survivor team very much value at all. It's a win/win for the killer and the survivors gain, what, a few seconds of distance on one of the two people being occupied by the killer?
As to your second point, I already addressed that. People are concerned about false positives on top of the fact that weaponising DS is extremely hard if not impossible with its current design, so calls to nerf its capacity for weaponising (which is already very negligible) could easily end up weakening the perk for its intended purpose.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619348#Comment_3619348
There were many people that were still weaponizing the perk after the conspicious action nerf, so there were a bunch of people that still thought it was a good idea.
And, we all need to remember that buckle up + FTP is now in the game, which means there will be SWFs that absolutely would weaponize DS if it was brought back to 5 seconds, just so they can combo it in as an actual health state. SWFs with voice comms was always where weaponized DS was the most obnoxious.
There were many people who tried to weaponise the perk after the conspicuous actions nerf. The only ones who ever succeeded did so because the killer took the bait, it's always avoidable from the killer side and it's actually a benefit to the killer side, since it's someone messing around trying and failing to bait you into a chase.
Buckle Up + For The People is its own problem. That needs to be fixed regardless of how long DS stuns you for.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619190#Comment_3619190
It's still weaponizing the perk. Survivors are purposely weaponizing the perk, and that needs to be fixed. The actual anti-tunnel part can stay. And super honestly, if people really truly want to use DS as an anti-tunnel perk, then they shouldn't care if the weaponizing part gets nerfed.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3619168#Comment_3619168
The fact that survivors were purposely bobdyblocking, purposely baiting the killer, and purposely trying to get the killer to eat a DS, means the survivors were weaponizing the perk. And why would you care if the weaponizing part gets nerfed? You obviously would never try to use DS offensively, right? Because if you don't, then you shouldn't care if the weaponizing part gets nerfed, because it wouldn't affect you at all, right?
It's attempting to weaponise the perk, which is a slightly different thing.
With the Conspicuous Actions nerf, any survivor who tries to weaponise DS is throwing. Speaking from the killer perspective, the statement "If DS gets a 5 second stun again, survivors will try to weaponise it" doesn't scare me off, since you're just telling me that my games are going to be easier due to more survivors throwing the match to try (and fail) to get value from weaponised DS.
The only change I'd personally make is making any save a Conspicuous Action, since you're not being tunnelled if someone else has been downed and picked up. Other than that, the current implementation is perfectly suited to combat weaponising the perk, so the stun duration can be safely buffed without worry about it becoming a problem.
To touch on the idea that "if you want to use it as an anti-tunnel perk you shouldn't care if it gets nerfed for weaponising", I think that's a fair statement that simply misses something: False positives. Take bodyblocking- there's no way of guaranteeing you won't end up having your DS deactivated just because you're hit close to your teammate post-unhook, which is pretty common when you're being tunnelled. Considering that, and the fact that DS is incredibly hard to weaponise without throwing (basically impossible if the killer doesn't fall for the bait), I think it's fair to object to the idea that weaponising the perk needs to be "fixed".
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618987#Comment_3618987
That might be true but the amount of complaining you get about slugging on here you wouldn't think it.
You're not wrong, I just base my judgement of an idea on whether it'd actually be good or not, rather than how many complaints it'd get lol
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Everyone says that people used to respect it more and I guess I did but I remember watching a lot of Twitch streamers would just slug and count down for DS to run out.
Slugging has more accessible counters than tunnelling, though, including basekit responses since survivors can pick each other up from the dying state.
It might not be the best outcome but it is still strictly better.
-
The fact that you want it so you can lobby dodge is the exact reason it shouldn't be implemented.
Lobby dodging messes with the MMR system and causes a lot of the mismatches we've seen since it was implemented. It's not a great outcome and we should be steering the game away from it, not encouraging more.
-
@egg_ said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618848#Comment_3618848
So a killer can sit on the hook for the whole hook stage while survivors have literally nothing to do? This is why I said reworked, they can't simply buff numbers
To be fair, the anti-camp system does exist now. But still, you're right they shouldn't buff the duration.
What they should do, instead of reworking it fully, is allow the killer to see all survivor auras for a longer time. That'd make the perk much more useful because stealthing out the duration would be much harder for survivors.
-
@Krazzik said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618858#Comment_3618858
The issue with that I think is that basekit BT is already used offensively to block the killer attacking the unhooker, being able to add OTR on top of -that- would be abused heavily.
It's a shame because as an anti-tunnel measure I think it's great. A killer actually tunneling the unhooked survivor getting hit with essentially 2 endurances is fair. But a killer trying to NOT tunnel getting blocked twice by the person who just got unhooked, or getting blocked once but then not being able to punish the bodyblocker like they can now, seems harsh.
That's a concern, but I don't know- even in the most egregious cases I've faced, I feel like it wouldn't be that big of a deal. Even assuming the best case scenario, like someone trying to bodyblock necessary doorways in Lery's or something, that's still occupying two survivors at once while the freshly unhooked one wastes a crazy amount of time. Besides, OTR already allows you to effectively do that if someone just waits out the initial ten seconds or wasn't even trying to tunnel in the first place, so it's not a huge change from where we are now.
I do agree it's a concern, but I don't think it's an insurmountable one.
-
It'd help. but it wouldn't fix it alone.
What it would achieve is pushing some killers to avoid tunnelling because they want to avoid the stun, and also give survivors a little more distance if any killer does choose to tunnel. It may not actually swing the game, but it'd be a good start.
What needs to happen, in my opinion, is that DS needs to go back to five seconds and more anti-tunnel perks need to exist, alongside a few tweaks to the basekit anti-tunnel measure. For instance, I'd love if the protection you get after unhook was changed to not be Endurance and not cancel out any Endurance effects after it's triggered, so you can block a hit with both the basekit protection and OTR or BT.
-
I don't see how BHVR can fix this issue, personally.
The community at large has decided - almost completely divorced from real necessity - that they have to run slowdown perks all the time, and almost exclusively run slowdown perks at that. BHVR can't keep buffing the slowdown perks that are already perfectly good, and it'd be a logistical nightmare to release new slowdown perks with every chapter (Especially if they're meant to compete with the current meta), so their hands are somewhat tied on this front.
What they need to do, somehow, is encourage people to realise that they don't need slowdown perks. They do sorta achieve that when they buff other kinds of perks, and they should definitely keep doing it, but that's clearly not enough to address this particular problem.
How do you prod this community to realise they don't need slowdowns? It's a tricky question without a clear answer.
-
It's not necessary, not even close.
However, there is some degree to which I think the killer's early game could be improved, and it largely has to do with spawn logic. If it were mechanically impossible for survivors to spawn spread out, only ever spawning in groups of two or all together, the early game for killers would be a little more consistent and wouldn't have those nasty edge cases where you lose three gens in your first chase. Nerfing toolboxes would help here too, but that's just sort of generally necessary in its own right.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618517#Comment_3618517
Hi, jester! Good to see you here.
The point about Coldwind Farm will remain as "agree to disagree". If you like it, that is fine, I respect your opinion. I just disagree with it.
As for the wider point, I believe the maps being playable in custom games is a step in the right direction, but it won't be enough for me. It will be nice at first, but playing against bots will get boring after a while. My favorite suggestions are either a classic mode (maybe the proposed Disgustingly Scary mode could use the older maps, as they are a better fit for it imho), or the option to choose between which map you want to see.
Both are possible, and no one is going to lose anything. Everyone wins. I'm glad these kinds of suggestions are acceptable to you.
It's not that I like it, it's that its horror atmosphere is pretty obvious. It's meant to look like TCM, which is pretty much the pinnacle of horror atmosphere. I'm not even saying anyone has to like it or prefer it to the old one, but the specific complaint that it lacks in horror atmosphere is just off the mark.
A separate game mode would be fine too, of course, I'm mostly only objecting to the idea of adding variants to the map pool. Though, when it comes to custom games, I'm also of the opinion that this game would benefit from a proper custom-game directory like Overwatch has, with some robust tools for curating the experience.
After all, the separate game mode would be dependant on people actually queuing in it, which might take long enough that it spurs people not to bother. The custom game directory entry would have at least a chance of filling quicker, in my opinion.
-
It's always been a massive pet peeve of mine when people point to Coldwind as a realm that now lacks in horror atmosphere. The realm that is extremely visually evocative of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, a movie of immense horror atmosphere in some part due to the aesthetic of a desolate, rundown farm baked in the Texas heat...
It ties into the wider misunderstanding of how "horror atmosphere" must somehow mean "visually gloomy". The game's not lacking in horror atmosphere at all, even in the reworked maps, you're just able to see the actual horror signifiers and aesthetics better now.
To the wider point, I'd support making them playable in custom games, as someone else said. It'd be nice for the people with nostalgia, and for everyone else, it'd be a reminder why those things changed. As long as no addition makes me personally play on a worse version of any map, I'm fine with it.
Honestly, in general, I'd like to see custom game tools be a bit more robust, but that's a topic for another thread.
-
Dead By Daylight is definitely not a party game, but I'm not sure if that's exactly what's being asked in this thread.
Current experience isn't what would dictate whether a game is a party game or not. But, to answer about my experience, it's been pretty alright. I play killer and solo survivor, and while there are frustrations - I've been matched with players vastly more experienced than me on killer, and solo survivor can be annoying for the same reasons solo play is annoying in any team game - I still very much enjoy my time with the game and it is overall improving.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617285#Comment_3617285
So what does hold water then? If a killer like Twins is very unpopular and disliked by the majority on both sides but not over or underpowered, something might be problematic with the design. They might be creative, but that does not make the design good.
I am putting everything into account, and i hoped the devs are too. Ballance, popularity and how people feel about them. Unfortunatly, i have a strong feeling they lost track on what is good for the game in many ways. Killer and Map design are two major problems these days.
What holds water is actually talking about the design. Using popularity instead of the design, only talking about whether they're strong and whether people like them, is going to be pretty misleading.
Using popularity here has a few major flaws, in my opinion.
The first is that we don't actually have a good sense for popularity. The closest we've come is BHVR's most recent top-ten list for pickrate specifically, but that's only part of the picture and has pretty obvious flaws even for the part it shows, such as Xenomorph being new at the time and therefore represented very highly. Any popularity poll you point to is going to be a heavily restricted subsection of the actual playerbase, to the extent that it's not super fair to use it to try and represent that entire playerbase.
The second is that popularity is going to be very contingent on a lot of extra elements. Killers like Singularity, for instance, might rate low in popularity polls that have a lot of console players, because he's very hard to play on controller. That's part of his design, but it's not the whole story- much like your example of Artist, too, people will rate killers low if there's something annoying about them, even when the rest of the design is perfectly sound. Part of the story, but not the whole picture.
The third and most important is that literally nobody ever votes on a popularity poll for the design of a killer. They'd be rating the implementation of a killer. For this one, I'd point to the Twins again: a good and interesting design held back by flawed implementation and a whole ton of bugs, neither of which are necessary elements of that power. Another good example is Legion: if you'd polled people on how much they liked Legion on release, they'd be bottom of the pack by a wide margin, but their design was totally fine - which is why they still have that design now, when they're much more popular.
Trying to use popularity skirts around actually trying to think about and discuss game design, and it stalwartly refuses to acknowledge the difference between design and implementation. It's a shortcut that doesn't even lead you to the right destination.
-
You seem to be basing a lot of these examples on popularity, rather than the quality of their design. Twins, for example, have a pretty good design with a ton of potential, and all you mention is that they're not popular, not even that their implementation was flawed and that they're buggy as hell.
Similarly, there are killers on this list where you hyper-focus on one specific flaw rather than the quality of their design. Artist and, I assume, Knight are examples of this: Artist has one of the best designed powers in the game, and also, an annoying flaw with the "drop bird at loop and force them to leave" tactic. It doesn't seem fair to throw out the entirety of her design, a very good and interesting design, because there's one annoying aspect to it.
The bigger problem is how much weight you're putting on popularity, though. If your point is just that modern killers tend to be less popular, that'd be one thing (probably not correct, Trickster's pretty popular for example), but the idea that a killer's design is bad because you can see some people disliking the killer as a whole just doesn't hold water.
-
Some of them are. Even the ones that spawn at the start can be perfectly good, there's just a bit of a risk that they'll be found super early.
The two ways around this are to just accept the risk and bring a hex as part of a wider build that still functions without it (I've brought Blood Favour in some chase builds, for example), or to bring a full hex build that includes trap/defence perks for your hexes. Either way, hexes are perfectly viable, and have been for a while; Ruin wasn't the only viable hex before, it was just the most directly powerful one.
More to the point, hex perks aren't bad. Most hexes are actually pretty damn good perks if they aren't cleansed super early, it's the shared mechanic that could use some buffs. Something to at least make hexes being broken in the first minute of the game less likely would be quite nice.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616751#Comment_3616751
The only thing I would say is that you have the misconception that "game sense" only applies to have knowledge of the game. While in part is true, having game sense also implies that you would make the right calls at the right time with that knowledge, which also needs skill. For example, if you can't coordinate to do a save without a "3, 2, 1, GO!" in voicecomms is also having a lack of game sense.
Other than that, I already said what I had to say about the topic. I would only point out that your explanation of "they are needed" are not any proof that they doesn't cover for a lack of game sense either. For example, the fact that having to take in count the possibility of you getting tunneled or camped on hook while making your build could lead to "stale metas and an irritating stifle on player expression" doesn't change the fact that you don't need to even think about it now as the game cover those cases for you. So, you are free to contribute in the stale and irritating meta of having WoO + the 3 builds that everyone else use (a lot of player expression in survivor's builds, without doubt).
So, your second paragraph here is repeating that same error I was talking about before. What you're describing, with needing to account for camping and tunnelling being something uncounterable without perks while crafting your build, isn't game sense outside of the most basic level of understanding camping and tunnelling exist. The systems in place to address camping and tunnelling aren't covering for a lack of game sense, they're just allowing those tactics to be (at least partially) countered using game sense instead of using perks.
Another great example is actually hook saves. Before the survivor HUD, there was no amount of game sense that would let you make the right decision without assuming your teammates are doing something useful, which is just a guess, or without bringing Kindred. Now, though, with the survivor HUD added, the player's game sense is what dictates if they're making the right call, not whether they brought the single correct perk in the loadout screen.
TL;DR, not wanting to be forced to run very specific perks is not a lack of game sense. The systems that addressed this need for specific perks actually enable game sense, they don't cover for a lack of it.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616739#Comment_3616739
I think you didn't understand, what I'm saying is that just as I said, you are giving that "explanation" of why those base mechanics that covers for survivors "are needed", almost like it is what every person defending them says (or maybe I can see the future, who knows...).
Because they do cover for survivors, as already explained. If you want to call it "base game flaws" to justify the fact that the game cover for the lack of game sense and skill of survivors, you do you. If that was the case, they could have done a lot of other things to solve those "design flaws" that didn't imply general nerfs in form of base mechanics that cover for every situation and case so survivors don't even have to worry about it.
Not at all? They're different statements. There is no game sense to cover for in your examples, because those things aren't a case of only struggling because you don't understand the game fully, nor are they situations that you can overcome with a superior knowledge of how a match is progressing.
It's not covering for a lack of game sense. That's a separate sentence to talking about why these things were added. That's why I was responding to your explanation- it's flawed, and doesn't prove the thing you're saying.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616730#Comment_3616730
In summary: "They not cover for survivors, they are needed features so survivors can get the best experience out of the game and have fun playing it", just as I said in the first post.
Anyway, again, I don't mind as long as they aren't abusable by survivors or an unearned advantage, so I don't have more to say about it. Just that again, is funny that BHVR is so killer sided for adding a FoV slider for killers after 4 base mechanics for survivors.
You seemed to be saying it sarcastically, hence my asking for clarification. You certainly seemed to be arguing against that point up to this stage, too.
Because, yes, they don't cover for lack of game sense, they were addressing base game flaws.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616715#Comment_3616715
The first three things all removes the same level of game sense: The need of making your build with those cases in mind, the need to know how to coordinate with your teammates to do saves (now only reserved to the EGC, where if done correctly it would almost always grant the save without the need of having thought that it could happen beforehand), and having the enough common sense of knowing that if a killer with an instadown is camping the hook it would require extra effort to go for a save, so you should decide if it is worth it or it is better to just do gens (funny enough, it appears that most people don't even have the enough game sense to know that now if you see the killer camping you should get out of there and let the AFC do it's job).
Now we will have to see what's the anti 3 genning is about, but if it is something that prevent survivors getting punished for not putting some thought on what 3 gens are letting the killer have at the end, it would be another one to add to the list.
And don't get me wrong, most of those mechanics were implemented in a "fair" way (with some caveats, like I said with BT in the endgame) and I don't have any problem with them. Doesn't change the fact that they were game changing and made to cover for the lack of game sense of survivors.
To tackle those examples in order:
The need to craft your build with hard tunnelling and facecamping in mind is not game sense, it's just pressure to not bring fun and interesting perks. It's a cause for stale metas and an irritating stifle on player expression, and it's absolutely a good reason to implement these mechanics, not a detracting factor.
I'm not sure I understand your second example, the need to know how to coordinate with your teammates. That's either something you can't do regardless of game sense, if you're in solo queue, or it's something that's largely pretty unaffected if you're in SWF? Not coordinating still means you're being inefficient, and it also wouldn't have caused hard tunnelling or face-camping before these mechanics were added, so I really don't get this one. Maybe I'm missing something, of course, please feel free to elaborate if so.
Your last point is the same as the first: That's not game sense, that's a game flaw. If you cannot go for a save and there's nothing to punish the killer for it... your teammate just dies and the killer gets a free kill, or you're forced to trade and give the killer free (albeit lesser) value that way instead. That's a bad outcome either way, so this mechanic isn't covering for a lack of game sense, it's correcting a flaw.
As for the 3-gen thing, I think considering that the previous mechanics don't cover for poor game sense in any meaningful way intentionally or unintentionally, I think BHVR have earned a little bit of benefit of the doubt. There's no point in making a fuss until we've actually seen what it does- and even if it does leave survivors able to cause 3-gens without being punished for it, that's not 'another to add to the list', it's the first entry on a currently empty list.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616674#Comment_3616674
The basekit BT, the AFC, the removal of unhooking grabs and now the "3 genning solution", whatever it is. All things that already had in game solutions. And people is already asking for an "anti slug" mechanic.
But a FoV slider? Unacceptable, that's too much. It's going to unbalance the whole game, even if the only difference would be that you won't need to use a perk slot to not suffer motion sickness. BHVR is killer sided and they prefer to ruin the game than never buff killers ever again. That's it.
How do basekit BT and the AFC system cover for a lack of game sense? No amount of game sense will stop a killer from hard-tunnelling or facecamping if it's mechanically possible for them to do it. Neither are things game sense could beat, or could prevent, so they're out as examples here.
The removal of unhooking grabs... there's a bit more of an argument there about game sense, kinda, but it ties in to camping. If the killer's camping, no amount of game sense will stop that.
Now the 3-genning solution, which is the first thing actually beatable with the right tools and mindset, but it's not exactly healthy for the game if the killer sticks by a 3-gen and refuses to actually down + hook survivors. Even if we were to agree that it's unnecessary, though, that's one example, so not a pattern.
I do agree the person you're responding to was silly to say the FOV slider is tone-deaf, to be clear, I was just confused about your comment regarding game sense.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616384#Comment_3616384
Survivors getting base mechanics to cover for their lack of game sense over and over again: They are needed features so we can get the best experience out of the game and have fun playing it. Now, where is the anti-slug mechanic so I can have another chance on top of my other second chances, BHVR?
Survivors when they add an industry standard feature that should have being in the game since day 1 for accessibility reasons: How dare you make this unbalancing change, BHVR? You are so killer sided! Your non-stopping killer buffing is ruining the game!
Do you realize you are saying what you are saying about a list where most of it are going to be killer nerfs and survivor buffs just because they are going to add a FoV slider, right?
What mechanics have survivors gotten to cover for a lack of game sense? I can't think of any recently.
Recent mechanical changes for survivors would be like... the basekit BT, the survivor HUD, and the visual terror radius, right? None of those things are things that'd cover for lack of game sense, really. The HUD kinda could in a vague sense, but that's obviously not what it does in most cases. So, what are you referring to?
-
Absolutely not, no.
It would help some Trapper players a little bit (assuming the downside is removed, if not then there's zero reason to do it), but it'd just encourage most to set up a minefield around their first hook, or just immediately go for basement plays. These two tactics are somewhat balanced right now around the fact that you have to commit time or inability to pick traps back up into them, without those restrictions they'd be the only things most players do.
Trapper could still use some buffs, but that's categorically not what he needs or should get.
-
@daffyd said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615858#Comment_3615858
>If consistent communication isn't what you expect to gain from voice comms, what is? What could affect the balance of the game other than the tool being used for its one purpose?
Consistent communication isn't affective communication is, e.g. i had eggs for tea vs it's a ghostface at the killershack
>It's also not like skill with your keyboard or controller because it's completely out of your control, for the record.
Not sure what you are talking about here
>To the last point: Salt and pepper have a benefit, they are seasonings. Voice comms have no such guaranteed benefit.
"Voice comms have no such guaranteed benefits"? example: "killer shack window is trapped" doesn't have any benefit or "shack pallet gone"... have I misunderstood you here?
Yes, you've misunderstood my crucial point.
You won't get comms like "Ghostface at shack" or "shack window is trapped" from voice comms. That's the entire reason they won't help solo queue in any meaningful way. To get comms like that, everyone would need to have the ability, desire, and language to use the voice comms at all, which isn't guaranteed. In most of your games, you're gonna have people who don't have a mic, or who don't care to use the mic, or who don't speak the same language as you so it doesn't matter whether they want to communicate or not.
You won't get consistent information in the sense that you won't get any information unless the stars align. If you play in EU, that's dramatically unlikely. If you play in NA, it's a little more plausible, but still not reliable. That's why I say it's out of your control, because it's up to chance if your teammates can use comms or understand you when you use comms.
What you want isn't voice comms. You want people who'll communicate with you. The game can't give you that with any additions, voice comms or otherwise; you have to get it from SWF.
-
@daffyd said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615851#Comment_3615851
>Only partially. The fact is that comms won't lead to consistent communication, and it's pretty well evidenced. It is my opinion that comms aren't a good idea overall, but my opinion is reflective of that fact.
Consistent communication isn't what is being talked about, compare it to skill with your keyboard or controller. Some people are better at it, some aren't. Balance leads to fairness and fun in games.
>It's also your opinion that it should be a choice. I'd contest that- why should it be a choice when the benefits it'd provide are pretty slim and the downsides it'd present are pretty compelling?
If I offered you a salt or pepper with your meal it is your choice whether it has upsides or downsides, the choice is healthy.
If consistent communication isn't what you expect to gain from voice comms, what is? What could affect the balance of the game other than the tool being used for its one purpose?
It's also not like skill with your keyboard or controller because it's completely out of your control, for the record.
To the last point: Salt and pepper have a benefit, they are seasonings. Voice comms have no such guaranteed benefit.
-
@daffyd said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615807#Comment_3615807
Have to say this is your opinion but having comms or not, it should be a choice in game whether you think it improves you or not.
Only partially. The fact is that comms won't lead to consistent communication, and it's pretty well evidenced. It is my opinion that comms aren't a good idea overall, but my opinion is reflective of that fact.
It's also your opinion that it should be a choice. I'd contest that- why should it be a choice when the benefits it'd provide are pretty slim and the downsides it'd present are pretty compelling?
-
@daffyd said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615807#Comment_3615807
Many words but no substance, please give examples
Well, I'll have to assume what the expected benefit is, but sure.
The usual expectation is that voice chat will shrink the gap between SWF and solo queue, with the logic that what solo queue is missing - communication - will be granted with voice chat. This isn't the case. When you're in a SWF with someone, a live mic connection isn't the reason you can communicate; you can communicate with them because everyone in the call has the ability to use that connection, the desire to use that connection, and the language to use that connection.
Anyone who's played a game that uses voice comms in the EU region can tell you that it's quite unlikely for everyone to speak the same language in a given match. Anyone who plays in NA can tell you that not everyone has a mic, not everyone wants to use the mic, and not everyone has the disposition to use the mic in a way that doesn't suck majorly to deal with. Further, anyone who plays anywhere can tell you there are people who may try to use the mic, but have massive noise pollution wherever they live, intentionally or unintentionally.
The fact of the matter is, adding a voice chat system won't mean solo queue survivors can communicate with each other reliably. That, simply and bluntly, won't happen. If you want information to be exchanged between solo queue survivors, it has to come from other means; whether it's an active one like a message wheel, or passive ones akin to the current survivor HUD we have.
So, we're starting from the position that voice comms won't address balance concerns. From that starting point, we start adding in the unavoidable downsides like toxicity and harassment, and it becomes pretty apparent that voice comms aren't all that good of an idea for this game.
-
Because it wouldn't help, mostly.
People pointing out the inevitable toxicity and such are completely right to do so, but they're sort of falling for the implied framing that there'd be any benefit to voice chat, which there wouldn't be. You wouldn't, as a solo survivor, be in a substantially better place from a balance perspective or an experience perspective, so there's no reliable benefit to adding voice chat to this game.
I think a lot of people expect adding voice chat to mean solo survivors will be on par with SWF, but that obviously isn't the case for a variety of reasons. It's all downsides with - at best - extremely minimal upside.
-
While situations like this suck, there is at least the silver lining that you're both using perks to cancel one another out, and the killer wins that since they have more basekit power than the survivors do.
Playing against squads like this is tough, but there are other things to use to track survivors. Scratch marks (when Distortion isn't eating them), blood pools, injured sounds, footstep sounds, even just the visual sight of them. If you know a generator's been worked on, too, because it stopped regressing, chances are they're hiding nearby.
So, there's stuff you can do to react, and if all you care about is having info in general (which I assume isn't the case since you're doing a gimmick build here, but still), there are plenty of good perks that aren't fooled by either of those survivor options. Discordance, Surveillance, even Whispers is pretty good-- or bring some aura reading that chews through stacks fast, like Gearhead.