jesterkind
jesterkind
About
- Username
- jesterkind
- Joined
- Visits
- 17,633
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Spectralfx said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3442991#Comment_3442991
My dear friend, as respectful as I want to be... I have to be blunt here.
Hell no you sure as heck don't know in those games either!
There's a reason why people get emotionnal in LoL when they get notified that their teamate feeded... it's because as they were tunneled visionned in their corner of the map... they failed to notice until it was too late.
Game sense comes with experience and handing over information in the fashion you wish for will only serve to clutter the screen and push away new comers as it will make the game look even more complex.
Less is more.
Stop the hand-holding and expect people to learn through failures. That's what mentors, communities and content creators are there for.
Minimalistic designs is how you make a good learning curve and offer longevity to a game.
Dumb it down too much with freebies and it becomes forgettable, easy to master.
So no, again respectfully, we don't need survivors to get yet, for the millionth time, another base kit ability.
Of course you know in those games? Taking Overwatch as our primary example, you can see your Genji through walls. Obviously information on that level can't be added to DBD, but in a general sense, you're basically aware of what your teammates are doing at relevant junctures.
For the most part we've already been given that information through the survivor HUD, and the only real blank spot still left is the knowledge of who is going for a save. Neither the survivor HUD nor a hypothetical basekit Kindred count as handholding, dumbing down, or 'freebies', they're just giving players the tools they need to make decisions.
I've always found this argument particularly interesting, honestly. I actually agree that players should be expected to utilise good game sense and decision making, and that you can't game-design away bad teammates; players will have to just react to having bad teammates and do their best on their own terms, while accepting that they're more likely to lose. All of that is absolutely golden, in theory, but for some reason people are suggesting that argument alongside an implication that players should be doing all of that while also flying blind.
Like I said above, you can't make decisions without a basic level of information, and a basic level of information also won't help you unless you're making decisions. Getting this information won't take away any decision making or skill expression, it'll enable decision making and skill expression. Minimalist doesn't mean missing, there's a certain amount of info players should be expected to have in order to make decisions, in any game- otherwise they're just guessing.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3442972#Comment_3442972
In any online game with a team, all you can control are your own actions. You can't make your team come for hooks or do gens. In overwatch I can't make a genji sit still so I can heal him. In Dota I can't force my support to put down useful wards. That's just part of dealing with humans with their own thoughts and agency. If we could make others behave exactly how we wanted the world would not be a very interesting place.
Yeah it's imperfect information and acting on it intelligently is a tiny satisfying moment in the game. If the game automatically vacuumed killers into pallets for you then you'd be robbed of that little happiness. If huntress hatchets automatically veered into survivors when within .5m then her gameplay would less engaging. At a certain point forceful handholding serves to dumb down the game and make it overall less interesting. More bland. For similar reasons I think the lightburn changes were misguided.
Yes, but in those games, you at least know when your Genji is going off on his singleplayer adventure on the other side of the map and you know when your support is doing something stupid (or so I'd assume, I haven't played DOTA but I've played other MOBA games). So, in DBD, you can only control your own actions but - to a degree - you should know to do that.
Kindred's information still has to be acted on intelligently, it's not handholding. It's just the information you need to make intelligent, informed decisions that aren't hinging almost entirely on guesswork. Seeing their teammates' auras won't make bad teammates actually bother doing a generator or going for a save, even if it were permanent and mapwide; only seeing auras when someone's hooked isn't going to change anyone's behaviour except the ones who'd be putting proper effort and intelligent thought into it.
-
@YOURFRIEND said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3442322#Comment_3442322
You think swfs constantly know where their teammates are at all times when someone is on the hook? Dunno who you're playing with, but that ain't my group.
Fact is kindred is obsoleted by the activity HUD and a little bit of game sense. Kate got hooked and Jane got off her gen and is not being chased? Very likely going for the unhook. Did Jane start to get chased when she got off the gen? Possible camping killer or just unlucky. Regardless, you go for the unhook. It's a very simple flowchart that it wouldn't hurt people to learn. You can't just hand everything in the game to people; it makes experience less rewarding. No more basekit perks.
Constantly? No. When it's relevant? Yes, obviously. It doesn't require all that much skill to ask "hey who's going" when someone gets hooked- I'll admit that I don't play in a SWF so there's always a small chance I'm wrong, but I hardly see how it could be possible.
As for your comment about the activity HUD, you're completely right!
....If your teammates are actually doing generators when the hook happens. Or at all. And, it assumes that your teammates are making the same rational decisions as you. Even if everyone's skilled, it's imperfect information. Playing with Kindred and playing without is night and day, specifically for this reason.
-
Even if they do work together, that's only going to be useful in situations where they're picking up someone from the dying state while the killer's already there, and there are ways of doing that which are probably a lot smoother than combining MfT and FtP.
FtP will make you injured so you can start using MfT, but it's not as though becoming injured is either particularly difficult to achieve or only a good thing, so that part's probably fine.
It's not a lack of a downside because you're still injured. You may move 3% faster, and you may have 10 seconds of Endurance... but if you aren't actively being chased you don't get to use the Endurance, and you're still vulnerable to a one-hit down when the killer does catch up. Made for This is going to have strong use cases, but I don't think this is going to be one of them.
-
@sanees said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3442461#Comment_3442461
3 survivors can complete all generators in 2 minutes while the minimum chase time without pallets and windows is 50 seconds,
Yes, given that the survivors can fix the generators faster than waiting in line, camping is definitely a problem.
By the way, how many anti-camping perks are in your build?
If you want to stop survivors from repairing generators faster, surely you'd be doing the opposite of camping? You'd need to be going and interrupting them to prevent their repairs, using whatever perks you've got or just stalling with basekit slowdown.
I'm not denying that gen speeds can be a problem with the right tools, but that problem and camping aren't really linked.
-
Half of Kindred should be basekit, pretty unambiguously. The survivor aura half absolutely should be made basekit to better prop up solo players without giving SWF anything extra.
The killer aura half, though, would be too strong as a basekit thing, and honestly kind of unnecessary once the anti-camp change goes through. That part being on the perk is 100% reasonable, I think.
-
Based on what we know so far, it looks like the legitimate form of camping - IE, patrolling around near-ish the hook and actually taking chase with the first survivor you see - should be largely unaffected. This new system should, on paper, only affect you if you're stubbornly standing by the hook and refusing to take chase away from it, a la the infamous facecamping Bubba scenario.
And if you are in that scenario, good, you should be punished. You should play the game and employ the actual strategies available to the killer, not just stand in one place and wait for the timer to go down.
-
The buffs and nerfs she got post-release were intended to alleviate the stuff people found boring. Between the nerfs to her drone placement and the more important nerfs to CoB/Overcharge, a huge amount of the 3-gen problem specifically was addressed. She's basically down to the normal level of 3-gen misery, at this point, hence them attempting to tackle that problem itself rather than continuing to change her.
Regardless, even if you think the changes were all bad, they weren't just directionless buffs. They were changes to try and push her towards a more active playstyle, they were an actual response to the problem rather than them ignoring the problem.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3441807#Comment_3441807
killer becomes insufferable against strong survivors when balanced around low-medium level. Its that type of balancing that can make dbd not fun for killer.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3441826#Comment_3441826
you mean old newspaper and rekiro watch? Sure but any buff you give to killer makes killer stronger at low-level first before it buffs killer at high-level. currently ringing noise is lullaby and it is directional so those add-on are not that good if the player understand how to read volume noises. Its similar to spirit's phase-walk. you will only buff killer at low-level where people do not understand how to use volume while very top-level is unaffected. I think you need disable lullaby first before you could buff her chase.
You're missing my point a little- it's a bad idea to pick one set of players to balance for, period. It doesn't matter which one you pick, there will be serious and unavoidable consequences for the other sets of players.
What you have to do is balance for all of them at once, which is especially relevant for Sadako. Personally speaking I'm not convinced the lullaby really is that important for lower tier players, but if it is, then she has to be balanced around that while also improving her against stronger survivors. That's simply how balance works.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3441786#Comment_3441786
why? The stronger players cannot become worse players. the worse player can get better at the game. do you think it is ok for the killer to get forced losses because their kit is highly limited to balance out bad players? this kinda what your saying.
Because you need newer and less skilled players to stick around for the longevity of the game. Only cater to those with thousands of hours, and you'll steadily lose players as the ones you have naturally drift away and newer ones are turned off by the balancing.
Also, because the lesser skilled players are still players, and their fun matters as much as top players?
Which is why it's a sticky subject. You have to change Sadako in a way that works for both sets of players.
-
Rather than buffing its duration, I'd like to see it show all survivor auras. Currently it has the issue of survivors just hiding it out even when you get it to activate in a timely fashion, so having survivor auras shown for a chunk of the timer (or hell, even all of it) would be a great change to encourage running it and splitting your pressure.
-
I hope for your sake they were at least also running Botany. That's actually a pretty good combo, albeit one with a pretty glaring weakness.
-
I don't think it's super fair to categorise this solely as a Franklin's nerf, that perk isn't even affected if you aren't playing one of the few killers whose items no longer count- and of them I think it's literally just Pinhead, right? Or could you use Franklin's to make people drop Wesker's First Aid Spray?
You already couldn't make survivors drop Sadako's tapes, iirc. The vaccines from Nemesis may have counted but you'd never be in a position to try that, that isn't how anyone plays with that item.
I imagine they changed the items (not Franklin's) because they want consistency across killer-related items, which is fair. On the fence about some of the change, I really don't like that survivors don't have to drop their item to pick up the Lament Configuration anymore, but the idea of consistency isn't that unreasonable.
-
I think you're legitimately the first person I've seen complaining about the Mirror addons, I was under the impression they were almost universally enjoyed by both sides. Fair and fun, and on a pretty weak killer so hardly overpowered.
-
To be fair, they very easily could've seen your aura through a perk, and at that point it's a fair logical guess that you're gonna be in a locker. Just luck that they guessed yours right.
If they were close when you hid, the locker doors do also make a sound when you open them, so there's that too.
The overall point is- if they know or suspect you're in that area, checking lockers is pretty reasonable. It might have nothing to do with sound whatsoever. I've got completely messed up hearing in one ear and I find survivors in lockers all the time, because the cue they're in there is often visual, not audio.
-
I would be very wary of buffing Botany Knowledge, considering how strong it currently is.
-
There's really good things on that map, but there's also a fair amount of bad stuff, like the sheer lack of line of sight and the many things that'll mess up collision.
It's super pretty, and I love the cool weird ledge loop they added, but there are problems worth criticising.
-
The problem here is that the scaling isn't nearly as clean as you'd like it to be. Something like the Hyperfocus/Stakeout build isn't run all that frequently and so wouldn't be counted as the ultra-sweaty build that it is, and something absurdly strong like Lucky Break/Overcome/Bite the Bullet would actively decrease the rating since those perks are rarely run.
Then on the flipside, you have perks that are run all the time but that aren't really sweaty, they're just nice perks to have.
Then for addons, you've got places where they'd be backwards too. Take Demogorgon- the strongest addon combination for him, more or less, would be the Barb's Glasses and Black Heart build, two addons that wouldn't rate particularly highly in this system. Compare to a meme build that involves his purples, and we've got a problem.
If you want the matchmaking to make a distinction between those playing sweaty and those goofing around, the more established way of doing that would be to add a ranked mode. I don't personally think that's a good idea, but it's the way you'd achieve something like this.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3438046#Comment_3438046
What changes, since 2018, do you feel have been geared toward the enjoyment of Killers?
Nobody finds gen regression perks "fun". Nobody ever sat mid-game yelling "Ruin!!!! OH YEAH!!". They were a crutch to help offset the long chases and/or long setup times required.
You also realize I'm not the sole voice of this stance, correct? Just see this page in this thread alone.
Do you honestly find most Killers "fun" if you are even attempting to be competitive in-game?
The massive overhaul of the Hatch, multiple map changes to make extremely broken setups far less common, the adjustment to DS to account for Conspicuous Actions, both reworks of Dead Hard (though the first one was more of a balance thing, the second one was about enjoyment), the Adept/Merciless Killer changes, and killer-specific changes that aim to make the whole roster more enjoyable by fixing very specific issues with any one killer.
That's just off the top of my head, if I went and looked into it I'd find a lot more.
Also, I may never say "hell yeah" about Ruin, but I've definitely had other perks activate at clutch moments and been very satisfied with it.
And ultimately, yes. Even when trying solely to win instead of doing challenges or relaxing, I find most killers fun, and the killers I don't find fun are almost all actual personal preference rather than game flaw issues. For example, I don't like Nurse and Spirit, I just don't like how they play, but nobody in their right mind could claim they aren't strong or fun in a general sense.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3437958#Comment_3437958
No.
Let me keep this short to be clear:
The changes have not taken into account enjoyment of the Killer role. All changes have been centered around increasing the enjoyment of the Survivor role. If you change the core of your game mechanic (which is fine), you have to ensure the new core is still fun for both sides.
Killer isn't fun as it is now. (Well, most Killers.)
What changes? Everything since 2016? Because that's a hell of a statement to make, especially considering how many changes in the game's lifetime have been explicitly geared towards the fun factor of killers.
That's why I'm asking you what period of the game you're talking about, because the stuff you're describing has been what the game has been built around for a long time at this point. Even at the game's launch, the chase was still a big element from everything I've seen, it was just meant to have more tense hiding between chases. That obviously didn't pan out and the game very quickly found its actual identity, but even that happened ages ago now.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3437694#Comment_3437694
"Dont forget that killers actually need to be having fun to continue playing. Most of the changes over the game's lifespan focus on the idea of survivors having fun with little thought for the killer. Things are fine if you play one of the top 5 killers but everything else kinda sucks."
Exactly.
This is the point I was trying to make @jesterkind with respect to the evolution of the core gameplay from stealth to pursuit.
The "chase" elongation and focus might be great for Survivors and their entertainment, but it simply isn't fun for Killers, and BHVR has done nothing to attempt to make it more entertaining for Killers.
- How many times am I supposed to circle the same car in Haddonfield before it's reasonable to complain?
- How many times am I supposed to chase the same Survivor up that stupid tractor?
Does anyone really believe this is "fun"? There is no "mindgame" here, they can clearly see if I go right or left, and the circle is large enough that it will take awhile to catch them. It's boring and frustrating.
I understand "the chase" is the fun part of DBD for Survivors, and the desire to have them run longer for those players, but it really isn't particularly fun for Killers. ESPECIALLY when every moment in chase is reducing the Killer's chance of success, as generators are flying. Taking the original game and simply adding longer/more frequent chases isn't sufficient. The "hunt" was a big part of the enjoyment for Killer. Now the Survivors just run straight up to you. What is supposed to have taken it's place in the game's evolution?
I used to only play Survivor for dailies/event goals, but now I play it to relax.
The chase is the gameplay, man, what else is it supposed to be? It can't be a hide-and-seek type game, there's a reason it stopped being that so quickly. Players can and will find ways to keep themselves alive longer, and since the chase element is the more active element and the element a majority of the game's built around, that part makes the most sense to focus on.
Also, sure, the car loops on Haddonfield do suck if your killer's power doesn't interact with it, but... by "that stupid tractor" do you mean the harvester on Coldwind maps? Because that's a good example of a tile that's actually played around by both sides. The killer can swing to get across the other side of the vault, or double back to catch the survivor on the fall, that's not an example of a bad tile.
Let's say we turn back the clock to pre-release DBD and decide it'll be a hide and seek game, instead of what it ended up being so quickly after launch. Do you really think a game where four out of five players are spending a majority of the time only staring at a generator or crouching in some grass is gonna be that fun for more than like, three days? Or that it wouldn't get dull trying to ferret out survivors from super dark maps with tons of super thick grass? I know I try to avoid talking about the term fun, but there's really no other term for it here, there's very little active gameplay. On both sides, the action comes from chasing down survivors, searching for them would get super boring super quickly, you can see that from how games with super stealthed survivors stretch on forever and aren't that engaging on live right now. In this hypothetical version of the game, the maps would be built completely different so looping can't happen (due to the chase element needing to be de-emphasised even compared to the original launch version of the game), so there'd be much less for either side to do.
You keep harkening back to some "original" game, or "before" the way we are now, but when are you talking about? These changes all started within a year of DBD existing as far as I'm aware, at this stage it sounds like you just don't like Dead By Daylight.
-
It's exactly like Hyperfocus all over again. A perk that most people aren't going to run, but that is going to be far too strong when it is run because of what it does.
Toolboxes are already too strong, that's a pretty simple fact about DBD right now. The ability to double your toolbox, not even needing to stop and hop in a locker like BtL to do it, is very strong.
The difference is that Hyperfocus has a simple fix (it not activating while toolboxes are used) and this perk kinda doesn't. I don't know how you make Scavenger balanced, without targeting the root of the problem- but an overhaul for toolboxes is gonna take a while so the problem's gonna persist until then.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3437474#Comment_3437474
Very true. I must admit, that I did not consider this.
Although, there aren't a lot of good tools killers have to cause the exhaustion effect. Some killers have addons to do that and I guess there is always Mind Breaker but that's about it. Blood Echo isn't really reliable enough to take up 25% of the killer's perks.
True enough! Honestly, I think the Singularity's new anti-Exhaustion perk might be one of the better ones once it hits live.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3437371#Comment_3437371
That's right. But it sure does apply before using these perks. Run Balanced Landing as a plan B and you have a very good chase build. DH would also have great synergy with it.
In the interest of balance, I think it's important to point out that means the killer's anti-exhaustion tools are twice as effective, considering they're disabling two perks instead of the usual one.
-
Normally I'd be inclined to agree, but in this case it's a bit of a "boy who cried wolf" scenario because Scavenger really is that bad. Made For This I think people might be overreacting to, but there's no ambiguity or redeeming context for Scavenger.
Also, in fairness, not every perk you listed there is equal. People said that Hyperfocus would be OP... and it kinda is, that perk needs to be nerfed so it doesn't work with toolboxes. Nobody runs it, and it's extremely strong, those two things can be true at the same time. Similarly, people complained about Reassurance being broken on the PTB... because it was, it was pretty easy to grief your teammates with it. That perk got fixed, but the complaints at the time were still valid.
Toolboxes are already too strong, the way Scavenger interacts with them is - functionally, realistically, for a majority of survivor players' skill level - too much. I imagine it probably won't see much use, but that doesn't make it balanced.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435882#Comment_3435882
-"If you only want to use one regression perk, you can still do that"
Name a survivor perk you would continue to use it if only gave 25% of its current effect. Go on, I'll wait.
-"Pain Res, Eruption, hell, even new Pop and Jolt are perfectly serviceable"
I don't agree. Jolt is 8% and needs to be combined in aggregate with other regression perks; meanwhile clever survivors jump into a locker to prevent its use.
Pain Res does nothing if you tunnel. This is a tunnel meta for both sides so I'm not going to bother with that. Hooking one player three times was -45% progress on generators and then you gave the team a permanent -25% progress penalty.
To put this into perspective : survivor gen rushing perks have no limitation and work at full speed if the killer has one hook or 9 hooks.
-"that doesn't automatically mean you have to start camping. You could just, generate normal slowdown pressure through downs and hooks."
So when Otz made his video showing that the best survivor options were well countered by the best killer options we didn't see Hens and crew going against any of the killers that Otz puts in the lowest tier on his killer list. Why is that? We all know the answer - those killers would have been absolutely destroyed.
Think for a moment about the slow walking speed of M1 killers. Think about how almost all the maps in DBD play out for those maps vs strong loopers. How does the game go if the killer goes for chases and abandons their 3 gen setup?
Think about a map like Azarov's; there are 3 gens on one side 1 gen in the middle and 3 gens on the other side. What m1 killer without teleport abilities has the potential to contest any generator setup other than the last three generators all being on the same side? The answer is none.
To this you might say : well that's an unbalanced map. You would be correct but the problem is that nearly 80% of the maps in DBD can be polarized in a similar manner where M1 walking speed killers cannot contest the generators.
Meanwhile you can always contest the unhooks. I can play with 0 gen regression perks now and just play to remove one player from the game asap. For years we had a meta where you could defend the gens even with the lowest tier killers on Otz's list. That's simply not true anymore with nerfed regression perks.
The bottom line is that when you play efficient survivors you have to play efficiently as well. That means camping/slugging and tunneling.
Tackling those points in order:
1: I don't need to. That has nothing to do with the point, which is that if you want to only run one regression perk, there are options available to you now that are better than CoB from before its nerf, assuming you aren't going for a 3-gen strategy. I also don't have to because there aren't any survivor perks that need that kind of nerf in the way that CoB did.
(Also I don't play that much survivor? I barely have a defined build as is, I'm a killer player first and foremost.)
2: Well, simple fix there. Don't tunnel. It isn't necessary and more perks will help you if you don't.
3: What does Otz and Hens have to do with this, exactly? Comp level players like them are outliers, that's true of every live balance multiplayer game. Genuinely, what exactly is the point there? What part of those videos or those games is meant to translate to the average game from the majority of players?
For your bottom line there... if you rely too much on trying to remove one player from the game ASAP, to the point where you're actively denying the use of strong perks that would help you play otherwise, you're gonna find that you lose when those less fair and more cheesy tactics are addressed by the devs. The right call on your end is to adapt.
The only sticking points, and I will acknowledge them, is the strength of toolboxes and the unbalanced nature of some maps. However, BHVR cannot do everything at once, and since you do not need to camp or tunnel or commit so hard to a 3-gen that your game lasts 40 minutes, there's nothing wrong with them starting there and working outwards.
-
@luvcraft said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3436378#Comment_3436378
that... was not my joke.
I gotta admit that I do not get it then, sorry!
-
I mean. All of those have significant overlap with horror and have horror sub-genres, so that seems a little nitpicky.
For example, Alien is both horror and sci-fi.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3436294#Comment_3436294
If the intent is to have the Killer patrol the entire map and be "roaming", as you write and I suggested in the original post, most Killers need a massive overhaul, as this simply is not possible beyond the lowest levels of play.
I would argue both Hag & Trapper have to choose gens, and stay within range of those gens, to be effective at all.
If you spend time setting traps around a gen, and they go off while you are clear across the map, those traps are worthless (as well as the time spent setting them). Further, Hag has a very finite limit on the number of traps she can place, slow movement, and must be inside a very limited range to teleport, so she has no choice but to focus. I would agree her entire design is "outdated" in exactly the same way Insidious is.
I have never seen another poster mention indecision as an issue for Killers, so I'm not sure where we are going with it. Killers, to my knowledge, either patrol the hook or nearby gens. I don't disagree standing still with no plan is a poor decision.
We will have to strongly disagree regarding the significance of injury as "pressure". I would refence the many threads since the last patch noting Survivors don't even bother to heal and simply focus on repairing gens due to the short time required.
Lastly, the complaints regarding the Killer "holding the game hostage" by patrolling gens is dishonest (not from you, but the general claim). The game lasts that long because the Survivors are unwilling to take chances on those 3 generators just as much as it is the Killer patrolling gens. Why is the Killer solely responsible for ensuring the Survivors have a chance to complete their objective? Shouldn't the same logic apply to ensuring the Killer reaches theirs?
When you say Insidious is outdated, I think we are agreeing/reinforcing the idea the game was designed to played one way, but the Devs have attempted to alter it in a fundamental way. I also believe there is a mistaken tendency to view the Killer as a NPC (which it IS in most every other game) that should ensure the Survivors are having fun.
The chase-focused style of play is problematic to the original design, and I don't believe BHVR has addressed the issue of Killer play with that transformation. IOW, it seems the developers have failed to consider the impact on Killer play enjoyment and has concentrated on entertaining the Survivors.
Not the entire map, that isn't always feasible. The only important distinction is that you should always be moving and actively hunting a new target. My point is that you don't pick a small area and claim that as yours while never leaving it; you don't want to cross the entire map as Trapper or Hag but you do want to venture out to push survivors into your web of traps. Otherwise you're just... sitting there. Waiting. Maybe those two killers need improvements to help there (spoilers, they do) but that obviously doesn't translate to stationary gameplay being a good outcome.
Indecision might have been the wrong word. But to risk picking you up on the same mistake- you say patrol. That implies the killer doesn't know where other survivors are and isn't actively going after them, it implies they're keeping a loop around something important and waiting for survivors to come to them, or for them to naturally come across survivors. That's again what I mean by being mobile, you should be actively hunting for more survivors to keep the pressure up. If you aren't, you just give them time to undo what you've managed to do so far.
We can disagree about injuries, but that wouldn't change anything. Having survivors either occupied by healing or vulnerable to one-hit downs is a benefit to you as a killer, even if the former is short lived. Considering what I've been saying about pressuring as many survivors as you can at any one time, injuries matter. Moreso now that medkits were nerfed.
I've addressed the idea of survivors being partially responsible for the 3-gen games above. I don't blame any specific player for those scenarios, I blame the fact that the game allows it to happen. It's a bad and unhealthy outcome. Neither side is responsible for ensuring the other has a chance at their objective; the game is.
That feeds into your comment about the killer being an NPC- conversations about balance aren't about scolding killer players into acting like NPCs, it's about changing the game itself so that it naturally results in the most fun (or since I tend to avoid that term where I can, the most active gameplay) for everyone. Sometimes, yes, that involves taking away tools players would actively use for an advantage, on either side.
The thing about your comments regarding this chase oriented style of play is that... I'm pretty sure this game stopped being a hide-and-seek simulator really quickly. It's just not what this game is, and hasn't been for significantly longer than it ever was.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3436240#Comment_3436240
I’m genuinely not being disingenuous. You and other posters are giving off the impression that if a killer defends a 3 Gen, whether they planned for it or it’s inadvertent due to survivor misplays, then it’s a bad thing. And your solution to this bad thing is to force killers to do the wrong thing because it’s “more fun”. Not your exact words, but that’s basically what you’re saying. Is the survivors running away from the 3 gens not also stalling the game? They’re not doing their primary objective after all are they?
There is overall a general ideology that crops up sometimes in this community that people should just know when they’re beaten. Whereas for others the game is over when the trial ends and not a second before. If four survivors are still alive but it’s a 3 Gen situation the killer should be able to defend these generators. Where we probably agree somewhat (and should be evidence that I’m not being disingenuous) is that I do believe the killer should be trying to down survivors, within reason (meaning not having to just chase that one survivor who clearly wants the attention and is trying to lead the killer to the other side of the map).
Overall aside from larger solutions, BHVR should just lower the total length of time a game can go on for to about 20-30 minutes. And call it a draw if the gens aren’t done and survivors are alive.
Alright, we're definitely on firmer ground here, I appreciate the clarification.
So, I do think the survivors involved do bear some responsibility, but it's not equal. A survivor committing to the generator or just running at the killer is guaranteeing a loss, more or less, whereas a killer who takes the chase has more of a chance of winning since they still have the gates to defend after the last generator. However, you're right; ideally the solution would require neither side to bear a serious risk of losing on purpose. I don't know what that looks like, but it is the ideal outcome.
I try not to use phrasing like "more fun" when I can help it, because that's subjective. What I will say is that 40 minute 3-gen games are unhealthy, and have very minimal gameplay in them. I don't think any individual player is inherently a malicious scumbag for that situation happening, but I do think the situation itself is a bad outcome for the game, and that it's bad that it's a possibility.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3436113#Comment_3436113
I'm sorry, but this isn't really useful, as much of what you wrote is so general it can not be translated into gameplay decisions.
Ex. "Aim to mobile and decisive"
What does that mean, in an example of gameplay?
"Mobile"; you don't mean mobility, because movement rate is fixed by the game, so I assume you mean "keep moving at all times"?
If BHVR did not want Killers to remain stationary, why have Insidious as a perk at all? Why can Dredge choose to remain in lockers and this increases Nightfall progress vs. moving? Myers and Ghostface tend to remain stationary while stalking. Pig crouching in wait is probably the best use of her power. Camping and gen patrol can include constant movement. I honestly don't know what "mobile" means here.
I have no idea what you mean by "decisive". Please clarify.
Killers pressure Survivors using the tactics that have been declared verboten, or at least highly discouraged, so the question is how is that pressure intended to be applied? Injuring Survivors does not create pressure, it, at best, simply lengthens the game (which is a current complaint). Any injury that does not lead to a hook in NO way progress the Killer toward victory, nor the game itself toward conclusion.
In short, I have to disagree with you. The longer I frequent these forums and see the discussions occurring, I'm left with the impression DBD was designed to primarily be a stealth game with a dramatic chase element as a fallback for Survivors. Due to player pressure, they have attempted to transform play to being chase-centric.
And it isn't working.
Sure thing. By mobile, I mean allowing the entire trial to be considered your territory, not just the immediate vicinity around a generator or a hook. Insidious exists because it's extremely outdated, but your other examples are better exceptions; it's not always a hard and fast rule, it's a mentality. As a killer, you are not an immobile fixture guarding a specific spot, you're a hunter with the majority of the map as your territory.
That's not to say literal mobility is necessary, but you should be roaming. Even Trapper and Hag want to leave their setup so they can push survivors into it. Any time you're stuck by a hook or a generator waiting for survivors to come to you, instead of going to harass the survivors yourself, that's what I mean by mobile vs immobile.
As for what I mean by being decisive, I mean acting with a plan and not waffling in a particular spot racked with indecision. If you got a hook, move, try to capitalise on that pressure by occupying another survivor before the save can happen; don't stick around that hook unless you've got serious reason to think other survivors are already there.
Killers pressure survivors by forcing them to act. Injuries do count, though they're a softer kind of pressure; healing doesn't take that long if survivors group up, but it is still time that they aren't on generators. Lengthening the game in general isn't the problem, but 40 minute games are. I don't have to explain that one, I hope.
You sincerely do not need to camp to generate pressure. Anything that pulls survivors away from their generators is pressure.
I hope that helps clarify!
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3436177#Comment_3436177
How is the 3 Gen an automatic win? Do all the survivors drop dead if a 3 Gen is active?
I find it hard to believe you're not being disingenuous here.
If a killer is determined to protect their 3-gen, and they're not committing to chases because those chases would take them away from the generators, that game is stalled out. A killer with a basic amount of pressure (so most of the roster) is able to keep control of the generators, and if they aren't taking chase away, that war of attrition would take forever even in cases it's winnable.
It may be a win through the survivors giving up, but it's still a win.
If you're going to contest anything I just outlined with a "what about cases where", then you aren't engaging with the problem BHVR have acknowledged. That is and will be relevant when talking about how to fix the problem, but it's not relevant when talking about whether to fix the problem.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3436131#Comment_3436131
It was stated that they want to stop killer’s going into matches with the intention to 3 Gen. Unless they have some minority report style detection system that can read the killer’s intentions it is highly likely any solution they offer will ultimately make 3 gens impossible unless the survivors misplay massively. In which case they should be punished.
How many killers do you think can hold a 3 Gen against four survivors, if the survivors actually pressure the gens?
It's stated they want to limit the effectiveness of 3-gens to account for killers that go into matches with the intention to 3-gen. I have no idea what they have planned, I'm not a mind reader, but there is a difference in language there.
The flip side of that question is pretty easy to compare, though. If a killer hasn't killed anyone at that point, and they have a 3-gen, should they get to automatically win?
I think the answer to both questions is that it should be possible, but not guaranteed. Sometimes that's going to look like the survivors breaking it, sure, but sometimes it's going to look like the killer actually getting downs and progressing the game.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3436113#Comment_3436113
This is all fine, but I think we all know that when BHVR talk about “long term” solutions for stopping three gens they are not just talking about killers who use the tactic from the very start of a trial.
So I’ll ask you a question I asked another poster- if the killer has a 3 Gen (whether deliberately or inadvertently through survivor error) should they be expected not to defend it just because it’s apparently boring and causes longer matches?
Do we all know that? Because the one person actually from BHVR in this thread said the opposite.
But to answer the question, personally, I think the solution would be to push things so the killer doesn't have to leave, but it's still possible for the survivors to win through good play anyway. A 3-gen, natural or artificial, should not be an automatic win for the killer.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
I can't help but notice how many replies this thread has with no one responding to the actual question;
"How does Behavior intend Killers to play the game?"
Don't camp. Don't tunnel. Don't patrol defendable gens.
What's left? Randomly roam the map? Check every gen once before returning to any other?
Please don't explain why you don't like these option, because the thread is FULL of people doing that already. Just describe the INTENDED playstyle for Killers, even if they are bad at the game.
Thanks!!
Sure! I can take a crack at that.
So, first of all, two of your three "don't"s here are right, but the third isn't. You can totally patrol defendable gens, that's not the topic being discussed and it'd be disingenuous to claim it is. There's a big, big difference between patrolling defendable gens, and picking three at the start of the match to never lose sight of while refusing to take chase away from them, stalling the game out so it lasts 40 minutes.
Moving on from that, I can't speak for BHVR but I can tell you what's left. Aim to be mobile and decisive, generating your pressure primarily through actions that push multiple survivors to respond; not just one down and stay at that hook, but spread injuries and downs such that survivors have to either dramatically cut down their generator efficiency to respond, or straight up stop doing generators to reset. Randomly roaming the map is a poor idea; if you don't have good enough map awareness to track survivors yourself (which I don't, no shade!) information perks will bridge that gap wonderfully.
Your biggest asset as killer is your ability to pressure survivors, by pushing them to take certain actions. Get an injury, that injury has to be healed or the survivor's vulnerable. Get a down, if you don't pick up, someone has to come pick them up instead or the generator efficiency goes down. Get a hook, someone has to save. That's the idea of spreading pressure, pushing multiple survivors to react at once instead of focusing too hard on one survivor.
There's no one specific playstyle, I hope you'll note. Stealth, chase, information heavy or slowdown heavy, these are all valid playstyles within this framework; the point is that you shouldn't be taking shortcuts that minimise gameplay, like facecamping or jealously defending a 3-gen to stalemate.
Obviously this game has balance issues. I'm fully aware generator completion times can be far too short to generate pressure. But you have to take one step to take any subsequent ones, and it's not an objectively ridiculous claim to say tackling the tactics that stall games out forever or completely remove players from the game for the entire match are a good first step over edge cases where games are over too fast, even if you disagree.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435803#Comment_3435803
-"Map design is pretty bad across the board, so I don't think some maps requiring/forcing 3-gens is a decent defence of it being intended"
Look at a map like Azarov's.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/NOLS2GNYIYYP/image.png
You have 3 gens on one side+ 1 generator in the middle + 3 gens on the other side.
There is no M1 killer in the game without a movement power that can contest any combination of two generators on one side and one generator on the other side.
So when the developers say: we don't want 3 gens to be viable you either need:
- To Delete this map
- rework the map to be massively smaller (change that 11 to an 8)
- Prevent any killer without a movement power from playing this map
What most people don't realize is that most of the maps in DBD can be polarized in the same way that this map can be. The removal of "3 gen" as a strategy removes most of the killer roster as being "viable".
If you want to kill the game then removing 3 gens as a tactic is a good way to encourage all nurse/blight all the time.
Yes. Map design is pretty bad across the board, including maps that force 3-gens because they are poorly designed.
I'm glad you agree...?
Although, to be clear, the language used is "limit the effectiveness of", not "remove".
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435772#Comment_3435772
-"If you played normally as killer, the changes in that patch to CoB and Overcharge shouldn't have affected you since those perks weren't that useful for regular regression anyway"
That's a false statement. I've used a single gen regression perk for years going back to the "time of Pop". With just one regression perk I was able to slow down survivors on average 90-180 seconds per game.
It was lame when people would touch a gen and pre-run so the killer just kicked that generator and went back to their three gen. What part of "pre running away from a gen" changed? It didn't.
What changed? The killer lost almost their entire ability to contest generators. What then do you have the ability to still do? You contest unhooks. Is that fun? No.
When I played the more terrible killers like trapper I used two gen regression perks (/gasp). Trapper with two regression perks was not bad. I used AGI with him as well to have good synergy for PR.
Tell me honestly though what survivor perk you would continue to use if it got a 75% nerf? How cool would Adrenaline be if it said : instantly heal 25% of the next health state and gain 1.25 seconds of haste.
Hold on, what do you mean?
Why has that changed, exactly? If you only want to use one regression perk, you can still do that, you've still got options. Better options than pre-nerf CoB, too, assuming you aren't sticking by three generators and harassing survivors away to let CoB eat away at them. Pain Res, Eruption, hell, even new Pop and Jolt are perfectly serviceable. Let alone if you branch out into other forms of slowdown, where there are even more options, and let alone if you allow yourself full builds of complementary perks with more than one slowdown included.
Even if you lost your entire ability to regress generators (which you absolutely haven't) that doesn't automatically mean you have to start camping. You could just, generate normal slowdown pressure through downs and hooks.
As for survivor perks, I don't know. Other than pre-nerf CoH, I can't think of any survivor perks that need a 75% nerf like CoB did to its regression half. It's kind of a false example when CoB needed a change and other perks don't, wouldn't you agree?
-
Map design is pretty bad across the board, so I don't think some maps requiring/forcing 3-gens is a decent defence of it being intended, personally. Hell, that could be part of what they're working on to address the complaints, adjusting the maps in some way.
Also, they released Skull Merchant and Knight to be played the way they're clearly intended, the fact that people use them for obnoxious 3-gen stuff doesn't mean the devs wanted that to happen necessarily. Maybe they were more fine with the possibility then than they are now, but it's not as though either of them were explicitly designed to only or primarily patrol a tight perimeter and never commit to chases.
As for how they want killers to play the game... normally? Spread pressure, use your macro sense, don't delay the game indefinitely and/or minimise gameplay with cheese strats like 3-gens or camping?
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435764#Comment_3435764
-"killers came out ahead."
I can't agree with that sorry. I would rather play in the pre 6.1 patch world than how the game is right now. As bad as DH was it wasn't "all this".
I don't really think personal preference makes much of a difference regarding this one patch, though? The two things being tackled simply break out that way. Survivors always self healed. Killers did not always need to jealously hold a 3gen for forty minutes. If you played normally as killer, the changes in that patch to CoB and Overcharge shouldn't have affected you since those perks weren't that useful for regular regression anyway; the only thing you'd notice is Pain Res being sidegraded. If you played normally as survivor, you're gonna notice your medkits and CoH being much weaker.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435709#Comment_3435709
-"Because of course, on live, you'd use Call of Brine to track when generators are being repaired"
Here's the problem with what you're saying. Why use Bond when I could use CoH to track people who need healing - not that I want to heal them, I just want to know where they are.
CoB had a very clear purpose : regress generators. Nobody was using it to track gen repairs and that was just a built in bonus.
-"The point isn't that the changes are of equal impact"
Oh so one minute you say that survivors lost X and killers lost Y so everything is fine. And then you say: we'll it's no big deal if the losses are not equal.
The problem is that the altruism healing nerf didn't go through. That would have slowed down the game but what we have now really doesn't. Killers lost way more than survivors and you really see it on the bad killers that were massively being propped up by gen regression.
...I'm starting to wonder if the segments of a post you highlight are the only parts you read.
The changes to Call of Brine and Circle of Healing specifically are not equal. The changes to the overall element being changed between survivor and killer - healing and 3gen protection, respectively - are equal. Or, at least, comparable. Like I said, killers came out ahead.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435654#Comment_3435654
As a whole looking at the last few years of DBD killer was recently best right before CoH got added to the game. Everything after that is downhill unless you're playing Nurse/Blight with strong addons.
Why would you use CoB if the point of using the perk is to regress generators? You can still use CoH for super strong team healing that is on the level with We'll make it (which is still super strong and had zero changes from the dreaded "heal nerf").
That's not even close to being the same.
I don't know, why would you? It's an interesting hypothetical, to present a situation where the point of the perk is to regress generators.
Because of course, on live, you'd use Call of Brine to track when generators are being repaired, since that's the thing that it does. Of course again, equally as obvious, I'm not stating those two perks are of comparable strength.
The point isn't that the changes are of equal impact, either, not one to one. Taking the update as a whole, though, yes, the changes are equal. Survivors lost ultra-fast self healing, killers lost (or at least partially lost) obnoxious 3-gen nonsense. Frankly, killers came out ahead in that patch, and by a long shot.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3434880#Comment_3434880
Did it get a 75% reduction? No.
CoH was absolutely without doubt broken on the levels of 2016 NOED.
Pretty much, yeah, if you look at how useful each half was. Removing the self heal is ABSOLUTELY removing the biggest part of its use, exactly like Call of Brine.
Call of Brine had its regression half removed, Circle of Healing had its self-heal part removed. In both cases, the problematic element and the reason why people used it were addressed.
The reason I bring it up is that it irks me when I see people say "they killed regression without touching genrush!", because it misses the fact that 6.7.0 fixed one of the game's biggest + longest-standing issues and I really do not like that being glossed over for the sake of a narrative.
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435591#Comment_3435591
it's a valid take, but we killers can dodge based on items/prestige/player name So it's already being done and it messes with the matchmaking as lobbies get backfilled.
Sure, but those are already in the game, and some of them maybe could/should be removed. The idea that it's already being done by some players so it's okay for it to be done by more doesn't really work when the thing itself is actively bad.
-
I kinda feel like any feature people want explicitly so they can lobby dodge shouldn't be implemented.
-
@Gandor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435526#Comment_3435526
1, 60% is already unfair. 50% would be balanced. I have no idea why it's "fair" for one side to win more
2, they don't count DC's. And surv DC's are 4x as common as killer DC. DC's mostly happen when the game is lost (not always tho)
If they made real stats counting everything, you would be surprised
To be fair, it's kill rate, not win rate, so I don't think it's fair to say one side is winning more. 60% killrate still translates to just over an average of two kills, and that's a draw, not a win.
-
Insofar as one of the reasons I don't play Hag is her chase music, yes. It's not even that it's bad chase music, it's fine, but the way it stops so abruptly when a chase ends really annoys me.
-
I don't know, I've had pretty reasonable success by just targeting and prioritising those generators myself.
Granted, I've not gone against a killer who went out of their way to defend a 3-gen from the start, but Deja Vu isn't for that kind of 3-gen scenario anyways.
-
From DC, I would love to see Punchline as a Legion skin, or the Joker as a Trickster skin replacing his baseball bat with a crowbar. Anything else from that world I'd probably like to see as their own character rather than just a skin.
(*cough* Bluebird survivor, Scarecrow killer *cough*)
-
@Mushmallow said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435163#Comment_3435163
I'd be willing to accept that. I have a possible mechanic I thought that could address the issue. What if by default, hooked survivors were blocked (unable to be unhooked by other survivors) for a short period of time after the killer hooks them? That way, it gives time for the killer to leave and go after someone else, and means someone waiting to instantly unhook has to waste a bit of time waiting for the block to expire. If something like this was in place, I'd be okay with penalizing otherwise.
Maybe, but I don't know that it's really required. There's still a lot to test with this system to begin with, and to be fair, one thing not quite discussed just yet is that if someone goes for an immediate unhook there's very little stopping you from turning around and targeting the vulnerable survivor who just got off hook. Sure, you have to wait ten seconds, but depending on context that may not be much.
Something to keep in the back pocket if necessary, though.
-
@Mushmallow said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3435158#Comment_3435158
I see where you're coming from, but I have a different stance.
Camping should be a situational strategy. When used incorrectly, it should reward less than not camping. When used correctly, it should reward more than not camping.
And I see it as camping when no one else is around as an example of the first, and camping while survivors are around as the second.
I think there's a fair line that can be drawn between camping when survivors are around unintelligently, like swarming the hook or looping around the hook within that 16m range, and when survivors are around more smartly- like the described situation where they're actively trying to bait you away. If survivors are putting some thought into it, I don't think they should be punished for it.
If you got less value than normal in both scenarios, I'd be with you, but since it's the same value than if nobody had been around and you left the hook straight away, I don't see a problem with it.