oxygen
oxygen
About
- Username
- oxygen
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,170
- Last Active
Comments
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2462889#Comment_2462889
Well, nothing is a good excuse for a DC, but I would say this one is understandable.
Survivors staying usually creates a very frustrating and boring situation that not everyone wants to deal with.
It's annoying, just like being slugged until you bleed out is annoying, but in both cases the scenario has a finite possible duration that's shorter than the first-time DC penalty of 5 minutes. Gonna be waiting one way or another.
-
I'd certainly love it. Wishful thinking here but bonus points if it was a demo-style file anyone could load up in their game to see a replay of a particular match, would make it easier than ever to share matches and review one's own gameplay.
And great for reporting too of course. Without it it's practically impossible to conclusively know if someone is "subtly cheating", as you can't look for the subtle signs that even the most disciplined user of subtle cheats (ones that don't have immediately visible effects, so stuff like ESP/wallhack) tend to fall for from time to time.
-
In my experience that leads to disaster for the survivors way more often than it works. It's actually one of the things that make me roll my eyes in solo queue, when everyone else is obsessing over one gen in particular, even more so if it isn't even an important generator or the last one.
Just focus on injuring them and don't chase far away if you feel the others run back to it, if they want to keep doing it when they're all injured it can very quickly fall apart. And if they actually heal up and then go back to the same gen that's an astronomical amount of wasted time and effort that would be better spent splitting up and letting the gen go until later.
-
I just have fun in general as the vast majority of the matches I get are somewhere in the neutral to good range. Not making any claim about how often others have bad games as that can vary based on everything from sheer luck to their mindset and goals, but for me when I became aware of how much negativity bias influenced my enjoyment of the game it got a lot better for me in particular.
I might get annoyed but in the end I just jokingly say "Unlucky" to myself and forget about it by the time I'm in the next match.
-
I had a pretty funny one, and it wasn't the basement.
I down someone by the pig tree in the corn, and upon picking them up two survivors rush from the tree for a flashlight save. They both step in traps perfectly in sync. And to think I planned to move one of them after hooking the first down.
I go smack them down, and then I see the last survivor creeping in the corn for the pallet save. The rest is history 😄
-
Someone who knows what to do when, is hard to catch if given the resources to be hard to catch and they know how the game works.
There's certainly a lot of "non-flashy" skill that is often downplayed either because of course it is, it's less flashy than fancy movements and stuff. But it's still very much there, and while a lot of the time it's perfectly natural it's not as appreciated as more flashy kinds sometimes it's also genuine skill-type elitism.
Take it from a former full-of-myself sniper-type player in FPS games. Any skill that isn't clicking on heads wasn't real to me. Positioning, gamesense, movement, teamwork, task prioritization? Who needs that when you can just click good 4Head. I see the same for DBD sometimes, too much of an emphasis on spins, flashlight saves, loooong range hatchets and so on. Without a doubt stuff that requires experience and practice, but by no means the only skill expression there is.
-
I mean I think Custom game should be way more custom, at the very least it should allow for bots to fill any number of slots.
And if loading into a match on our own can't be done, just have an option to spawn any number of idle bots. They don't have to do anything else than spawn in so there's players on both sides and the match can start. Obviously bots actually running around like in the tutorial matches would be even better to at least have as an option but still.
-
Throwing hatchets and going fast is fun, so while I wouldn't really say I "main" any specific killer it makes sense that if I'm not entirely sure who I want to play, I usually end up picking Huntress, Wraith or Blight. I also like Trapper a lot because I like the more "strategic" side of him without the all-in reliance on it that Hag demands.
For survivors I just like the look of Ace, Dwight, Claudette and Jeff. I also like their cosmetic options on top of that.
-
I assume that also means 8 gens spawn on the map in total as opposed to 7, so the final gen has to be 1/3 remaining ones. In that case... sure? I'd much rather something else than more generator time but that's a whole discussion on its own.
If you mean there's still 7 total gens, hell no. 2 gens really close to eachother is a lot more likely than 3, and even in 3gens there's usually one of the three that's a little bit further away than the other 2 but still close enough to be a 3gen.
-
Not entirely sure if it counts as working with the opponents unless it happens earlier as well to be honest.
But I do know that if a killer tries to do that with me, I make it blatantly clear that I won't comply. I'll run straight to the closest gen and make sure they see me get on it, if they want me on my feet they know I will be progressing the objective. Probably mostly because most of the time a killer tries this, they don't even use the time where I'm slugged to look for the other survivor(s) or the hatch - they just hover near me until I almost bleed out and then get surprised and/or angry that the other survivor(s) don't turn off their brains and give them exactly what they want.
-
Safety pip. Primarily because it basically turns matches involving AFK or other forms of refusing to actually participate into the guaranteed "no contests" they should be.
-
In a perfect world where people reserved such a function for genuinely unpleasant people nobody should have to deal with? Sure.
But that world doesn't exist. Not only do people have wildly varying definitions of toxicity ranging from "slinging slurs in end game chat" to "using a perk I don't like", but systems like this in the past has proven that people simply block people that are better than them.
Overwatch has an avoid as teammate option, that used to be an avoid player option. It's not too uncommon to see people really dislike good Widowmaker players, so some of the best ones got blocked by so many people that the game had serious problems managing to find them a match through matchmaking. Now apply that to DBD, killers playing disliked killers well and survivors "too good at looping" both get blocked among other situations.
If the blocklist had limited slots (as in 3-5 slots) maybe that would encourage people to reserve the slots for genuinely unpleasant people. I'd be fine with at least trying that.
-
TF2 will probably remain both my most played and favorite game forever to be honest.
There's no other way to put it than to say I used to be hopelessly addicted to it. And even today when I cycle through a bunch of games TF2 is still among them. Might not play it constantly whenever I can anymore, but all of a sudden I'll get an intense urge to just play the hell out of it for a week before taking a break again.
I do wish Valve would do more with the title, just like I wish they'd do more with the L4D(2) titles and other things. But I still love the game and I don't know what could possibly change that.
-
You see, agitation makes you go faster and people generally sweat more when they put more physical effort into things! It's simple really 🤓
But seriously, sometimes people decide "I did not like that match" and then look for a reason to justify it. Of course people can conjure any reason including nuclear options like cheating accusations, but simply calling someone sweaty/tryhard is kinda the safe option. "If I also tried, I would've won. Therefore it wasn't actually a loss.".
-
If someone hates you as a player for using something in the game they might have a problem with, that's such severely misplaced blame that it's not even worth recognizing.
People can and should talk about stuff they think should be changed, but shaming people for using stuff in the game is just scrub whining. Assuming we're not talking about actually breaking the rules in some way of course.
-
@ReikoMori said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2440700#Comment_2440700
Old Ruin still suffered from the being placed in the most asinine places, for most of it's life span gen times were base 100s rather than base 80s. When there decreased the base time of gen repair they effectively took a considerable amount of sting out of it. Which is fine because the perk was worth using and was more consistently effective. At most the only thing that was needed was the removal of good skillcheck penalty, but no one asks for sensible changes.
Where did you get the idea that gens used to be 100 seconds base at any point? At first they were 65 charges and that got changed to 70 charges, then it got changed from 70 charges to 80 charges which is where we've been ever since. And 1 charge = 1 second assuming no speedups, slowdowns or great skillcheck bonuses.
-
As long as it maintains its focus on the actual problem (habitual disconnectors) instead of starting to hit people with session-ending timeouts after a single DC, it's good in my opinion. I'm against ideas like making the first DC already give 30min/1hour++ timeouts which you see proposed sometimes.
I do feel for the people that experience stability issues and the like and obviously improving that on all platforms needs to be a top priority, but at the end of the day any actually remotely functional DC discouragement system will cause some collateral damage. It's completely unavoidable and can't be eliminated, but working towards minimizing it should be very high priority.
-
As long as they aren't hypocrites that say stuff like that and then starts crying when their opponent(s) give them the same treatment, I'm neutral to it honestly.
Sure better than the people that make "playing for salt" their way to play. Or the ones so far gone that do that and somehow managed to convince themselves that's not just allowed, but some sort of noble or justified thing.
-
Spinning was a thing long before crossplay though, hell it was a thing long before the game was even available on consoles in the first place.
I do agree that at least to me it's a last ditch effort kinda thing. I always get confused when people try to spin a non-instadown hit when they're healthy instead of just running straight to maximize the value of the hit speedboost, but if you're injured and caught out without any alternatives? Not like you lose anything by giving it a shot at that point.
-
That a lot of perks (and items, add-ons and whatever else) could use reworks and/or buffs to be more appealing, as they're just... really underwhelming and unappealing to the vast majority of the playerbase.
-
I like builds that catch me off guard. Got bamboozled real good by someone running Dark Devotion and putting it to good use yesterday and that was really fun and interesting. And the same goes for when I play killer, if someone catches me off guard with something like Dance With Me or a well timed flashbang that makes them vanish into thin air by the time I can see again I can only respect that.
I'm by no means trying to say just because I enjoy that sort of thing I'm gonna tell people to use builds like that, shame people that don't or that I look down on people that don't here. I'm simply saying what kinds of builds someone who plays the game for the creative tricks and outplays that can happen when a killer and survivor interacts finds the most entertaining.
-
Something similar is already the idea behind the current DC penalty system, the escalating nature of the timeouts don't slap an immediately session-ending ban on someone genuinely losing connection once per month, while it inconveniences habitual disconnectors that can't help it until they hopefully go away for a while.
-
There is anticheat, but if you genuinely believe you've encountered 104 cheaters in a row the most realistic answer is that faaaaaar fewer people than you think actually cheat. I don't mean it in a mean way at all when I say that you'll see way less "cheaters" when you get more experienced, this is a game with a lot of perks, add-ons, powers and mechanics that can make it seem like people are doing stuff like wallhacking or speedhacking at first.
And anticheat is really hard anyway. It's a neverending arms race between cheat developers and anti-cheat devs, and the people actually making the cheats people use are by no means stupid. Not to mention Easy Anti Cheat isn't some homemade software BHVR invented, it's a third-party anticheat used by a lot of games. I have no doubt their hands are very full 24/7 as they're fighting against countless cheat developers developing cheats for a lot of games.
-
You can do that, look for the little arrow button near the chatbox. Click that and it should go away.
Wouldn't have anything against a more persistent option in the actual options menu though, as I've heard some say it can re-open sometimes. More player choice isn't a bad thing afterall.
-
Personally I reserve it for someone who plays in a manner that might be competitive, but their mindset is far from it. They don't want to be tested, they don't want to improve, they just want to steamroll 24/7 and when things don't go their way they throw a tantrum. Scrub BS like the classic "You didn't win the right way so it doesn't count" and "I can try as hard as I want, but if you do the same you're a sad no-life" is common.
But I'm well aware that's way more complicated than what it means in 99% of the times words like tryhard/sweat get used. Most of the time it's just a lighter version of the classic "you're a no-life virgin in your mom's basement!" stuff, which is just a cope of the "I can't beat you in game, but I beat you in real life" flavor.
-
I mean they can try, but as I see absolutely no reason to allow anyone that isn't my friend on Steam to interact with my profile in any way, they won't get very far. My comments, playtime, screenshots, friendslist and whatever else is none of their business, no matter if I encounter them in DBD or somewhere else.
-
I'd classify people asking for this as pretty silly, to be honest. But it's very rare to see.
Only things I really see discussed at all is information available that isn't about their in-game setup, like usernames and any information their profiles might offer on the platform in question. Which is something I think no one should see before the game is over, not killers and not survivors.
Profiles are ultimately pointless anyway, if people don't want others to see something on there they can already just set it to friends only/private. And that just makes the weirdos that have convinced themselves there's no other reason to have a non-public profile than to hide SWF status/their 8400 hours/hide the 37 pages of -rep comments on their profile from other players... when I'm pretty sure friends only is the default profile privacy setting on Steam 🙃
-
Rarely, and most of the time it's simply people that don't know what a perk/add-on/item/power does.
The rest is some sort of mix of people genuinely believing you're cheating, people filled with truly existential dread at the mere thought of admitting they lost fair and square, and people that are just saying stupid stuff in an attempt to do a little bit of very low-effort trolling.
-
@Junylar said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2444120#Comment_2444120
How to know what timing is correct? I thought when they scream the "immobilization" is started at that moment, but that survivor screamed and proceeded to vaulting right after that. It looked like a proper shock, and yet he was able to vault without limits.
You don't shock before they actually vault, you shock so it hits them before they get the option to vault. If they start the action, you can't stop them from completing it.
This can of course get weird with latency involved, but you probably want to shock a little earlier than you'd think.
-
I don't like the map and find it boring as both killer and survivor, but I'd still prefer that it remained in the game.
-
No.
Normal regression when you kick a gen could certainly be buffed in how fast it is if you ask me, but not with the auto-regress effect of Ruin.
-
Hope is 7% putting survivors at 107ms. It's not a perk you see often because it's situational, but there's a reason it's restricted to endgame. Don't view it as 7% extra speed or even 0.28m/s extra speed, view it as basically cutting the speed advantage a 115ms killer has over a survivor in half instead. And that's just half as powerful as your proposed 114ms survivor speed.
And besides, I'm fundamentally opposed to making ANY more perks rely on "while in a chase". It can be cheesed in all sorts of ways, old Legion is perhaps the biggest example but experienced survivors can also break chase at the right time to vault more than 3 times in one spot as well as entity blockers only count vaults while in chase. Don't use chase status as an activation or deactivation condition any more than absolutely necessary unless the system gets improved.
And lastly: a killer simply chasing a survivor for a long time has little to do with tunneling on its own. If anything this perk would be the most powerful at the very start of the match. All pallets are up, just play super safe until you get the speedboost and you're practically uncatchable unless the killer has a power that can bypass actually getting close to you and hitting you.
-
I wouldn't stray too far but I wouldn't just stand in front of the hook. I'd focus more on getting hook trades than trying to ensure one kill. You said it yourself, they + the gates are on the opposite side of the map so it's not the easiest save. Myers can also stalk and benefit from the usual "everyone indecisively running near the hook" situation, but I wouldn't use T3 unless I felt like I could down more than one person with it as it might make them do the thing they should do in the first place: just leave.
Most of the time they trade hooks, run away and reset until someone is about to die. Even if in the end you still get 1 kill, you got more hooks. If you get a few of them injured you can try to drag the people trading to hooks even further away from the gate too.
Sometimes they mess up and you snowball. Emphasis on mess up because again, they should probably just leave and certainly not overcommit in the face of a killer that can activate instadowns.
And very rarely they do what they probably should've done in the first place in that situation: Open the gate and leave without a microsecond of hesitation. In which case you get 1 kill anyway.
This is just me of course. I'll take the extra points and hooks of leaving enough room to trade hooks and potentially get more if they mess up over just securing a single kill.
-
I honestly don't care either way. The best part of them getting removed would be more stuff I'll actually end up using taking their place in my bloodwebs.
-
@Desh said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2430710#Comment_2430710
I'd argue against it. Paraphrasing someone else in here who stated it, when someone DC's, just make the entity do the animation of killing them similar to EGC. That way there's at least a few seconds to remedy the situation so that someone doesn't win based on an unfair exploitation.
The hatch/key idea is not the best approach because it doesn't solve anything. That's simply the design of how it's intended to work. When you have people taking advantage of it by DCing so that there's only 1 Survivor left which immediately spawns/opens the hatch, it goes beyond the scope of what it was supposed to be used for.
Oh yeah, when it comes to making the "death" less instant I've always been a fan of the idea of straight up teleporting the DCer onto a basement hook, then treating it as if they got hooked as the last survivor. So obviously no struggle, and "rushed" through their remaining hook states and then sacrificed. I guess that's pretty similar to your idea, but at the same time it allows the killer to get any stacks and tokens related to hooking people as well as a time-to-die quite similar to the EGC death.
And the idea of a change more to the hatch itself means unless all the gens were already done, nobody can know where the hatch is in advance. I'd argue most dc-for-hatch situations happen when someone knows where it is or finds it, and before all the gens are done. Assuming that weird thing where the hatch has collision before it even spawns is some sort of bug and gets fixed of course.
-
There's already a DC penalty to prevent people from doing it a lot. And that penalty is already shared with everyone in the DCers party.
Make DC penalties in general harsher and the "collateral damage" that's 100% unavoidable with any remotely functional DC penalty system gets worse. It's for a reason that the first levels of DC penalties are fairly short, to not hit someone that has a genuinely accidental DC out of their control with a session-ending 30+ minute timeout right away.
Stuff like preventing the hatch from opening for X seconds or even forever if someone DCs just gives survivors a tool they can use to screw over other survivors. Oh, that person actually used their brain and decided to just chill on hatch instead of trying to save against a killer making sure any unhook would be a trade? That's """cowardly""" or """antimate/immersed behavior""" to some people, and they could DC to try to deny others the hatch in situations like that.
There's no easy nor perfect solution, because neither actually exist. The hatch/key idea of making the hatch only spawn when either all gens are done OR there's only 1 survivor left is probably the best approach, as it would indirectly make dc for hatch a lot less relevant as well.
-
As said, different killers have seperate MMR. A feature that has been requested for a very long time.
The reason this is completely incompatible with swapping killer is pretty obvious. What happens if you load into a lobby with your bottom 20% MMR killer that you actively threw matches on, then swap to your main who you're top 1% MMR on? You already got matched with survivors, presumably based on the killer you had selected when you got matched with them.
And even when MMR isn't active, this still applies. Data gathered from matches where the killer used for matchmaking and the killer actually played is different is completely worthless data when it comes to improving the MMR system. Because even when we're not in a MMR test and it doesn't drive matchmaking, it's still gathering data and doing pretty much everything else the system is supposed to do in the background, most likely.
-
I'm actually against ideas like making the initial penalty (5 minutes or whatever) longer or anything like that, as I understand that the intended targets of the penalty isn't the player that has someone accidentally yank out their ethernet cable with their foot once a month. The targets are the habitual disconnectors.
It's quite simply an unavoidable thing, any remotely functional DC penalty system WILL lead to some collateral damage. Because it's impossible to consistently tell if a DC was the player's fault or not. Games have tried to be forgiving by doing stuff like assuming actual connection drops (or what seems like it) are accidents, and you better believe people pull the plug to abuse that trust.
That's why most DC penalty systems use some sort of escalating timeout approach. The first (few) disconnects lead to pretty short penalties so a player that has a genuine accidental DC isn't immediately hit with a potentially session-ending 30+ minute timeout. Meanwhile people that simply can't help themselves and DC every time they get a map, killer, survivor perk or "annoying but legal" behavior they dislike in their match get the longer timeouts.
-
Items and survivor choice? Yes.
Names and easy access to their profile on platforms where that's relevant? No.
-
They had 3 BNPs, 1 of them on the fastest-repairing toolbox in the game as well and another on the longest-lasting one.
Putting multiple of them into the first gen is pretty much just a "lol lets see how fast this gen can go" meme, it would be way worse for you if they used them on seperate gens or saved them for later for a contested gen or something. They brought 42000 bloodpoints worth of items and add-ons just to get that gen done as fast as possible.
And sure, I'd be more than happy to see the BNP reworked into something else as it's an add-on that can get pretty wacky when multiple are in the trial, especially if people actually use them more strategically than dumping them into the first gen they see.
-
There's no way they'd ever even consider implementing that for a second, unless they made dodging give a DC penalty or something which I'm sure people wouldn't want. It might sound mean, but SWF is a perfectly legal, supported and even encouraged part of the game and you have no more of a right to avoid playing against them than someone has to play a map they dislike, or a survivor has to avoid playing against a killer they don't like.
I don't even mind the idea of showing it after the game, but I can't even blame BHVR for not doing that. It would without a doubt lead to some harassment and some posts on here make me feel some would use the information to make "dodge lists" or something.
The only way to "do something" about SWF with a non-zero probability of ever happening is the approach that is often called "buff base survivor/solo and killer" in an attempt to reduce the possible efficiency gap between solo and SWF.
-
This is unacceptable anti-British censorship smh 😔
But seriously though, the filter is really bizarre. Pretty sure it tries to pick up on "context" or something else slightly more "smart" than simply "if word is on list, blank it out" like most traditional wordfilters. And it leads to situations where entire parts of sentences get blanked out.
I've said it since the start and I say it again, if it only blanked out stuff if people say something that's actually against the rules to say, it would be so much better. Blank out the whole line involving the word if they want to prevent the word to be easily identifiable through context. Make it so if you see **** in chat, you immediately know that you should probably report them for a chat violation.
-
When people say it doesn't work they're talking about actually dodging hits with it.
Which isn't exactly very reliable and is where the "exhausted on the ground" thing comes in. Not really a surpise, as it might be the single most latency-sensitive interaction in the game along with killers grabbing survivors off of actions.
-
Most of the time it's as simple as someone wanting to make someone else mad, classic "fabricated" schadenfreude. Nothing more, nothing less.
At least that's what it was like for me. I had stopped by the time I got into DBD, but back when I played Counter Strike Source/GO and Team Fortress 2 (still play TF2 but like, back in 2010-2013-ish) I thought being That Guy was cool. Not the slur-spouting kinda toxic, the "target/focus one player, taunt after every kill and spam my textbinds that said "you're bad lmao" in dozens of ways" kinda toxic. It was never some kinda personal vendetta, never "karma" for them using the wrong weapon/class or killing me, never payback for them being a jerk first. I found it fun to make people mad (or seemingly mad), so I tried to make people mad.
By no means trying to justify it, I experience some pretty visceral self-cringe when I look back at how I used to be, but you did ask for answers from people with uh, experience in the field.
-
I tend to always bounce back and forth between DBD, Escape From Tarkov, Team Fortress 2, Paladins and Stellaris.
Recently I've also been finishing Red Dead Redemption 2 and starting to re-play Metal Gear Solid V, as well as the Back 4 Blood beta. Sorta waiting for all my "essential" Rimworld mods to be updated to 1.3 before I get back into that as well 😄
Other Paradox strategy games (like Crusader Kinds 2/3, Europa Universalis 4, Hearts of Iron 4 and Victoria 2) are pretty common games for me to suddenly get an urge to play a campaign or two in as well.
-
I'm pretty sure at least one console manufacturer makes it an unnegotiable requirement for any devs that want to crossplay other platforms with it to allow players to opt out of it. Probably started in games that make more sense (FPS games before those started to do input-based crossplay instead of platform-based), but it still sticks.
So this probably isn't just something that won't happen, it's most likely something that can't happen.
-
Please tell me you don't actually think there's even an infinitesimally small but non-zero chance of that ever even being considered by the developers of a multiplayer game in 2021.
There's a reason people discuss other methods like the idea of trying to make the solo-swf gap smaller and balancing around that. While it's impossible to find a perfect solution (as no perfect solutions exist), there's at least a probability of it happening that's bigger than a big fat 0. Stuff like this or trying to interfere with voice chat is genuinely a waste of time and keystrokes to even discuss, no nicer way to put it.
-
If I no longer have fun playing it.
-
Bad latency, and that's it.
It's actually the one thing I should check more often before just clicking ready and waiting for the match to start while tabbed out. I don't want to have high latency and I don't want to go against players with high latency either, it just makes it less enjoyable for everyone involved and MOST of the time matchmaking does a good job not giving me that kinda lobby. But sometimes it does happen.
I don't care about anything else than that.
-
Because you never spent money/auric cells/shards/whatever on a cosmetic, chapter or its contents like killer/survivors/perks in its release state, you spent it on a license to have access to the related content in whatever state they're in.
And that's without getting into how someone could've used a cosmetic (or killer, survivor, perk, whatever) for potentially thousands of hours before a change/rework/nerf makes them no longer enjoy the content. It's one thing to offer refunds after you've basically just tried it out and decided you didn't like it (which is at least the idea behind Steam's refund policy), it can quickly become something very different when talking about live games/"games as a service" model games.