oxygen
oxygen
About
- Username
- oxygen
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,170
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Komi said:
Its more funny than justified, you outplayed them to the point of disconnecting. The real question is if survivors should be held accountable for making a killer DC, be it through normal play or intentional abuse.
The only situations I'd call being forced to DC already involve other rules being broken. Like taking the game hostage or exploit abuse. If someone sees the killer stuck in a pallet and just dance around him for hours or a killer blocks the last survivor in a corner and goes to sleep, of course they should be held accountable for it as they're breaking the rules.
But no one is ever "forced" to DC from normal gameplay.
-
No matter what I seem to see Huntress more than any other killer. Can't blame them, she's fun. Totally not biased when saying that just because she's by far my most played killer 😄
Also quite a few Doctors, Leatherfaces, Legions, Onis, Pyramid Heads, Wraiths, Blights and Spirits.
Hag is really rare but whenever I do go against one they're usually a pretty good Hag. Can't remember last time I went against Ghostface, either he's pretty rare or he's so good at stealth that he's stalking me as I type this post or something.
Rank 1 EU.
-
They can do gens, and if they're smart they'll 99 as many gens as they need (or all of the remaining gens if they want to). Pop one, hide in case the killer comes to check, sneak to another one and pop that one.
It's what I do in the pretty rare situation where the killer doesn't just close the hatch. It's rare, but when it happens it's like a 50% chance the killer turns around to call me a tryhard or something for doing so even though it's just the smart thing to do. But no, not taking the game hostage.
-
@SleepyWillo said:
I thought they made it so you can't spawn in LoS of a hex totem?
If you did see it immediately with your eyes it sounds like a bug to me...
I genuinely believe the game tries to do that, but depending on how the game determines "line of sight" that might end up not doing a whole lot.
I've played games where the LOS check only says "Yes, you can see that" if you can see a point in the middle of the object. So you could see most of the totem (especially the glow) without the game considering it in line of sight if that's how it worked in DBD. Not claiming that's how it works, simply saying I've seen it in the past.
Because it has certainly gotten much better than it used to, but kinda-tucked-away totems (like the ones between tires/barrels in TL wall loops on some maps) seem especially likely to get past the LOS check for some reason.
-
As killer very similar to a post further up on this page. "Say byebye to your account", "we know powerful people you're getting banned". Why? I had NOED 1 on my level 13 or something Leatherface and using instadown perks on instadown killers is apparently some kind of sin. This was around the time Bubba was released, still waiting to say byebye to my account.
EDIT: Actually when I think about it, did NOED even instadown at level 1/2 at that time? I feel like that was restricted to level 3 at some point, in which case it's even wackier if I'm remembering right.
As survivor, the most ascended and paranoid "there's nothing implying you're swf, but you are" statement I've ever seen. Not the already kinda paranoid "sure there's 4 public steam profiles with no friend relations, but you clearly invited through discord!", but they claimed that we unironically, genuinely and sincerely delete eachother on steam between every match just to hide we're SWF. I really hope they were just trolling (in which case A+, gave me a good laugh) but based on the very bannable things they said in chat later on and their incredibly angry Steam profile it seemed pretty genuine.
-
If that's how it worked there would be plenty of things ahead of BBQ in the "nerf queue". How often do you see stuff like NOED, spirit, camping, tunneling, keys, several maps, several perks, SWF and more complained about? Compared to many of those BBQ is practically universally adored if we just look at the frequency of complaints.
So I doubt you have anything to worry about there.
And I'm not saying anything about the validity of complaints about anything I mentioned, I'm simply saying those things are far more "controversial" than BBQ.
-
Sounds fun, it's always interesting to review my gameplay from another perspective after the match and a lot of the time streamers let me do that 😄
-
Considering the other posts here a pinned thread simply won't do. We're reaching pinned category at this point.
On the serious side of things I have mixed opinions about "megathreads". I've seen them work, I've seen them turn into unofficial chatrooms, I've seen them be the undisputed troll magnets and more 😄
-
If it is, it's an entirely new method as the log files are very much still encrypted.
And unless there's more examples of that person being unrealistically good at predicting the killer in several matches, it could just be a lucky guess. When I play with people I like just saying stuff like "It's gonna be <killer>" or "It's gonna be <map>", and sometimes I'm right 😄
EDIT: And the post below is a possibility too, I don't know who's who in the clip and if someone that had never faced the Trickster before was in the party they'd get "Facing the Trickster" loading screen tips.
-
I've never heard of someone getting banned for playing from the same household, which is basically what you're asking. Assuming you're talking about you being on one platform and someone else on the other.
If one is survivor and the other is killer obviously you can't do any working together at the expense of the other survivors in the match, as that is against the rules.
-
Probably forever gonna be in that "We don't care, but if EAC bans you for it for some weird reason we can't help you" very light gray grayzone.
-
The difference between how it used to be and now is that the Feng didn't do anything useful since she got unhooked.
And clearly she didn't effectively get in your way/bodyblock you in a chase with others or force you to eat her DS if you hooked two survivors in 1 minute, which is one of the few useful things a survivor can do without DS deactivating.
-
If you for some bizarre reason actually say you went after them because of the charm in chat, yes you should be banned. There's no reason to actually say that unless you're either doing some kinda cringy "salt mining" or you're genuinely bigoted if you ask me.
-
I don't feel like it's right to basically unload my frustration on completely unrelated players, so I don't do it and want nothing to do with that entire mindset at all.
If I ever got so frustrated that doing so crossed my mind, I'd turn off the game and play something else.
-
I just ask myself this question: Is everyone involved fine with it? If yes, it's fine.
So if someone wants to cheat in singleplayer, that's their decision and nothing else for obvious reasons. When you get to co-op you need to make sure everyone involved is in on it, otherwise it's not okay at all.
-
@Madjura said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2217994#Comment_2217994
I'm still very very curious to get more information because there simply has to be missing information.
If there really is (a lot of) missing information why announce it during the anniversary stream?
It is one thing to announce an exclusively positive feature that is in development, such as colorblind mode (though that was only announced in response to a certain event) but announcing something that has potential to be abused and can get people banned is a whole other story.
Imagine we did not have colorblind mode, and during the anniversary stream one of two things were announced:
"We are adding colorblind mode."
"We are adding an auto-ban system."
Both lack a lot of information, but saying the first one is safe because there is no downside to it. Instead of announcing the auto-ban system without any details they should have waited until they had more information to share. It looks really bad currently and I can't think of any way that such a system could be made without it being exploitable, without also making the system completely worthless.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2218026#Comment_2218026
The fact that both Killer and Survivor players / mains agree this is a terrible idea really shows how bad of an idea it is. How often do both sides agree on something?
I guess I'm honestly just rather dumbfounded by the announcement, the way it was described it's such a bad idea that I just really hope there is some sort of further information that makes it sound less bad.. somehow. Because you're right, I have no idea why they'd announce something like this without any more info.
But even then, I don't want it in the first place. If they want less reports to deal with start with an automated system that discards obviously false reports with no human interaction required. Like, there's no reason for an actual human to review reports with no information beyond "camper tunneler" or "tbag swf", it's not against any rules and the reports should be send directly to the bin.
Beyond that the only automation I'd actually be fine with would be a system where manual review is maintained, but a large quantity of reports (for actually rule-breaking behavior) would let the review of that player's reports "skip the queue". But that would pretty much require repeat false reporting to be a bannable offense in itself, or people might waste the reviewer's time of course.
-
I'm still very very curious to get more information because there simply has to be missing information. Perhaps because the system is in such an early state they genuinely don't have much more of an idea than the basic concept, or something else. Because I can't actually bring myself to believe any developer would implement something that's straight up "if reports is greater than x, ban player" or anything like it. It's such a monumentally bad idea in general, and especially in special cases like streamers and even more so in a game where people can be told "X is not bannable" by a mod/dev and they respond with "Well but it SHOULD be, so I'll report it anyway"
On the bright side actually giving players feedback when their reports do something is a great thing though, and if this autoban thing turns out to not be a catastrophically bad idea afterall that can do wonders for restoring faith in the reporting system actually doing something for people that submit proper and legitimate reports. No real way to know at the moment if someone gets banned unless they get permabanned, as only permas show up as a "game ban" on their Steam profile and all that.
-
If the survivors win, all the still alive survivors will be guaranteed to be right there to see chat as the game ends. If they lose and especially if they died earlier on, they might've already left and gone to another match. Of course you'll see more chat activity in general (gg included) from survivors that are actually guaranteed to be there unless they just click continue instantly no matter what or have chat hidden.
Even with that I see either 1 or more ggs or nothing at all in chat in the vast majority of the matches where I'm there at the end, no matter if I play killer or survivor.
EDIT: Somehow I missed the post on page 1 that basically said the same thing, but yeah it should honestly be expected that survivors that live talk more than ones that die, lol.
-
@Madjura said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2209289#Comment_2209289
Ask the devs for an option that allow to change the resolution in the game menu.
It's honestly ridiculous that the 5th anniversary is approaching and we have a resolution slider.
Why is it a slider? I honestly haven't seen any other game that doesn't have the standard resolution settings ,either with arrows or dropdown.
Because it's resolution scaling and a slider make some sense for that. Put it to 65% (the minimum) and the game will be rendered at 65% of your actual resolution (your desktop resolution) to offer better performance. Then "stretched"/inflated to fit your whole screen.
I do agree that we should really have traditional resolution options though. Even ones tied to your aspect ratio would be great and would avoid "stretched res", so if your native is 1920x1080 you can change to something like 1280x720 no problem without dealing with percentages. Better performance, no difference in the "stretchiness" of the visuals as they're both 16:9 aspect ratio.
-
I've seen some pretty ugly tweaks for clarity and/or performance in DBD and other games before, but now I know what truly deep fried DBD looks like.
And I wish I didn't 🤮
-
@LilCrapper said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2206845#Comment_2206845
no. lamest excuse ever. since the devs can rein in this crap
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2206839#Comment_2206839
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2206837#Comment_2206837
see, this is a troll post i will bite at, but barely........ as you can EASILY come up with these answers on your own
only doing infinite loops. soul guard. flashlights, body blocking. DS, dead hard... When all four survivors utilize every single resource at their disposal. The killer will NEVER get one hook even with tunneling
That's not bullying, that's just using stuff that's in the game. While I dislike using the word "bullying" for in-match actions in general and reserve it for stuff like harassment, at least if you were talking about acting like griefers against an obviously outmatched killer that shouldn't be against them in the first place I'd understand what you mean even if I disagreed with the wording. But you're just talking about people doing stuff you don't like/playing well for the resources part.
If you genuinely feel bullied by that I don't really have any recommendations beyond reconsidering if you want to continue playing the game.
-
I really hope the reporting system has some kinda automated filter that discards obviously BS reports. I'm talking reports with little to no information in them beyond the kinda stuff I'm sure they get a lot of like "tbag bodyblock -.-" and "camper tunneler -.-". Because an actual person having to look at those for even a second is a waste of their time.
If not, rampant false reporting should honestly be a temporarily bannable/"warnable" offense if you ask me. There's the in-game reporting reason categories needing refinement (really needs to explain that "bodyblocking" refers to using it to prevent people from playing/prevent the game from ending and not taking hits for other survivors or holding someone in place while revving your chainsaw, lol), but then there's people that seem to genuinely believe that if someone gets reported enough they get banned no matter if they did anything wrong.
-
I honestly just don't like playing as her, I quite simply don't find her power fun to use at all so I pretty much only play her for challenges or dailies I can't reroll 😄
EDIT: But oh, I wouldn't really say I "hate" her either. More like indifferent, don't even see her that often in the first place.
-
Well saying that's something I'd never think of is an understatement 😄
With the investment and time getting MoM to activate takes I personally don't think it's any sort of problem though. An interesting combo but it requires infinitely more effort than OOO used to (because then the effort was pretty much "equip the perk")
-
I still think of something more specific than simply someone trying to win whenever I see the term. You know, that player. The one that combines trying to win with going nuclear when they lose, a complete inability to admit they made mistakes, and classic hypocritical scrub behavior like getting mad at their opponent(s) for "tryharding" just like they're doing.
But I'm well aware that most of the time that's not what people mean when they say it, it's just a form of "stop playing in a way I dislike" like all the others. Guess it's because the word at least used to be used for that kinda player in the games where I first heard it mentioned and it stuck with me 😄
-
Of all things it's actually the moonlight offerings.
Both the Blendette with darker light on dark maps stereotype, and just how wonderful some maps (like Haddonfield) looked with brighter lightning. They were cool and I liked the offerings, but I understand why they were retired.
-
I feel like I haven't seen any other maps than Autohaven and MacMillan ones for like 3 days here. I like the maps, but I'd happily trade with you for some variety 😄
That's one fun thing about randomness. You need a really big sample size to start seeing the "intended" distribution, whatever it is. I always just joke it's a <map/realm> day today. Maybe they give certain maps a higher chance at times for one reason or another, maybe they don't - we can't really know for sure.
-
The vast majority of matches are either just gg or nothing at all in my experience. And that includes killers, solo survivors and any party size of SWF. So I can't say I agree at all, as that would be a complete lie based on my experience.
-
4man in particular is a long long time ago at this point, probably like summer last year.
I play duo with the same person pretty much every time I play the game though, just got done doing exactly that in fact. So if the thread question isn't exclusively about 4man, my answer is about 20 minutes ago.
-
They don't even want survivor ranks to be visible because anything that can increase dodging on any side quite simply won't ever happen. Showing it after the match is at least remotely possible to imagine being implemented, even though it's not impossible that people would ruin that as well by using the information to make "dodge lists" or something, getting it removed again.
Like it or not but a player has no more of a right to see if people are together than another has to see what killer they're about to face.
-
@TGB said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2191352#Comment_2191352
Sorry, but you're not a Killer main. You might have Killer stats, but you're a Survivor Brain.
Attacking a player that's injured instead of a player that's healthy is not, in any remotely possible way, "scummy".
You definitely exposed yourself with that remark, my dude...
(No pun intended.)
Maybe don't make "you disagree with me, so you're not a real killer main!" posts and realize that neither killer mains or survivor mains are hive minds that are supposed to agree on every single detail?
-
It's a ragequit. Something happened they didn't like, they quit.
It's very rarely worth it to try to find any deeper meaning behind it than that.
-
I'll take someone who "copes" by finding something to be happy about even when they lose over someone that can only feel accomplished and content if they win. Not saying people aren't allowed to be happy about winning, but thinking a lost (or even draw) match is all bad is how you get people that can win 20 games in a row and then start seething when they get a single loss.
-
@Bwsted said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2189403#Comment_2189403
Mods and devs straight up said that comms are allowed on this forum.
You're correct about Xbox and I'm pretty sure PS is the same.
Of course, I guess I'm just going for an "Actions speak louder than words" approach with my post.
And their actions tell the exact same story as a post on here, a clip from a stream or the line in the actual rules dedicated to say "We are not banning for communications apps" does.
-
@sadghost said:
Its not far in any way.
Using an un-policable 3rd party external software designed to unnaturally enhance a players performance (also known as allowed cheating) in a Multiplayer game is unforgiveable.
Solution:
Step 1: Find a way to set up easy anti cheat to identify those using 3rd party audio coms and deny their access to dbd.
Step 2: Then add one into dbd that alerts the Killer every time audio coms is used
Problem solved, you now have a fair and balanced way to allow audio coms to be used in dbd that gives sufficient risk vs reward for both sides.
Fairly certain at least Xbox straight up disallows developers from interfering with its party chat in any way whatsoever. What should they do about that?
And obviously BHVR disagrees with you anyway, as they don't simply begrudgingly allow it because they can't stop it. They let the Discord have channels for it, they let their Fog Whisperers do it live on stream, they do it themselves - that's not signs of a company that just tries to sweep it under the rug because they can't get rid of it. Your stance is incompatible with BHVR's, and with the modern gaming industry at large.
-
@baseballfan4877 said:
Well I was rank 5 last night and didnt get deranked at all.
It seems to be mostly random.
I got reset from 1->9, a friend of mine got reset from 1->19, and yet another friend didn't get reset at all and just stayed at 5 just like you.
-
No one's really being mislead, it's just a very human thing to do. It's very common to overestimate one's abilities and a lot of the time people can go a long time without that really humbling encounter with someone way better than them. For a rather famous example there was a time where 93% of drivers surveyed about it considered themselves to be above average. There's similar surveys that returned lower percentages of course, anywhere from 60-something% to 80% is rather common.
It's not even some Dunning-Kruger thing because it's not only inexperienced people that engage in this sorta "illusory superiority", most people do it to some extent and it's often hard to admit you're not that great at something. At least in some games you can go look it up and come to a conclusion like "I'm Diamond rank, and Diamond + higher ranks make up the top 13% of players. So I'm above average and then some", in DBD people can't even do that. Or I guess they could figure out the % of people in red ranks, but people wouldn't take it seriously as the skill level variation in red ranks is crazy big.
-
@bjorksnas said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2180975#Comment_2180975
oh you can still change killer in lobby, its just weird now
Well that makes it sound like it's not intentional behavior at all, I'm not aware of that anyway. Certainly completely invalidates any data the MMR system could gain from that match.
-
That's something that's coming when the MMR system is implemented. Not ranks to be fair, but killer-specific MMR is coming Soon™
It's actually the reason you can't change killer in the lobby anymore. That exact system is gathering data in the background even though it's still in development.
-
I see absolutely no reason not to add it (if possible, of course) as long as there's a way to opt out for people that don't like it.
But not to "hold people accountable" for anything in game. If someone's straight up cheating or something don't give them attention, report if you're able to provide the needed proof and move on. If someone's just being annoying but they're operating within the rules of the game they have nothing to justify or be held accountable for.
-
High ping, that's the most I bother to check before tabbing out until the game starts.
-
Because they find it fun, every game ever has had people doing "taunty" things either to get a specific response or for pure schadenfreude.
Looking any deeper at it than that is honestly a waste of time if you ask me.
-
It's a waste of time but not against any rules.
Hopefully they're reasonable and hold the same opinion about survivors waiting until the last attosecond of EGC to leave the match even when all 4 are safe, as it's an equally pointless waste of time that isn't against any rules 🙃 (compared to letting people bleed for no possible tactical reason, anyway)
-
That's not really how tier lists work at all. You can make it so there's less of a difference between S and F or whatever, but eventually you'll run into fundemental problems like "how do we make placing beartraps as strong as teleporting through walls?" and similar issues for perks.
I'd love to see the difference in strength between S and F be made smaller for both killers and perks, but you can only go so far with this before creating entirely new problems like trying to buff a perk with an effect that is only okay because it's very situational but can be very powerful when it actually works instead of redesigning it.
-
If Trapper qualifies, Trapper. Still probably my 2nd most played killer after Huntress, it just feels really nice when it works out and people step in your traps. I'm simple like that, Huntress is my favorite simply because hatchets are really fun and satisfying to land afterall 😄
-
I don't think any of that should be punished and certainly not made mechanically impossible at all.
But I also think perks that interact with the tactics have a place, it's practically unavoidable anyway with the perk design of DBD. Pretty much everything besides the most sacred balancing variables have perks and other selectables interacting with them, and by sacred I mean stuff like 3 hooks = death and survivors having to do 5 gens to power the gates.
-
The movie Requiem For a Dream. Especially the ending. Great movie, but it's rough.
RDR2's ending for games. Even got it spoiled for me in advance, but it was still great.
-
It sucks but some posts make me react with a bit of an eye roll at words like "robbed" as well.
Because it's usually about getting "robbed" of a kill or escape. While having a mindset where you're genuinely "entitled" to a kill or escape you haven't actually gotten yet is nothing but a recipe for frustration.
-
They've tried an alternative, it didn't work well.
And spheres are nice and easy as well. Pick a central point, give it a radius, you got yourself a sphere.
-
I like it, it's fun to see what people are saying.
And guess it might be a bit weird but "old-school" forums is still something I prefer even today when everything is all centralized into having a subreddit or discord server try to fulfill the same purpose as a traditional forum, I just prefer the forum model so I'm happy DBD has one.
And no, the Steam forums don't count. Entertaining to open while in queue to play the "Who's trolling who" guessing game, but that's it in my experience 🙃