oxygen
oxygen
About
- Username
- oxygen
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,170
- Last Active
Comments
-
I don't care about in-match actions that aren't already against any rules really. Yeah it's obnoxious if someone intentionally sandbags or takes the game hostage, but I really don't care if someone tbags or hits me on the hook.
I don't have any problem with people enjoying getting "payback" either though. As long as they're not hypocrites (love it when they get payback, start seething uncontrollably when opponent(s) get their own "payback") or they have ascended definitions of toxicity ("looping too well is toxic", "using that killer is inherently toxic", that sorta crybaby garbage).
-
Closest you can get that I consider to have even a miniscule non-zero probability of even being considered is either voice chat or some non-verbal comms system (like a comm wheel and "pings"). Even that isn't perfect and is by no means immune to abuse, I honestly feel the latter would be the better option even if it's not perfect.
-
I'm pretty sure all it does is prevent them from sending you an in-game friend request. Not a Steam one or whatever other platform you're playing on, but for the in-game friends list, the one with the Discord-like ID's that are like Name#xxxx.
Pretty sure it still works if you just click their name, but it can be a little bit weird at times and you might have to find the "right place" to click.
-
It's less if DBD feels stale and more I just cycle between different games no matter what. That way it's far more rare any game gets to feel truly stale.
But for other games I play it's usually Team Fortress 2, Escape from Tarkov, various (grand) strategy games like Civilization, HOI4, EU4, CK3, Stellaris and others.
-
How is that 99ing healing thing toxic? Doesn't sound like they had a build centered around being injured (be it something like dead hard+resilience+spine chill or a more general resilience "genrush" build) so it honestly sounds more weird than anything to me.
And no matter how tilted you are you probably shouldn't refer to other players as "subhumans" under any circumstances, that's pretty yikes.
-
Wouldn't say I really main anything, be it a side or a specific character. I play mostly killer for a while (weeks to months), then go back to do the same but with survivor.
But I've played more Huntress than any other killer and find her very fun to play. And as survivor I like Ace, Dwight, Bill and Kate the most.
-
Luck and Lightburn are just forgotten and outdated mechanics in a lot of ways.
And all button holding/mashing is just kinda outdated in gaming in general. More and more games offer accessibility options that remove the need for them nowadays and DBD should really do the same imo.
-
I'm not sure, and it depends on if Deliverance gives +100% chance to self unhook or if it sets the unhook probability to 100%.
With the former, MS will bring the probability below 100%.
With the latter, it will only do so if MS is applied after Deliverance.
Does make me curious what's the case ๐
EDIT: Assuming the percentages are additive to begin with. For all I know the 15% harder self-unhooks from MS might be multiplicative just making them 0.6% less likely to work (15% of 4, from the base 4%) or something.
-
Binding teleport to mousewheeldown instead of spacebar isn't a macro at all, it's just rebinding a key. Yes it's easier to spam than spacebar and might be faster to use as well, but it still requires user input and is bound by human reaction times.
An actual teleporting macro sounds like a pretty bad idea. If it's not running at all times, might as well just use mouse wheel. If it is, that sounds like a recipe for a lot of teleporting away from people you were about to down because someone stepped on a trap at the edge of your teleport radius. And that's without getting into how easily punishable it would be if the survivors caught on to the Hag always instantly teleporting to every trap that gets popped in her radius and intentionally used this knowledge against her.
At the end of the day it's gonna be in that weird "greyzone" of things that they're not gonna hunt players down for, but they won't help them if EAC suddenly decided to ban them. It's not explicitly "whitelisted" unlike something like VOIP apps (I'd call a dedicated line saying "We are not banning for VOIP apps" in the rules is pretty damn whitelisted at least ๐) but it doesn't really offer any significant advantages that makes more aggressive anti-macro measures needed.
-
Sure is for me, I feel quite naked and vulnerable whenever I don't have it. And I see it a fair bit in the builds of other survivors as well. And I can't blame them for a second, as it's so useful both for genuine evasive stealth and in chases.
-
Getting a flashlight save that was barely possible to get in position for in time.
-
Hag and Plague, by far.
-
Probably only seen 15-20 obvious and clear cheaters in ~3300 hours, and most of them did some sort of connection manipulation. Old-school teleports behind u p2p style lagswitching, stuff seeming like intentional VPN abuse, that sorta thing.
Seen like 4 blatantly speedhacking survivors.
2 Leatherfaces that revved up as the match started, then rapidly teleported to down everyone in 0.2 seconds and let everyone bleed out.
1 person that just straight up walked through the gate and left with 5 gens left.
-
From what I can see it seems like a relatively strong compact PC. See nothing about it running some sort of specialized finger lickin' good operating system so unless I'm missing something PC games in general should work ๐
-
It's stupid no matter who does it, as it's blaming players for grievances with stuff in the game. Pure scrub brain mentality. It goes from complaining about stuff in the game (which can often be perfectly legitimate to do) to complaining about players using something in the game.
Don't care if it's about "small pp survivors" or "sweaty tryhard killers", when it's all based on perk/item/add-on selection or something it's just pointless whining and horribly misdirected complaints.
-
Wouldn't call it common, but wouldn't call it super rare either.
Most of the time even when it happens it's really not an accusation. Goes more like "swf?" "no/yes" "ah. gg" or something along those lines, and as long as someone doesn't explode if they don't get an answer I see no problem with asking a simple question.
Certainly do get the more accusation-like reactions sometimes too though, but that's just the usual "I didn't REALLY lose!" BS, no different to a survivor blaming a killer for something that never even happened. Just find a reason to declare you didn't lose the "right way", and if no reason exists just invent one.
-
Please consider increasing your Jesus dosage.
-
A Leatherface that whipped out the old school p2p lagswitch to win a hatch standoff after about a minute. Stood there, suddenly the survivor is hit twice and halfway through the pickup animation in an instant. Claimed the survivor was taking the game hostage, and therefore it was justified.
I'm not gonna deny the classic hatch standoff was 100% stupid for everyone involved but that was so absurd that I still remember it.
-
Some survivors do, I don't really think it's a platform thing as I see console crossplay survivors do it too.
I tend to bring a naked brown medkit for one emergency heal, and I also often use Inner Strength to have a heal in my back pocket if I feel like healing is the best choice but I also run Iron Will and feel quite confident injured as well. Depends on the killer, the state of the match and what I gotta do at that moment really.
-
There will always be some collateral damage, as games that have tried to treat seemingly legitimate connection/server issues differently to obviously intentional quitting has proven one thing: People will disconnect their internet to quit "for free" if they can. Either with the old school cord pull or less hardware-y methods like just disconnecting their gaming platform in its network settings until they're dropped from the game.
I don't think I've ever seen a game actually be able to tell the difference between genuine connection errors and intentional disconnects. The most popular method to "soften" the collateral damage seems to be to give players the ability to rejoin matches, which is in theory a possibility if a DC husk system was implemented. But DBD matches generally last for a shorter period of time than something like an Overwatch, CSGO or MOBA match just to name some examples.
That and escalating and non-extreme penalties of course. There's a reason most games give people relatively short bans to begin with, to make sure people with genuine connection issues or unexpected "I gotta go" moments don't get screwed too hard.
-
Even though the description has always been the same, the actual requirements have changed a lot over the years. From point-based ranking, the hook/kill based one and then emblems. It should honestly just be 4 kills if you ask me.
Bonus points because emblem requirements for double pips/merciless change based on rank bracket, so in red ranks you need quad iri. Extremely obvious with The Twins because the Devout emblem was broken in some way for them, and you can't afford even a single gold unless you derank to purple.
-
Change how matchmaking treats parties. Used to matchmake based on the highest rank in the party, even if it doesn't return to that system entirely ignoring significantly lower ranks while getting an average or whatever would be an improvement.
Because no, the devs won't restrict their players no matter their ranks from using the most powerful player acquisition tool that exists: "Hey, come play this game with me!"
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1830400#Comment_1830400
I literally never use balanced ever
For a moment I thought I somehow accidentally quoted you or something.
But yeah same, I've had enough times where I think running it might be fun and it immediately summons Shelter Woods just to make me regret my decision ๐
-
Sorta like the idea of Buckle Up and Shadowborn as default.
Running to someone that has been laying still for 30 seconds just to see they haven't recovered at all sucks, and a wider field of view is always nice especially in 1st person view.
-
I'd argue most people have a pretty clear understanding of the general scenarios the words refer to. Camping is sticking close to the hook, tunneling is tunnelvisioning on a single survivor. Pretty clear and overall neutral terms on their own.
Of course, it's when people define "close to the hook" and "tunnelvisioning" you get wildly different answers from different people. Two people can discuss the terms with one reserving them genuine hard camping and the sort of game-losing tunneling where they abandon an almost won chase to go look for someone that got unhooked on the other side of the map, while the other might consider following scratchmarks to a hook or hitting an unhooked survivor that ran into the killer's face to be camping/tunneling.
-
Wouldn't want a button that's instant in any way, but I'd be totally fine with a way to speed up bleedout. Make it slow enough to not be an appealing DC alternative, but let it save time if the killer completely lost you and the game is over or decided to just stare at you for 4 minutes while you're bleeding out. Make it teleport you to a basement hook and insta-sacrifice you for all I care, so it can't be used to cuck the killer out of points.
-
I don't know either. Can't remember if the devs said it was because it might offer some sort of advantage, but I've certainly seen posters on here be against it because of that.
Shouldn't even be an arguement against it in the first place. As long as people can use filters, monitor firmware crosshairs and other tweaks who cares if someone that isn't colourblind can see scratch marks a bit easier? At least people that are actually colourblind in ways that clash with how colours are used in DBD can enjoy the game properly, sounds like an easy "sacrifice" to make right there.
-
For killer lock to ever go away the entire MMR system would have to be entirely scrapped forever, as the way it works with seperate killer MMRs makes it a required feature.
-
Based on the things you refer to as destroying you and how you seem opposed to the use of voice chat in a modern multiplayer game for any reason (opinion harshly incompatible with the standards of the modern gaming industry no matter the genre or game in question), I doubt the game will ever be "fixed" in a way you're happy with.
So I hope you find some other game that you can enjoy more in that case.
-
A few times because of killer aura perks, most of the time they have an "A-ha!" moment once I direct them to the perk description though. And one person that insisted I had "bloodlust always on" hacks just because they didn't hug the structures they looped tightly and got caught really fast.
As survivor I had a killer accuse me of speedhacks, but again once I directed them to the perk description for Hope they got it. Trying to run down a 107ms survivor as a 110ms huntress all out of hatchets is not a great idea. And also someone that insisted I had some sort of speedhacks because I used the vault build. But that was my mistake, as they considered using the vault build in the first place to be cheating/exploiting ๐คก
-
But yeah, increasing the "baseline efficiency that can be assumed" (this is the "buff solos" thing that's often mentioned) is pretty much the only realistic way to do anything about it. Make it so when you balance the game around a group of survivors not all going for the same unhook and wasting ungodly amounts of time, that assumption can be consistently achieved even without perks. And no, I have no clue of any perfect way to do it either, I don't even think a perfect solution exists.
But anything from pushing for the removal of SWF, interference with voice chat or even "subtle" and/or blatant disincentiviazation of party play in a modern multiplayer game is rooted in ignorance of what's expected of modern multiplayer games at best, and straight up delusion at worst. No nicer way to put it, all of that is lightyears into NEVER EVER territory.
-
So what would you even want the devs to do? Can't really discuss too much when you don't make it clear what you actually want.
-
Because in the MMR system there's individual killer MMR. You can have high mmr as Billy and low MMR as Wraith or something like that. This obviously requires killer lock to work for matchmaking purposes.
I think that while enabling/disabling MMR doesn't require a client update users have to download, enabling/disabling killer lock does.
And while it's not driving matchmaking full time at the moment the devs have stated the MMR system is still gathering data about people's performance. And since the MMR system is built with killer lock in mind, killer lock is sorta required for the most accurate data gathering possible in general.
-
@anothercomplainer_10 said:
Well I say it's dumb as hell, get better at the game and dont get caught twice. There is no point in having to wait until they would die anyway. Thats why it's such a rare offering I thought.
They're not rare at all. There's far fewer ultra-rares than any other quality, the amount of moris I have on my killers are the polar opposite to proportional to their rarity. The most ebonies, fewer ivories and even fewer cypress moris.
It's because of how the bloodweb works. Any killer with 2 ultra-rares has a 33% chance of getting an ebony from every UR node, meanwhile there's a lot of items that can appear in green and yellow nodes. This was even more wacky on killers like Hillbilly and Leatherface before their reworks, as every UR node was an ebony mori because of their lack of ultra-rare addons.
-
For a multiplayer game people potentially play for hundreds or thousands of hours the best application of such is in making maps nice and atmospheric if you ask me. Embrace the fact DBD is more horror-themed than a traditional horror game and give maps a nice and atmospheric look, with details and ambience that adds to it. Aesthetically speaking Midwich is a great example of all of this in my opinion, even though gameplay-wise it leaves a thing or sixty to be desired ๐
I don't really think trying to push it in that direction through gameplay would be too well recieved. When it comes to stealth for example it seems like quite a lot of survivors aren't too fond of it, and at the same time it's not uncommon to see killers dislike looking for survivors being super stealthy either.
-
By what definition? This is a community where two people can argue about toxicity and one of them thinks toxicity doesn't even exist and even racial slurs are just """banter""", while the other might think even looking at the portrait of a strong killer or the SWF button on the main menu is against the Geneva convention or something.
If you mean the most usual definition from my experience within gaming (mostly the "communications abuse" kind of jerk behavior) then not really. Can and should obviously ban people that can't control themselves from dishing out slurs and stuff like candy, but games banning people for all the ways people basically say "lol ur bad" is still a minority. And that's something some people will always do if you ask me.
-
I have no idea if there's any special challenges with getting console manufacturers to agree to it or something, but if it's possible I honestly see no downside as long as the ability to close/hide it is there ๐๏ธ
-
Nah that man right there straight up skipped all the way to Stage ฮฉ
-
@Afius said:
Off topic but quick question DS is automatically activated so you could tunnel off first hook to get them to use it up correct?
It activates, but if they choose to not attempt the skill check it won't be used up and they can use it again later. So saving it basically. In my experience while playing both killer and survivor it's rare to see people do this however, but it is possible and it can be very powerful if saving it lets them get it to activate at endgame instead of almost-endgame or something.
-
It indeed shouldn't, and in my opinion ideas that involve either making it 100% mechanically impossible or punishable to camp/tunnel are up there in the hall of fame of absurd and at times straight up delusional ideas along with "let me DC as much as I want without penalties" or "remove SWF". It's stuff that is so firmly in NEVER EVER territory that genuinely wishing for them is recipe for nothing else than endlessly screaming into a void that will never even pretend to listen.
It makes sense designing the game in a way that at least makes sure stuff like genuine first-hook hard camping isn't a recipe for victory assuming the survivors react properly though. One reason why pretty much any change to generator speed/match length in general if other objectives are introduced would require some sort of tweaking to hook mechanics/timers - I'm pretty sure the devs absolutely want to make sure that true no-map-pressure hard camping costs a lot of objective progress if the survivors abandon the hooked teammate and just slam objectives.
-
I've never really liked playing Spirit. I even "forced" myself to play her a bit to see if I just had to get more used to her, but even then I just didn't really enjoy how she played? Honestly no clue why, but it's the only killer that really sticks out to me like that.
Pyramid Head and Plague are somewhere in the same direction but I don't mind playing them here and there, just kinda meh to me. At least if I get a daily with one of them I don't feel an overwhelming urge to instantly re-roll it like with Spirit ๐
-
I've actually recently gotten back into CoD with Warzone and now Cold War, and I'm having fun. Haven't really played since Black Ops 2.
And I sure did play MW2. A looooot of MW2, if I could track my hours on my PS3 it would probably be up there as my 2nd or 3rd most played game ever. It was a glorious example of "If everything is broken, nothing is" and despite how stupid it could be it was a lot of fun. Kinda hard to get mad at even "cheap" deaths when you probably dish out a handful of them in the same match as well, you kinda just had to accept that sometimes you get blown up by someone shooting portable nukes with OMA + Danger Close, or you get shanked through time and space by care package commando speed demon.
-
I don't consider it an exploit as technically everything involved in the situation is working as intended. Hatch opens when the penultimate survivor dies, disconnect = instant death (like the end of a mori, RBT kill or a bleedout, unlike the sacrifice/cage death process) and therefore the hatch instantly opens.
That doesn't mean I agree with how disconnects are intended to be treated by the game though. While there's all sorts of ideas for more complex systems (husk system and such) even just teleporting disconnectors onto a basement hook and starting the sacrifice animation would be an improvement.
And that's on top of other issues with DCs, like how they can screw a killer over when it comes to certain challenges and achievements. A DC should honestly count as both a sacrifice and a mori "behind the scenes" as something like a survivor disconnecting to cuck a Myers out of Evil Incarnate or something is infinitely more lame than hatch DC could ever dream of being in my opinion. Not entirely sure how DCs interact with emblems, but anyone that disconnects should probably be treated as if they were sacrificed by being hooked 3 times as well, if it doesn't already.
And as far as punishment goes, it's already punished by DC penalties and that's fine.
-
Make it so simply bringing another survivor "up" one health state is enough to activate it, as opposed to filling an entire bar.
It feels pretty stupid to heal someone 99% of the way on your own, then someone else joins in on the heal for a nanosecond and you get cucked out of activating the perk.
It's a perfectly fine effect once it's activated in my opinion, just has to be easier to activate in the first place.
-
It's not exactly about them being hooked/caged twice. If their next hook would kill them, they can be mori'd. I assume the same logic applies to someone that has lost 2 hook stages to cages, as someone that has been caged twice will still die immediately the next time they're hooked/caged.
Someone that goes into struggle state on their first hook can still be mori'd after only being unhooked once, as their next hook would kill them.
-
Accessibility options like good colourblind modes, toggles for hold/mash-a-button-to-do-an-action stuff like doing gens, struggling and so on. And yes I am aware you can do the "M1 -> Bring up menu -> let go of M1 -> close menu" thing for the former, but they should be official options and not something you have to rely on a weird "tech" like that to do.
I don't care if people with regular vision can get some sort of "advantage" from it, when people can use stuff like Nvidia filters and monitor firmware crosshairs that's a pretty silly thing to worry about in my opinion. I'd much rather have that and give more people the "advantage" of actually being able to see stuff that's important better.
-
The only time I find it sorta silly is when they just hover around the slug for 3 minutes and 50 seconds, and then get surprised (or even mad) when the last survivor caught on and just let them bleed out and then escaped. Unfortunately this works more often than it should, as some survivors and killers seem to think survivors are 100% oblgitated to be altruistic even if it's suicidal, lol.
Besides that specific situation (which isn't common but I still see sometimes, at the latest yesterday) I don't really care.
-
I honestly don't think it would make much of a difference, as at least in my experience I don't see many moris (and I don't really use them myself either).
Not that rarity means they shouldn't be changed if they want to (and since they've already been announced to be a to-be-changed thing that seems to be the case), but statistically I doubt there would be that much of a difference.
-
Just all around fun in my opinion, both playing him and going against him. And he's pretty good too.
Quickly became one of my favorite killers and they'd have to really mess him up to stop me from playing him ๐
-
@TripleSteal said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1796406#Comment_1796406
If someone DCs while being hooked, you get double emblem points for the sacrifice, as if you killed two separate survivors (pretty sure it's a bug rather than a feature).
That's weird, lol. Should be as if the survivor didn't DC but died on the hook in my opinion. If they haven't been hooked, treat it like the killer hooking them 3 times. If they're on their last, reward the killer as if they hooked it that final time.
Should certainly not be more rewarding than a regular kill, as that could be viewed as "encouraging" making people DC. Which is all kinds of icky in my eyes.