pseudechis
pseudechis
About
- Username
- pseudechis
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
Meh I don't get it.
I mean not to downplay anyone else's enjoyment of them, more content in game is generally better than less, but really I just look at these and just think meh...shrug
Half of them look like circus clowns.
-
@skylerbound said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3049065#Comment_3049065
1) read the post next time. They themselves said it wasn’t fun.
2)read the post, I acknowledged all of this.
1) Did they really mean it though or is it very easy to push people into seeing another view just so they can avoid confrontation?
Because the "yeah I know its boring" response sounds more placative than an actual opinion.
2) yes and no, I mean you did but only within the confines of a very narrow point about what you find fun in the game.
The responses sound like excuses but everyone makes excuses when they lose because typically its not that fun to lose, but none of them needed to justify how they play to you simply because you found it unfun.
I'm curious about why you felt the need to press them for an explanation to their gameplay simply for the reason that you find it boring?
I mean what if one of them had said to you "I found it fun, sorry you didn't better luck next time" because that probably would have been my response, because not every game in DBD is about chasing, hook defense can make for some really fun games.
-
@HectorBrando said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3048240#Comment_3048240
No offense but one .ttv doesnt represent the whole comunity in the slightest, Clown gets very little flak in these forums, reddit, steam or the imageboards.
Even if he riled the viewers it doesnt mean anything, .ttv viewers tend to parrot what Streamer™ said because its the way echo chambers work.
The thing you gotta remember too is that any idiot with a camera and a mic can be a ttv.
Any fool can have one no matter how deluded, talentless, childish, ridiculous, undeserving or mediocre they may be.
Its a wonderful time we live in.
-
I don't think its a big issue as it forces you to be smart about how you use your power, especially when you have tombstone addons.
If there was a change then a very gradual (I stress very gradual) build up again on survivors who reached full.
This only triggers after survivors have full stalk depleted and pauses in chase or if stalked within the last 1-2mins.
Prevents the potential for just infinitely draining survivors of stalk but still removes the scenario where you are outa stalk on all the survivors left and now have no power.
Again not really necessary but if they were to make changes then something this subtle would probably be enough.
I say this as a rather big fan of Myers whom plays him more often than not.
-
What else should players do?
I don't get how getting hits by patrolling a hook is any different to getting hits by finding a new survivor.
I mean if you don't find someone straight away adding the hook to your patrol is just a smart play, you're pretty much guaranteed to find someone there eventually.
-
@Science_Guy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3045466#Comment_3045466
Right, so if a killer has chased you and only you for the majority of the game, but you've managed to survive until the gates are powered, you're suddenly not being tunneled? This BHVR logic does not compute.
This is one game view I always find odd.
I got chased all game and interacted with the killer non stop making it exciting for its entirety but somehow that's bad and I hate it. That logic does not compute.
Losing DS in the endgame somehow makes this even less tolerable.
I guess some people just enjoy sitting on gens all game while others interact with the killer?
-
@Tiufal said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3045273#Comment_3045273
So its better if the survivor dies on hook cause there is no possiblity to get him out?
There is possibility to get him out it just requires team work, take a hit for you buddy and both get out.
Some people are just defeatist from the get go.
-
It was definitely satisfying knowing you had the free out if you hit the skill check, we'll just have to see how it plays out.
It will require more teamwork to get someone out in the endgame but that raises that stakes and makes it more fun.
-
Myers, jump scare or infinite tombstone. Both are substantially different but thematically great fun.
Trapper and Hag (mostly Trapper) because I love when a good strategic setup pays off. Basement lockdown Trapper is just great when it plays out well.
Leatherface because its just fun to chase people down with the saw, so visceral and when you get 2-3 its just really satisfying. That saw can be terrifying.
Dredge is growing on me but I haven't played enough to make a call on it yet. I'm loving nightfall though.
-
What I'm reading is your issue isn't with the hatch. It has counter play you find it first you close it.
Your issue is with the negative feeling you get when someone BM's on top of the hatch because they found it first.
I'm afraid you'll have to fix that one bug yourself because it lives inside your own head.
You're never gonna stop people from being obnoxious about winning or pissy about losing, even if they make some mechanic where if you BM for more than 2 seconds at the hatch/exit you explode and die losing all your blood points, people will find a new way to taunt you if they beat you.
Understand that this 'taunting' can't hurt you and is the providence of very childish egos nothing more. You won the match but lost the hatch game any opponent whom thinks this is taunt worthy is purely compensating for their own overall loss.
Survivor is a team game. Its why people complain about solo queue because in solo queue a lot of people are just in it for themselves and it shows in the gameplay and match outcome.
-
@Nikatara69 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3048037#Comment_3048037
If someone play toxic, why I should suffer and waste my time???
Because what you are describing isn't inherently toxic.
In fact removing an opponent early in an elimination based game is often the best move you can make.
Add to that the pay off for defending a hook (AKA camping) often outweighs the pay off for chasing multiple survivors and you have a recipe for optimal gameplay that often involves these twin elements of camping and tunneling off hook.
I'd hate to say it but the only "toxic" element to this is how much people upset themselves over it.
People really take being camped and tunneled personally but the truth is neither are some personal attack on your fun.
There are plenty of obnoxious plays on killer and survivor side and I'm not a fan of a lot of it, but in truth most of it is not toxic. Often its just efficient. People take this efficiency to heart though as efficient in DBD often means denial of objective or participation which is rather zero sum.
Non-participation and elimination a core aspects of DBD its the practical outcome of game mechanics, thematically you are trying to escape from capture and death which is represented in game by denial of participation (capture i.e. hooking/slugging) or elimination (death).
Try going into each DBD game with the expectation that you are probably gonna be caught and eliminated, sometimes really early in game. This is the core concept of DBD and some players are going to utilize it to its maximum but that doesn't make them terrible people out to ruin your fun.
Separate questionable game mechanics from players you'll find that most people are just playing a game within the confines of the mechanics available and that's ok.
-
When survivor experience sucks I play killer and vice versa.
Sometimes they both suck and I play something else.
Yeah MMR based solely on outcome rather than contribution is kinda crappy, but people also hated contribution based ranks so whatcha gonna do eh?
Rant about it on the forums I guess.
-
we fear change...
-
One bad interaction lead to death in a horror game, really I wouldn't dwell on it and just move onto the next game.
-
True 'gen rush' extends from the good ol days of BNP being
This intricate mechanical part feels oddly out of place. It is clean and shiny as if straight out of the factory.
- Reduces charges by 50%.
- Instantly repair a Generator on secondary action.
- Depletes the Toolbox on use.
You have one gen complete and then 3-4x gens would all pop simultaneously after about 1 min.
Exit gates powered an all out in 3-4 mins max.
-
Absolutely not.
The RNG of what killer you might face is part of the horror experience, fear the unknown etc.
You can see from the replies alone that people would just boycott killers they didn't want to face making them non-playable options.
Its an unhealthy change that adds little to the game experience outside of pandering to player entitlement at the expense of increased queue times.
-
@Bartlaus said:
I don't care about the tbagging. But the fact that people don't leave immediately and waste my time is annoying.
@Roadrunner said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3046673#Comment_3046673
because they will wait until the last second to leave, thats even more annoying
As killer you have this great tool called a weapon. Press M1 and make the survivors leave. Time wasting over.
Its even more effective if you don't care about people button mashing at you.
If people can't figure out how to leave and stand there mashing buttons till something works, I'm more than happy to help them out the door.
-
I think they should put a chance for flashlights to fail, which increases the more frequently they are clicked.
Its that thematic scene in horror films where the flashlight conveniently starts flickering or fails right before the jump scare.
Macro clickers would just 100% crap out after the first mouse wheel roll and be unable to use it again.
You've got a system that just pretty much exists to annoy people that lets make it less fun to do while being more thematically appropriate.
-
Yeah it shouldn't require 1 perk for a BP bonus to get worthwhile points.
If they want to remove it fine but it needs to be coupled with cost reduction in the blood web and an overall increase in BP gain in general.
Without these two things it's just losing one way to get extra BP's and lessen the grind.
I know they are reworking the blood web and the prestige system but what about post game BP rewards are they getting a general bump too?
I'm sure a lot of the pissy salt in this game revolves around bringing 12K worth of addons/offerings and getting only 5-7k points due to a crappy game. Sometimes this scenario is out of your control due to the non-participation/elimination mechanics at DBD's core.
-
Pretty good blanket buffs for all killers in the next patch.
I do agree that killers should generally be strong and even kinda unfair 1v1 as that's the point of asymmetric gameplay.
Survivors have a team advantage while killers have a strong 1v1 advantage.
The rest is a bit of a ramble and doesn't make much sense so I'm out.
-
Its often purely regional, but you should expect a small wait on both sides of the fence most times, it shows that the population is generally healthy and its trying to find you a balanced match.
As great as it is to have instant queue scenarios, like evenings on some servers, where killer queues are instant and survivor queues can be 10+ mins, with grossly misbalanced games by back filling lobbies due to missing killers at certain MMRs, its a sign that population is pretty unbalanced at those times, which is not good overall.
Ideally you'd want insta queues for both sides but what you are gonna see is ebb and flow based on time of day. I'd like to see killer queue times go up a bit during peak times because it means you're probably gonna get a survivor game quicker than once every 10-15 mins.
Also its an elimination game, if survivor queue time was instant people would probably be a lot less pissy overall about being eliminated early. Waiting 10 mins for a 2 min game sucks, but nerfing the threat killers pose purely due to bad survivor queue times so they can live longer and have more game time sucks even more... and doesn't solve the issue of player bias in population numbers either in fact it makes it worse.
Stronger killers who live up to the threatening theme of antagonist making them more enjoyable to play, will result in longer killer queue times but I'd take that even as a predominately killer player because its the game as it should be.
-
Couple of issues with your points are
survivor queue times are still long comparative to killer, this varies by time and region but generally so. This shows there is still a survivor bias in player population.
complaints piling up on the forums is a quasi form of survivorship bias. People predominately come here to complain, if you don’t have an issue with the game you probably aren’t here on the forums complaining about it. (survivorship bias is a genuine mathematical principle and has nothing to with playing survivor, just making this point for the dumblocks.)
Are dc’s and suicide on hook really going up or are players that do those things starting to get sorted into their respective mmr groups. If you rage quit all the time you probably don’t have a great mmr rating it only takes a few losses as survivor to wind up stuck with these kinds of players.
The new changes are a healthy shake up of the game, we’ll see how things change as a result. The sky isn’t falling.
-
@tendyhands said:
I want to see the number of hooks/kills before last gen pops for noed and non noed users. I'm so bored of the noed games. Killer gets 0-2 hooks before endgame, you know they have noed. They don't know how to mindgame or basically do anything. You know they have noed because they just run into every pallet and vault every window. Then noed pops and they get 1-2 kills pending on how hard it is to find noed. Fun games.
Why wouldn’t you enjoy the increased threat in the endgame?
Threatening killers make the game fun. The scarier the killer the scarier the game.
What makes horror movies good are typically iconic and scary antagonists. I don’t get why people get so down on the game being what it’s meant to be, a threatening game of horror survival.
If you are basing your idea on an “unskilled” killer doesn’t deserve kills then I say that’s one of the dumbest mindsets to have about DBD.
NOED is great because even mediocre killers can be scary with it, which is the whole point of the game.
Why are you trying to escape in the first place if there is no threat?
-
The only thing toxic about tunnelling and camping is people’s gross overreaction to it and them feeling justified in abusing others over something as silly as a game mechanic.
-
Yeah outside of the “I wanna play my way, you should play the way I want too waah!” Tantrum.
There really isn’t a rational explanation to be pissy about any of what you described, it was just gameplay.
-
Everyone bemoans solo q because it’s not as strong as swf, but name any pvp game where a pug group is just as powerful as a premade.
People seem to forget this and then get pissy when solo q is harder.
Solo q is harder not because killers are op but because random players often suck.
No amount of buffing will fix random players sucking, all it does is unbalance the game when teams are coordinated.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3025771#Comment_3025771
The OP’s two examples are based on players being annoyed and examples of bad play. Neither of those things are good metrics to base changes on.
First off, no, Dead Hard has nothing to do with bad play. If it had an actual reliable counter to stop it from extending chases in a game all about time efficiency then sure. Second off, yes, it is entirely reasonable to make changes based on the human element. We're not robots. Dealing with DH or getting tunneled without DS are both prime examples of player agency being almost completely removed, which is not fun for the majority of people.
What some people find annoying or bad play is completely legit to others.
As OP mentioned some people find punching people in the face for no good reason fun. Again, there's a very objective human element you're lacking here. Certain things trigger certain responses, and certain responses are triggered more often and/or more intensely in "normal" functioning human beings. Again, having a down denied by DH and getting tunneled out of the game are both prone to triggering negative responses that could be considered unfun experiences.
Some of the core elements of DBD people keep saying are annoying or bad play but really they are just in game mechanics and people are just pissy about losing.
What a useless statement. And not even necessarily true. I've won games and felt unsatisfied because the actual gameplay was a complete ####show due to being defined by certain gameplay mechanics that I just don't find fun to deal with. And I've lost games where I felt good about the loss because those game mechanics weren't so prevalent. It all goes back to player agency and feeling like your actions actually mattered instead of your opponent(s) just fumbling around and not making use of the resources they have, or having said agency completely stripped away to the point where you're barely playing a PvP game.
So do we completely rework the game so that the whiners always win… no that’s just stupid.
And your argument, which is tantamount (not saying it completely is) to saying "just look at raw data 5Head", isn't stupid? Some people on here definitely complain about ######### nonstop with no rational thought but to see those people and think "anyone that says what they're saying is just a whiner" even if they express logical reasoning behind why they feel the way they do is absurd and willfully ignorant. And I think the OP did ok at promoting this type of thinking instead of just expressing incoherent rage at things or looking at raw numbers.
The point they made about “think what the majority want”also falls flat because there is an inherent bias in the forum majority because it’s made up predominately of the complainers.
I really don't think it's just the forum userbase that has a problem with Dead Hard and tunneling. And if BHVR would care to do a poll about these things and publish the results I bet it'd confirm my hunch. Again, it's really all about player agency, not necessarily "fun". And if we can't agree that making changes that promote player agency & interactivity isn't healthy for the game (because that's the whole point of a PvP videogame) then I don't know what to say.
So it goes back to my example of objective perk assessment, which the OP didn’t like.
Objective perk assessment aka raw stats aka ignoring the human element entirely. AKA the reason why Self-Care is getting nerfed into the ground despite no one ever complaining about it and saying that it's not fun to face. And why Twins were nerfed despite barely anyone wanting to play them because of how clunky they feel. What a stupid way to balance a game.
None of what you have written counters my point.
You mixed up the examples the OP made as to why DS needs changes and DH is fine. Both are still arbitrary.
Extreme examples are often pointless examples, no one is advocating for punching people in the face being fun but loss of license is part of the game it’s a core mechanic. Do you get pissy when you get shot in COD?
Objective assessment is often based on raw stats but it also involves expected outcomes and takes into account player feedback (guess you missed that part).
lastly writing a lot doesn’t mean you write well, re-read my post then the OPs and you’ll see what I wrote was sound and what they wrote is still subjective.
-
How does starstruck on nurse give you a DC penalty?
Surely you do that to yourself.
I’m ok with OP things as long as I can rage quit against them… clearly you’re not ok with OP things.
Another forum self awareness train wreck.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3025423#Comment_3025423
I’m critical of your point because arbitrary definitions of what’s fun don’t do much for working out game mechanics.
What do you mean by this?
The OP’s two examples are based on players being annoyed and examples of bad play. Neither of those things are good metrics to base changes on.
What some people find annoying or bad play is completely legit to others.
Some of the core elements of DBD people keep saying are annoying or bad play but really they are just in game mechanics and people are just pissy about losing.
So do we completely rework the game so that the whiners always win… no that’s just stupid.
The point they made about “think what the majority want”also falls flat because there is an inherent bias in the forum majority because it’s made up predominately of the complainers.
So it goes back to my example of objective perk assessment, which the OP didn’t like.
-
@Phantom_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3025427#Comment_3025427
Idk what a waifu is, sounds like someone sneezed mid-speaking, and I don't care enough to find out, but it's not that deep lol.
It shouldn’t be that deep but strikes me that some people take this stuff way to seriously.
-
Never. I find peoples attachment to digital characters wired.
Is it why people get so upset over the game when they die because their digital waifu died?
I genuinely don’t get it.
-
@EntityNea said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3024593#Comment_3024593
uh-huh, so you throw the point of the topic out the window because you get stuck on the use of a word? I even said that seeing it from an impartial standpoint may be a better word choice than objective standpoint. Like, you understand the point, so why write a wall of text whining about the use of a single word?
I didn’t throw the topic out the window, I provided a critical review of its weakness.
I’m critical of your point because arbitrary definitions of what’s fun don’t do much for working out game mechanics.
There was an objective example of assessing perks and that appears to be what BHVR are doing while at the same time taking player feedback in to account.
I’d hate to say it but you are getting defensive and losing your your objectivity over the topic at hand.
-
About the same as facing any other team.
I think the thing people miss about obnoxious squads like this is they often end up throwing the game in order to get flashy saves or trolling build fill.
If you keep a calm head it’s usually not too hard to destroy them, because they aren't progressing their own objective while chasing you around with flashlights.
It’s extra funny with lightborn Tombstone Myers where you just stare at them while they try to blind you and then stab them to death.
-
@HexPleaseLetMeSpeak said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3024353#Comment_3024353
I did tho?
Maps need full reworks across the board. And there's a reason why people have to hard tunnel / camp / play nurse so often.
The forums don’t process satirical content very well so the constructive feed back gets lost in the knee jerk response of bubbas name being mentioned.
-
@EntityNea said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3024541#Comment_3024541
By objective I mean distance your own opinion and consider how it's perceived by the majority. Don't just go "i enjoy this therefore it must be a part of the game". If the thing you enjoy is annoying to 90% of people who are on the other end of the stick, then from an impartial standpoint, your enjoyment causes irritation in other players. (i suppose impartial may be a better word choice than objective?)
For example, in my case, I personally think Dead Hard is fine, but I am aware that a majority of players hate going against it, therefore I understand it needs to change. It's not a necessity to play and enjoy the game, and due to it causing so much grief, it's not worth letting it stay the way it is. As with my example on DS, it's a perk for countering something that's widely considered bad behavior, and you can avoid it completely by avoiding that behavior. In this case, the source of grief is the tunneling, and DS is the solution and only causes grief to the people who were willing to cause grief to others. You with me still? Yeah this is difficult to comprehend for some people.
Objectivity does not mean side with the majority.
Also the forums are rife with confirmation bias which severely limits objectivity.
You want an objective approach to perks then look at how often they are run and how they are applied in game, is that application in line with their intended use and what impact does it have game outcome.
Rational objectivity in a nutshell, observing measurable outcomes within established guidelines without preferential bias.
After looking at that then you can ask does this make things more or less fun and take player feedback into account.
But the ‘fun’ is completely subjective. Just like your two examples. Both are built on the highly subjective ideas of annoyance and player behaviour perceived as bad.
There is nothing wrong with empathetic thinking I.e. I can see why this annoys someone else but even that doesn’t make it an objective approach to game mechanics.
-
@EntityNea said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3024438#Comment_3024438
you chose to completely ignore the sentence following it. you can look at something objectively.
Extreme example - but someone could say "i love punching people in the face!". Most people will understand that for a majority of people, receiving a punch to the face is not a fun experience.
A lot of things i see complained about on the forums can have a similar view applied to them. And as I've said, consider if your idea of fun is at the expense of someone else's enjoyment.
You also chose to ignore it.
None of what you put here is objective it’s still all subjective.
You created two arbitrary scenarios and qualified one as fun and one not fun in a completely subjective manner.
Many elements of dbd are zero sum because the goal is objective denial of your opponent. This doesn’t make them inherently ‘unfun’.
-
To compensate them for what?
killers with M2 powers haven’t lost anything by buffing M1 hit cool down.
-
Because it’s still fun.
Seriously players getting all pissy over gameplay, calling each other trash etc is really the main problem with dbd.
If it’s that un-enjoyable then play something else. You can always come back to dbd another time.
-
I’d say, if it’s not satire, then the new changes are doing a great job of getting the tantrum folk to quit.
Game health wise that seems like a good thing. 👍
In all seriousness thought the meltdowns are becoming entertaining.
“The lament of those whom fear change more than the killer”
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3020815#Comment_3020815
The bias you mostly see on these forums are not coming from solo q survivors.
And about those stats, why did they not show them and just stated it? And from what they said before, solo q escape rate is 15% lower than swf, so...
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3020815#Comment_3020815
Not sure if that is believable. Solos hardly win, killers on twitch never lose, even survivors on there are not winning all that much.
Balancing for bad killers to usually win is not going to be good. There is no incentive for killers to improve because you don't have to, and there is no incentive for survivors because skill is meaningless.
Oh woe is the poor forgotten solo survivors.
I play mostly solo survivor, the SWF folks I played with have largely moved on from DBD.
The disparity between solo and SWF is to be expected, a single player in a PUG group will never do as well as an organised pre-made. Any PVP game will demonstrate that.
I think you only get uppity about solo being harder than SWF if you are the kind of person who'll get uppity about anything in game.
If you are setting yourself up to never have any fun then you're never gonna have any fun. No in game changes will help you there.
-
@Marigoria said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3020854#Comment_3020854
They said self care was meta, is it OP?
Yea it's only interesting if you're a killer main or only play SWF.
When playing survivor I play predominately solo and yeah you die more when solo compared to SWF.
We'll have to see how the changes pan out but really, as a solo survivor, I still find it interesting.
-
@SN34KYSQU1D said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3019391#Comment_3019391
Yeah, it's just that to me, if the way hooks function were implemented into any other game, people would be pissed off (rightly so), but here, people just accept it.
Like, imagine playing Call of Duty and they made it so that when the enemy kills you, you have to sit there for a minute doing absolutely nothing and then for another minute, you have to do really bad QTE. No one would play.
The problem is that it requires a large overhaul to fix because by BVHR's original design, hooks on the survivor's side are only engaging when you're new to the game.
Fair point.
We'll have to see how the new changes pan out to begin with.
-
Did we read the same perk changes announcement?
"META isn't the problem OP perks are" well good thing only non OP perks make up the META, err... hang on, what does META mean again?
Strong perks make up part of the META and make for standards of optimal play. Shake up the perks shake up the standards of optimal play.
We'll see how good the shakeup is and what makes it to live servers but so far its more interesting than threatening really.
-
@Moofy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3019344#Comment_3019344
I don't think anyone needs to try the PTB to comprehend that some perks that have been nerfed are no longer useful (ie Iron Will is no longer a perk that silences injured survivors, self care takes longer now, etc...)
What gets announced doesn't always make it to live but if you want to jump on the doom and gloom we fear change bandwagon go for it.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3020636#Comment_3020636
They've been heavily nerfing survivors for 6 years. That is not catering to survivors, but catering to killers.
Even bloodlust was buffed? What does that say? After maps have been neutered.
It says exactly what the explanation on the announcement says... that kill rates were lower on average than they'd like them to be and they are making changes.
The amount of doom and gloom bias on these forums maybe its better if these people do just quit for a bit.
-
@Tizzle said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3019336#Comment_3019336
Did you not understand when this was implemented no changes were made whatsoever before it was completely scrapped?
You need only look at Barbeque and Chili to see that incentivising Killers to leave the hook does not work.
Nearly 6 years later yet here we are with the exact same problems.
As I said, those problems would have been rectified if the timer resumed its normal state if the Killer was in chase near the hook or a Survivor entered the range that the timer stopped.
With the changes as they are now the game is going to become nothing more than camp/gen simulator with a drastic increase in players suiciding on first hook and simply moving on to the next game trying to not get caught first.
No I understood.
Your proposed solution is the same as the infinite stage one solution people will just hang on hook for the duration.
Why go to the hook and restart the timer when if the killer camps the timer stops giving you infinite game time.
Seems pretty obvious to me it wouldn’t work very well, seemed pretty obvious to the devs.
Why make changes to implement something that doesn’t work just to test for longer that it doesn’t work?
At the risk of oversimplifying it you don’t have to punch yourself in the face multiple times to test if it hurts, some rational consideration will answer that for you without the repeated testing.
-
@SN34KYSQU1D said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3019319#Comment_3019319
That's really interesting, I still think that with enough time and effort, a solution to camping can be found. I would even argue a reasonable solution would be remove the "hooks" from the survivor's side altogether.
Meaning the hooking mechanic stays, but allow the "hooked" survivor a way to contribute to the game nonetheless. Either as a spirit or telepathically, since all the aura abilities hint that the suevivors have supernatural abilities of their own. Because I don't know that the camping is the issue as much as the waiting is. If the killer wants to sit by the hook, whatever, they can bore themselves like that, the problem is the survivor ALSO has to bore themselves there.
Plus that would mean that they can still earn blood points while in a hook state.
The only concern is that method would either take a lot of coding and time or would likely be a boring minigame itself.
The current listed changes are a step in the right direction.
Enhance players after the unhook but in a way that trying to leverage it aggressively (the ol BT body block) comes with the cost of squandering the added benefits (the speed boost).
We’ll see how it plays out and if it’s enough or too much to be basekit.
I gotta admit I’m kind of in the mind these days that camping doesn’t really need a direct solution as I said sometimes it’s the appropriate play to make.
Indirectly “solving” camping by providing incentive to chase and switch targets is probably enough, that’s just my own opinion on it.
EDIT: True the survivor has to sit there too but non participation is one of the threats you face from the killer and a substantial one at that. Maybe something more entertaining than spamming buttons or repeated skill checks would lessen the monotony though.
-
Man the “we fear change” crowd is working in overdrive tonight.
I’d say much of what’s being changed is interesting and we’ll have to see how much it shakes things up.
-
You could wait to try it out on the PTB and see what comes to live before crying that the sky is falling.
-
@Tizzle said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3019221#Comment_3019221
What most fail to understand -- when this was tested the hook timer did not resume the normal state when a Survivor entered the range of the Killer that paused it in the first place.
This was nearly six years ago yet everyone that brings this up echoes the same song and dance that it was just abused by Survivors.
Of course it was exploitable -- that's what happens when something is tested for a very short period of time with no changes whatsoever.
What about it being 6 years later would make players treat it any differently now?
You need to incentivise people to save their team mates just as you need to incentivise killers to leave the hook.
Protracted hook timers do neither really as it was demonstrated by the player base when trialed.