pseudechis
pseudechis
About
- Username
- pseudechis
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@HarlockTaliesin said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2982455#Comment_2982455
They've been talking/hinting about that for a long while. Was there an official announcement that they're putting those in the game?
If so, I very much hope they're outsourcing the coding to a company that will do a good job of it. If the bots used in the "tutorial", such as it is, are any indication, they don't exactly inspire confidence.
It was part of the recent anniversary live stream. Plan is to implement custom game bots within the next year.
Yeah its a long timeline and there are no details on the level of functionality, can you play a full game?, with without perks? lot of unknowns but its finally an official announcement that its part of the road map so it gives me something to look forward to DBD wise.
-
@JohnWick1654 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2984534#Comment_2984534
Challange to have folder full of these photos have more size than a folder with Movies some of wtich are 4K quality?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2984570#Comment_2984570
No they don't, because if you genrush the killer you get 0 pips, but people still genrush the killer
no they don't what?
People are going to try and finish gens asap just as killers are going to try and eliminate players asap, its just gameplay.
-
So what do you want changed?
The ability to automatically stand up whenever you're down if left there for too long giving you basically free recovery and health states?
The bleed out timer to be 30s so you die really quickly?
What is it you want?
-
The dbd forum is kind of like a train wreck. It’s a disaster but you can’t look away.
There is no boredom category to vote for. I have a lot of downtime waiting for sterilisers/irradiators to run cycles.
It’s one of the things I check between workloads.
-
I enjoy every scenario you listed from either side. It’s all just the caveats of gameplay.
Emblems and ranks are meaningless.
It was bad idea to make BP rewards around ranks and emblems because now everyone takes it too seriously and it’s far more game ruining.
-
@VonCrow said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2984043#Comment_2984043
If you are with your son in the supermarket and he starts yelling and crying because he wants a chocolate, do you think the right idea is to buy it so he stops? Not really, the right answer is to educate him correctly.
Going to exit gates so they can tbag and mock you is literally like buying the chocolate.
Wow it really isn’t the same. It really really isn’t. And if it was adding a free ragequit function for endgame really isn’t a solution.
The suggestion to speed up the egc countdown if survivors are near the gates was a good one. Hooks slow it down so why not hanging out at the gates speed it up.
-
Is the game easier at 4v1 or 3v1?
At 3-4 gens gone I’d want the game at 3v1.
Plenty of ways to do that but often chasing each survivor is to the killer’s disadvantage.
So just as splitting up on gens is to the survivor advantage, eliminating a player early is to the killers advantage.
You need a pretty flawless game get an advantage over even slightly coordinated survivors. When chasing fails to build adequate pressure, and it often does in a chase extending meta, camping and tunnelling pay off bigger.
That’s all it is.
-
@Impalpable said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2984151#Comment_2984151
"With that kind of thinking you can justify anything providing the majority want it."
In our society this is simply common behaviour culture and it regulate itself between humans and how our society judge what behaviour is social acceptable and it gets enforced by official and unspoken rules. We already had in human history cultures in which property was bound to body strength for example, so yes its subjective and individual for each culture and community but thankfully the human society developed beyond that with setting themselves more ambitious rules which established bigger and more stable communities on longsight.
Now in our modern society we can be thankfully more flexible, thoughtful and inclusive with what we establish as the rules, when people state something is 'toxic' my understanding is that they mean something goes beyond what they understand as social norms and its worth to think about it, to avoid unneccessary negativity which divides the community and lead to unpleasant situations.
The playerbase is the community of a multiplayer game and form a behaviour culture as well but other standard human behaviour like testing the boundaries in this case of the game design and exploiting it for an advantage will challenge this.
Now my point is, if something goes beyond what was original designed for the game, we should consider to regulate it. Is it good or neccessary for the game and the community or is it unneccessary and only causing negativity.
I think its the latter, we see constant complains on this forum about these topic, people stated that they and/or their friends quit this game for this behaviour culture. There are many more reasons some of which ive stated in my last comments already and i wont repeat therefore.
--
With the arguementation of the blurring of reality and fantasy we arrive into the topic of metaphilosphy, neurology and psychology.
I could talk now that each human has an individual fantasy/imagination of this world and that your picture of this world is only a reproduction of what your body sensors are caring further to your brain and how it interprets it for you as well. "I think therefore i am" is probably the only self-provable reality that is outthere for you, everything else could be as well count as fantasy and be even potential illusions. I could as well argue that if you replace the information of your visual and sonical sensoric it could very well influence your psych and build a sort of reality for you. But this is a huge topic which i think is to large for this forum and i doubt that we both are informed enough to discuss it and arrive on an agreement any time soon here.
My core point against this is that you cant see mental and emotional damage and while your physical body isnt reachable ingame your mental state is. The reason why i mentioned school shooting is because it argues around the same point, (!not because of the size of the problem which i clearly mentioned) the usual arguement is instead of a "its only a game" it gets replaced by "its just talking" as barrier, physically your are safe, everything is fine - time has proven undenieable that these barriers dont filter out negativity which is your point.
The only point i see for your side here is that you can escape the behaviour culture of a game more easily, since your not bound to it but this is not a positive point that works towards why things should stay as they are in this game.
Your last point is that the size of these problems are smaller then some issues in real life, and i dont deny it but its a complete neutral point that adds nothing to the arguement. We dont say macro flashlights should change who you vote on election day. We are arguing on a forum of the developer of a game with the community about behaviour culture and why certain exploits and unneccessary gameplay elements are still in this game when they are only negative for the game and community.
Ugh god you are reading way to much into this. It’s a game about brutally murdering people in a homage to 80’s slasher flicks, it ain’t that deep.
If you are triggered by minor inconvenience in a fantasy world then you need help beyond a patch that changes gameplay.
You make the point the it’s not serious but then go on about emotional distress yadda yadda brought on by negative in game experience that flies in the face of established community norms laid down by society throughout history and modified by modern sensibilities.
Your thesis reads like a first year psych/sociology text book blurb, Points for mansplaining though but I’m no stranger to pompous academic BS, I’ve been doing the academic thing for a long time. Again it’s not that deep it’s only a computer game.
-
@Impalpable said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2982166#Comment_2982166
(Human-) Toxicity has from what ive read no clear definition. If i would have to come up with a definition based on my perception i would say its negative behaviour that goes beyond whats social acceptable for a community. In connection to social interactive behaviour between humans i would say vaguely, its basically everything a person does out of the intent or apathic ignorance to cast negativity upon someone as main reason with no defendable second objective in the view of a community, or in short terms anti-social behaviour.
This can happen in real life through harassment of a person, but it can as well happen through f.e. griefing ingame even though argueable to a lower effect and degree. Just because our viewangle change from a bigger community to a smaller community the core definition of this behaviour doesnt change.
To dismiss something as "just" this or just that is questionable as a valid point of arguementation, you could as well argue how could anyone be potentially hurt through words, they are just words, its just talking, its just slurs, etc. This shortsight and ignorance is the reason why people ask afterwards of a school massacre how this could potentially happen, this is an extreme example but you get the point. With what we allow as a community we built our daily enviroment, the more negativity you allow and spread the more negativity you will face.
Gameplay wise it means you can escape it more easily then your school or workplace, your are not bound to this game. But is this positive for the game and the community of it, that unneccessary annoying behaviour with the goal to mentally exhaust the other players which adds nothing to the designed objective and neither include qualitive gameplay elements hurt the amount of players and the mood of the community as well as lowering the quality of gameplay?
You mentioned some gameplay elements and i will try to showcase why the community percieve some as clearly toxic and some others formost not at all (they are complained about but out of different reasons)
Looping, is a qualitive gameplay mechanic, it provides neutral interaction with certain counterplay option in most cases (balance is a different point) and chasing the killer is clearly stated as a survivor objective and gets rewarded. It also makes logical sense to have chasing in a horror game as gameplay element. Same goes for defending a hook, repairing gens, killing survivors, flashlight saves.
But what is the point of flashlight macros, teabagging, exploiting the lobby last second to switch items, cheating, etc? They are clearly not intentionally designed and neither rewarded and they are not a qualitive gameplay element that fits to a horror game - it even destroys the mood and atmosphere. These are not protectworthy alternative ways of gameplay, Its annoying behaviour that mentally exhaust players for no good reason.
And in the case of flashlight macros i will argue its even sadistic, people are concious about that they are hurting the hearing of another person when triggering it and know theres no counterplay beside a tactical disadvantage. Its hard to believe that any joy comes from triggering this macro, the joy lies in the dominance in form of a tactical advantage and to see the irritated reaction of the other player, potentially even the imagination how the person takes off the headset in pain. Try to take an alarm clock and go to a stranger you meet on the street hold it right against his ear and trigger it but dont come to me when you get punched it face, the place it happens is irrelevant, the definition wont change therefore.
So why is it bad to unneccessary annoy and mentally exhaust people through gameplay, because these people will play less, they will burn out faster and call it a day sooner. Others are seeking for revenge and an annoyance war between both sides takes place in which the meta tools for triggering annoyances are getting tested and expanded which means less qualitive gameplay. Bully Squads vs 4min Sluggers. It also effects new players when the developers try to create a hype and they get between the fronts, burn them out is even worse because they are not on the same addiction level as the veterans, they as well just quit if the gameplay is not qualitywise attractive. Theres a reason why they cant keep alot of the new players attracted through chapter hypes and i would argue this is also one of them.
Now i dont argue this topic because i expect a change from BHVR, they already stated that they are pro anti-social behaviour and sadistic traits and that they dont care if it bothers the community aslong as the impact in playercounts is not big enough. I just do it, to let people who care about this topic know that this is not an overreaction, but an rightfully ambitious request, to rise the standard of gameplay qualitiy to acceptable social norms, respectable.
The core rationale of your argument is flawed though.
Beyond what is acceptable by a community. With that kind of thinking you can justify anything providing the majority want it.
Liking in game obnoxiousness to the extremes of something like school shootings in the same argument is exactly my point, the blurring of reality and fantasy.
Nothing in game in DBD can hurt you, not one thing. It’s a game.
The problem with the world now is everyone is offended by everything all the time. So much so that genuinely offensive things that a terrible get lost in the noise of all the irrelevant crap.
-
They announced custom game bots. I’m hanging out for that.
-
I think there is a blurring of the lines between gameplay and actual toxicity.
Post game abuse, slurs, harassment, cheating are genuine toxicity.
A lot of what takes place in game is just gameplay. Yeah some of it is obnoxious and there are some tedious mechanics in DBD but it's just gameplay. It doesn't really equate to sadism.
There are some bad exploits and you could argue that going into a game with the intention of exploiting them is just bad gameplay. But again its still just gameplay, something for the devs to fix if its broken.
Its really not malicious or sadistic, I mean looping is exploiting the smaller survivor hitbox to waste killer's time is that sadistic or just gameplay? Its no different from leveraging strong perks/addons its gameplay. Defending a hook (aka camping) being gameplay. Efficient focus on objective (AKA gen rushing and tunneling) being gameplay. Flashlight clicking, yes I find it annoying but that's a me issue its just gameplay.
Personally I don't care for pvp, I play to recreate a horror movie experience. That means the nastier a killer is in game the better in my opinion. As for survivor the less obnoxious and more focused on escape over getting in the killer's face the better. This is how I like to play DBD no matter what role I'm playing.
Someone else not wanting to play like this with me does NOT make them a sadist purposefully trying to sabotage my fun.
People need to ask themselves are they upset because they encountered genuine toxicity, or are they upset because they just didn't get what they wanted from a game and are being big tantrum babies about it. Its often the latter.
-
I miss Hawkins. I was a good map, different and fun.
Loss of content is never good, as much as I'm not a fan of RPD I'd rather see it reworked than deleted.
Lack of map choice is never good.
-
I always do, play it out to the bitter end you may still get out.
-
Well there's us... YAY!
and then there's them... BOO!
Insert whatever two sides you wish for taste and then make arguments that purely paint everyone from the opposing side as terrible.
Here are some examples to get you started...
Survivor/Killer
PC/Console
Rich/Poor
Dark/Light beer
Ducks/Chickens
Coffee/Tea
Nudists/Clothed
etc etc.
The more irrationally you generalize how terrible the opponent is the stronger your point.
1000's of years of partisan religion and politics can't be wrong, give it a go today!
-
@CEO said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2979208#Comment_2979208
im sorry u got offended
lol I'm not offended I'm just calling it like I sees it.
You don't have to be offended by something to point out when its kinda stupid, all that has to happen is for that thing to be stupid.
What you have here is schmuck 1 fights with schmuck 2 over a game. I'm not offended by this I find it comical.
So I stand by my previous statement... This is an example of fragile egos one of which came to the forum for external validation of their fragile ego.
Behaving like a fool in public used to be frowned upon but with the anonymity of the internet you can hang your own foolishness out there for others to see. Why you'd do it I'm not sure, its kinda foolish and open to mockery.
-
@sp1n4l_ssnap said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2979211#Comment_2979211
he legit doesnt even need to injure you, without warning he can insta kill healthy survivors, it really needs sorting.
That's on your team mates for feeding him stalk.
God forbid people have to change up how they play in response to killer powers.
-
Whatever I feel like in the moment.
Ease up a bit sure, finish it quick sure. Maybe have a farm sure.
Each are equally valid and often dependent on how many DC's I've had to deal with already.
-
DS and UB are fine, players get snotty because they don't account for them when slugging or picking up and then caught off guard that's all.
BT gets leveraged aggressively typically to body block killers going for other hits. The players that do this are often the ones who get most put out if you target them straight off hook, but they are running into your face what are you supposed to do?
That's where BT gets annoying because its a damned if you do damned if you don't scenario, where you eat it giving the unhooker time to escape and then either tunnel the BT down or go for a protracted chase after the unhooker.
The former gets a lot of salt/tantrums and is subject to DS, while the latter is often the less efficient play.
This is why BT base kit isn't good idea because all it does is incentivize farming, aggressive body blocking and generally more obnoxious/bad play from survivors. It also won't do a damn thing about the amount of camping because killers are still going to camp if they can't get efficient chases.
Chases will just be less efficient as built in BT will guarantee a head start every post hook chase, making camping for the 2nd stage still more valuable than chasing in a number of scenarios.
-
The problem isn't really solo queue though its MMR.
If well matched then MMR does a pretty good job of having similarly experienced survivors together.
The problem lies in that with kill/escape being the only metric that matters (rather than overall contribution like the old system) if you do lose a few games, you just start nose diving into bad gamer levels and it just keeps spiraling downward as you keep getting mismatched with potatoes.
Solo queue was a much better experience under the old match making system under the new one its a bit of a crap shoot.
-
luckily when you die in game its only make believe... queue again.
Don't nerf Myers because a few sore losers can't deal with loss, its a major failing on the survivor side if he gets his mori off that early.
-
Two man babies whacking their fragile little... egos together.
-
So what its all gameplay.
-
"i havent played killer so i dont know,"
You're missing out on half the game.
The forums can't really tell you anything, try playing killer maybe you'll find out that sometimes camping is necessary, sometimes its malicious, sometimes its the best idea, sometimes it the worst and sometimes its actually kinda fun.
In then end its all just gameplay.
-
Bah I hope they don't all those changes will do is reward survivors for being more obnoxious without really addressing game mechanics that make camping and tunneling prevalent.
I think its very narrow sighted to think base kit BT will be a solution to camping.
-
Or it punishes survivors who hyper focus on gens without taking notice of totems.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Most maps are tuned around super low level play. Clown's power is great at forcing pallets down early. It's just not impactful in the grand scheme of things if survivors are being remotely optimal on their only objective. You'll never get through an impactful amount of pallets before the gens are done unless survivors are greeding pallets and taking pointless hits.
The only thing that holds the game together is the artificially lowered skill ceiling in public matches via the lack of QoL in solo queue and terrible matchmaking that forces good survivors to play with relatively bad ones on a consistent basis
This is the thing under the old system red rank basically = time spent online, so you had this odd mix of pros and potatoes.
Those potatoes were invaluable to the killer game, an exploitable weak link that kind of indirectly balanced even organized play.
MMR for survivor does a pretty good job of weeding out the potato in a lot of games. I find in solo queue, sure its harder than swf, generally my team mates know what to do and get it done.
Unless you are in the constant downward spiral of death due to bad team mates MMR hell scenario, which happens, MMR is pretty good for survivor.
With a well balanced survivor team, even a solo one, the ability to apply pressure by splitting up on gens usually outweighs a killers ability to apply pressure to all 4 survivors, not always but often enough.
So the solution is to remove a player, if you can't exploit a weak player then just remove one strong one ASAP. You've now rebalanced the game in your favour as killer.
This isn't every game but its often enough that survivors complain of being tunneled and killers complain of feeling overly pressured.
-
It can be more interesting than a lot of games that involve chasing.
Some of the most tense and interactive games I've had as both killer and survivor have involved playing around the hook/basement.
Game splay out in all kinds of ways some eventful some not. Is guarding a hook any more dull than sitting on 3x gens all game, you'd be amazed how many survivor games go like that regardless of what the killer is trying to do.
-
Its the MO of the entitled gamer.
There is one right way to play DBD and anyone who doesn't do that is toxic/malicious/purposefully ruining people's fun etc. etc.
I often find chases bland and repetitive, unless you are having dynamic chases that mix things up most people just run 4 times around the same rock then drop the pallet and rinse/repeat.
Its really mind numbing, often more so than playing around a hook/basement trying to out play a hook defending killer.
That's just me though and I switch my game up accordingly to how things are playing out.
A lot of people can't do that because they are stuck in the mindset that there is one way to play and only that one way and its only fun for everyone all the time.
Its exhausting trying to interact with people like that and fun killing.
-
@Rokjer said:
That some people get a reality out of their heads once and for all: we don't all want to be "good". Some just want to play original builds, have long games, not have to sweat and especially not to be bullied by the winning side. We don't all have a "problem", so to speak, with the hard-earned victory. It's a game. A GAME. And the MMR prevents this view of things.
My best memories in this game are from low MMR or old green ranks. As soon as we climb, it's just hell and I don't want to play this game anymore. I have NOTHING to gain from being a God in this game. No money, no reputation, no title.
So yeah, without going to wish for "baby" opponents, I want opponents as casual as me. What MMR definitely does not offer me.
This is my gripe with MMR. It’s for the no fun competitive gamer. The casual gamer who is in it for theme just gets chucked under the bus every game once they have a few wins.
High MMR competitive games play out the same every game. Its very underwhelming and often not that rewarding to play.
I don’t want easy games, I want thematic games which aren’t about squeezing every mechanic to its upmost in a 5min comp mode setting.
MMR fails to make that distinction, the rate you derank is definitely not proportional to the rate you rank up.
Its why I’m looking forward to custom mode bots, I want to just play for fun. Most other players aren’t much fun to play with and MMR is for them.
-
Well there is its called getting hit, its just being injured isn't the threat it should be and healing up is really easy.
-
@DBD_Pinhead said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2975286#Comment_2975286
You mean when keys could let whole teams escape with zero counterplay? That was the equivalent. Old moris fit into the horror concept that anyone can die at any time. Now they're a joke that survs use it as an excuse to tunnel through gens regardless of how a killer plays. They spend so much invested in how cool their character looks or plays some people act like they're going to die in real life because of a cinematic 3rd hook. Even this new Mori rework will be just adding the Cypress Mori to the basekit in a new environment. Unless you're playing Myers or PH, they don't have teeth.
While keys had counter play so I don't really agree with you on that, I do miss old moris.
They were scary, facing a killer with a mori meant you didn't want to be caught. It often changed games from waste the killer's time to try and get away from the killer. The latter is much more thematic and enjoyable.
They were an elegant tool to humble even the most obnoxious PVP'ers into a scarier and more thematic game.
Now its all just obnoxious, unless you are going up against uber killbot guy or paired with complete potatoes, playing survivor is pretty safe most games, which kinda feels wrong.
-
@Exxodus21 said:
I don't think a survivor should be able to completely stop a killer. Survivors should suffer some sort of knock back or stumble effect for colliding with the killer.
Being able to bulldoze through survivors would definitely be more thematic.
I kinda like this idea.
-
Hawkins,
Original grittier UI,
Old moris.
-
@burt0r said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2976492#Comment_2976492
"DBD is the only place"?
Now just imagine any sport, for example basketball, and the match goes 25/0 for multiple sets.
And now imagine being on the losing side and getting told "good game" by the winners.
Does that feel good or sportsmanlike? At least i think not. It feels like an additional slap in the face. It obviously wasn't a good game but a one-sided slaughter and the winner didn't have a challenge and the loser not a chance. Empty or negative feelings for everyone involved.
A GG after something like that feels often like the "misery cherry" on top.
But in video games it has become the norm by now that only the victors say GG and the loser say nothing. I see it nearly every day in league and saw it in rocket league, rainbow 6 siege and overwatch.
Maybe not the only place then.
Good game can be offered as a commiseration too, its polite sportsmanship that says no hard feelings any outcome can be a good game. More so in a real life setting as in after a sporting event. You shake hands no matter what the outcome was. Sportsmanship. Is the winner taunting you by shaking your hand post game no.
I hate to say it but what you describe sounds like the very glass ego I'm talking about. Many people say GG win or loss.
-
DBD the only pace where even saying good game is an insult.
I love how the idea of simulated brutal murder doesn't offend folks but the mere idea that someone would have to audacity to be polite post game is just upsetting and disgusting.
I thought horror fans would have thicker skins than this, but I see that its really just a bunch of emotionally unstable glass egos.
Maybe rather than assuming gg is a taunt and upsetting yourself, say gg back and build a lil positivity in the online game experience.
-
DS is in a pretty good place right now, gone are the days of the DS/UB combo where it guaranteed 60s of total action immunity.
If someone with DS gets in your face then knock em down, you can then either eat the DS so they don't have it available in endgame or leave em on the ground and go for original target.
DS is at its most powerful in the endgame so if people do have it, its best to eat it early.
Nothing to get upset over.
-
@UnluckyDucky said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2972750#Comment_2972750
Finishing ONE GENERATOR is not "winning" the game you egg.
?? no idea what you are saying here, never said anything about finishing one gen being a win. ??
@UnluckyDucky said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2972750#Comment_2972750
Sounds like a lot of killers who highly utilize camping don't actually LIKE playing Dead by Daylight, they like ranking up. Because the main gameplay design of the game is to be chased and to chase--thats why theres so many perks around that. If it was designed for camping there would be perks that make camping better--"When standing within 5m of a hooked survivor all survivors within a 10m radius will have their auras revealed" yet we never see perks like that do we? Sounds like killers who boast the face-camping strategy just want to rank up and gather blood points, not play the game. Because if your TRUEST form of enjoyment is just standing in one spot watching someone die on hook, you'd really enjoy watching grass grow.
Its all just different gameplay, looping and chasing is just one part of the game. You could play immersive and try to avoid the killer all game.
You could play a gen defense game and just patrol three gens all game in the hope of securing a solid endgame 3 gen.
You can build for chasing, slowdown, endgame, basement defense and camping there are plenty of good camping builds.
There is a real mindset amongst players that there is one right way to play the game and any deviation from that is some kind of malicious attack on their fun. Frankly that's complete BS.
Some of the best games I've had as killer and survivor have involved a basement build where there is lots of playing around the shack, trading for hooks and very little actual prolonged chasing going on.
Any game can be fun if you take the ridiculous expectations of how it should be played and flush that thinking down the toilet.
PVP is dynamic people are gonna play in all different ways, your fun may not equal someone else's fun, if you want a consistent predictable game play experience then find a single player game and you'll get it.
This is why I'm excited for solo game bots in DBD, I can expect a consistent game experience which will likely often be more fun than the PVP experience.
Lastly the terms camping and tunneling are so overused at this point that it often doesn't matter what you do in game people will accuse you of it just because they lost and are pissy about it.
-
@Alionis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2972700#Comment_2972700
People say a lot of stupid stuff on here, it's nigh impossible to know whether someone is serious or joking.
Nothing on this forum is really serious. Lets look at what its about, a computer game that has no consequential outcome on the world other than fun had while playing.
People take this crap way to seriously.
-
@RockyCrayon6625 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2973106#Comment_2973106
So what you're saying is "don't bother adepting, just play for fun"?
This is not a bad mindset to have really, with respect to adepts.
The thing I don't get about these so called "achievements" is they are worthless, completely worthless.
People bend over backwards to get some phony badge in a game and its completely meaningless, most of then are just passive effects that you'll get over time if you just keep playing.
There is no real achievement about them whatsoever so why people crave them so hard baffles me.
If you just keep playing with the required perk loadout you'll eventually get it, is basically how adepts work.
I guess its doing its job, keeping people playing by making them strive for imaginary goals.
If you want to get it faster do what everyone else did tank your MMR by just letting everyone go till you get complete beginners and then stomp them for the adept.
-
There are a lot of players who's mindset is winning = fun.
Just watch how they melt down post game or on the forums because they didn't get their "fun" when often what they are saying is they didn't get their win.
-
Already a ton of good doc advice here.
Two builds I always enjoyed as the doc (less so now that Hawkins is gone)
Gen killer build
Distressing, unnerving presence, overcharge, pop/huntress lullaby. Lullaby tends to get cleansed quickly so you don't always get good use out of it. Stack double calm addons, or calm and disc. Max terror radius, small map offering if you wanna be mean.
Good starter build but gets less valuable as you go up in rank because most players can hit any skill check eventually. Relies on gen kicking which is meh. When it does work you'll need earplugs to reduce the constant sound of gens exploding.
Madness/chase build
STBFL, PWYF, Whispers, Iron Maiden/distressing/pop/NOED etc. Disc and Restraint addon. Spam your blast to find people, chase and shock the obsession till stage 3 then go to town on everyone else. The goal is to find people and down them quickly or max out their madness, wound them and move on to the next.
Its not as good in the current chase extending/COH meta without any slowdown to counter the split up and hyper focus on gens but is still usable. You could swap out STBFL with maybe starstruck as STBFL isn't what it used to be.
EDIT: As an M1 killer with timing required for anti loop he gets right royally screwed by latency and hit validation, keep that in mind when timing shocks and attacks.
-
Quick Summary.
Killer meta perks waah!
Survivor meta perks yay!
I lost not fair waah!
Saves you having to read the whole thing 🤢.
-
Yeah its pretty silly.
I think the complaint comes from trying to juggle the spread pressure of 4x people working on 1 gen each. Its just the most efficient way to complete the survivor objective while maximizing pressure on the killer, so you should anticipate survivors splitting up on gens.
The flip side is also true eliminating a survivor early taking it to 3v1 ASAP maximizes the pressure on the survivors in the most efficient manner for killer. It should be anticipated that the first person found will likely be the first person eliminated.
Both are equally valid gameplay if wanting to go for the win as efficiently as possible.
EDIT: I should qualify that I often think finishing 3 gens for 1 chase is a bit much, but that's a developer issue not a player issue.
-
I think half the posters here take this stuff too seriously.
I mean wow look at some of the comments, people talking about having...
"the tools to make informed strategic decisions." <- the unkown and the threat is half the fun you aren't a general in a war you are a camp counselor at crystal lake.
"Baseline abilities to counter it camping every game" <- have my cake and eat it too argument, I want to bring my uber looping build and get even unsafe hook saves for free.
"its exploiting major game flaws" <- how so, its possible to save against it unlike true face camping of old where you could body block the save. Its exploiting game design no more than say looping, which exploits smaller hit box for max advantage and unintended but now accepted gameplay. 360's which work only because of screen stutter and lag. locker flashlight tech I got more but I'll stop.
"it guarantees wins" <- only against people who aren't very good at the game, kinda like "gen rushing" guarantees wins against killers who aren't very good at the game. (Actually nothing guarantees wins but its a nice excuse to use rather than looking at your own gameplay).
My favorite is "why not just let me finish my gen" <- man I hate it when my opponent doesn't let me win.
Sheesh, camping works because people like you lot get so triggered by it that you make stupid plays and end up handing the killer kills, that's basically it.
The are games where I'm outclassed by the survivors, so I switch it up to hook defense over chasing and what happens... everyone gets all in my face because they are triggered by it and I end up with 4 downs with no extra gens done.
Its often a better option than chasing in a lot of scenarios, but the game elements that lead to that aren't people's concern they just want to punish camping because hey they don't like it.
Yeah its not much fun to hang on a hook all game, but that's a core game mechanic camping or not. At some point you are going to hang on a hook, that may happen for your whole game.
@Crowman said:
There's nothing wrong with it and there are always situations where camping is just the best play.
People just need to get over themselves. Camping does not equate to being a bad killer.
Best quote here. The only thing that makes a player bad is getting triggered by gameplay and acting like a sore loser as a result, regardless of which side they are playing.
-
@Alionis said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2949229#Comment_2949229
That assumption is ridiculous, the tome challenges were determined weeks before he got any press, as you put it.
comedic irony isn't your strong suit is it?
-
that's your loss. you might have learned something.
But read it or don't read it doesn't matter, I'm not your mum.
-
@Deathstroke said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2970242#Comment_2970242
If survivors bring cakes and you dominate the game you don't have to be toxic. You can play it fairly so they can get some points too as they gave you lot of free bp.
Sure I agree, but at the same time nobody owes you anything for bringing a cake offering.
Also again what was listed by the OP isn't toxic its just gameplay.
The only thing toxic in this post is the OP calling people scumbags because they don't play how he wants them too. That's genuine toxicity and again the great irony of this whole thread.
-
@_AdamFrancis_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2970463#Comment_2970463
Also your just mad that I called you out lol
@_AdamFrancis_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2970463#Comment_2970463
I know I said your a scumbag if you play a certain way, because you are trying to ruin other players fun.
You can play how you want but if you are trying to ruin other players fun by denying points and altering your playstyle in an unfun way, your a scumbag.
But the caveat of this is you are assuming all those playstyles you listed are someone purposefully trying to ruin your fun, but that's completely unfounded.
All you do in your OP is list a bunch of gameplay that you don't like and then imply anyone who does those things is purposefully ruining your fun and is a scumbag.
The problem is you expect people to play DBD a certain way, even moreso when its 2x bloodpoints, and if they don't then they are purposefully trying to ruin your fun and are scumbags.
All those things are just people playing a game, no one is out to spoil your fun you ego maniac.
"Camping, tunneling, gen rushing, selfish gameplay, all of it should stop so lil adamfrancis can get his double bloodpoints waah." See how silly it is.
I realize projection of emotion is a reactionary defence mechanism, hence the "you're just mad yourself lol" reply. That's fine you assume whatever you need to in order to pad your ego.
My suggestion is stop getting your nickers in a twist about gameplay and just play it out. Also stop attacking other players because you didn't get what you wanted in game.
You'd have a lot more fun, and probably be a lot more fun, if you stopped imagining other people's gameplay to be a purposeful attack on your fun.
But introspection isn't your strong suit is it? That's very obvious, especially after that stop complaining git gud thread of yours, which goes hand in hand with this I'm gonna complain and get all defensive because other players ruined my game thread.
Nobody owes you a farm, a break, or even a "fun" game as you define it simply because its a 2x bloodpoints event.
-
@DangerScouse said:
If I know I'm not as good as I think I am, can I still complain?
Only if your complaining is as good as the OP thinks it should be, otherwise no.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2970230#Comment_2970230
"suppose a killer get 8 hooks but kills nobody every single game. are you saying that killer is winning every match despite fact that 4 survivor are escaping every single match?"
Absolutely. Hooks are way more reflective of how well the killer played than kills.
"At what point does the survivor lose by hooks? It would be entirely subjective for how many hooks the killer needs to win."
The game doesn't say "you won" or "you lost". That's entirely player interpretation. What the game does do is tell you how well you played through pips and category scoring. So "at what point does the survivor lose by hooks?" is actually an irrelevant question, it's how well they played.
"I'm pretty sure that most players would agree that a killer player that gets 2 kills on average is better than a killer player that gets 0-1 kill on average. "
Actually I'm pretty sure the average player would agree that the person who gets 8 hooks is better than the person that got 2 kills.
"NOED and hook bombing is a reflection of game balance."
They don't. They get you kills, but they are not a reflection of skill or how well the game is balanced. Kills is not equal to skill or game balance. Yes, that's what the devs "think", but that's not actually accurate and why their game currently has so many balance problems in the first place.
"the other two win conditions(slugging and camping) were put on the side."
Those can exist in the game. The whole reason we're disagreeing is because you're going by the devs win condition which to me is flawed and incorrect in principle.
"I'm sure perk does increase kill-rate when it is used but it is probably not as high as you would imagine in regards to overall kill-rate for killers."
Most the high end community players I know would disagree with you. The devs also tend to lump all kill rates together and don't regularly separate high from low brackets. Most the data we do have is also data that's non mmr era data which is relevant.
I think you have some good points here.
I agree completely that the escape/kill metric is bad one for win condition and worse for mmr given how inflated these two metrics can be. The old ranking at least took contribution into account with the emblem system.
Maybe contribution weighted by kill/escape would be a better metric.
While 8 hooks and no kills is probably more indicative of ‘winning’ play than 2 hooks for 2 kills, kills are far more satisfying than hooks making them the goal post in most players minds and probably rightly so just from a game experience perspective.