pseudechis
pseudechis
About
- Username
- pseudechis
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
If you haven't unlocked BBQ and Chili through the shrine then I say Leatherface.
BBQ&C is a great perk for lessening the grind on all killers and indirectly survivors because BP's pool.
LF is also a great killer, his chainsaw is powerful and useful in both chases and hook/gen defense.
He's also a licensed killer so better to spend your cells on that rather than ones you can get for free with shards.
I believe you will get a shard bonus for LF when they remove his free mask cosmetics next patch so he comes with 6K shards. (You should confirm this though, don't just take my word for it).
I'd second Myers because he is so much fun to play, not the strongest but if you know your way around killer he can hold his own and his addons have some great stuff to mix up the game play. His perks are also pretty good across the board on many killers.
-
@The_Krapper said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2755597#Comment_2755597
The perk literally stalls the game and gives the killer a hand because people who are bad in chase keep resetting and good survivors don't run COH they don't have to it's literally a time staller that takes what would've been a 5 minute match into a 10 minute match , sure it's aggravating as a killer when you get people that play that way but it doesn't benefit them it benefits you by giving more time to catch them, COH is a good perk for a bad survivor who is scared to be injured on a gen , good survivors will run perks like iron will dead hard adrenaline and resilience/spine chill and they will just gen rush you to adrenaline they for sure aren't gonna hunt for a totem and waste time blessing and healing before they focus gens
This is kinda true, but COH now creates the scenario where everyone still runs their chase extending adrenalin builds but one person has COH, so if the game does start to snowball its really easy, and quick, to reset and have 4x fully healed survivors at 1-2 gens left.
Unless you are a high mobility killer or have an insta down its an uphill battle at that point.
I don't think the time sink is enough to really benefit the killer unless they are already applying great pressure on the survivors in which case CoH probably isn't going to do much anyway. The moment for any reason you take your foot off the gas as killer though it has a really big impact disproportionate to the cost of bringing it.
-
Its not really that big of a time sink though to bless a totem.
Boons overall aren't that bad an idea its just they were implemented in a ham-fisted way.
Basically hexes are strong, they are high risk high reward and once they are gone... they are gone.
Boons are high reward relatively little to no risk because you can just keep relighting them indefinitely. They also benefit the entire team so you basically give a 5th/6th perk effect to your team mates by running them.
CoH is the main problem because it means you either continually commit to even bad chases or drop chase and lose all pressure in seconds because everyone has self healing. Its kind of a lose/lose.
I mean hex undying and ruin combo was nerfed into the ground because of its great synergy when first released and it didn't take that long for it to be changed. Boons require no synergy at all and should probably get the same treatment, either a long cooldown or limited use via tokens.
Time is often a much bigger crunch for the killer so the time to bless totems isn't really equivalent to the time to snuff them, especially when you add in the janky collision that can often take 1-2 goes to line yourself up properly and get the prompt.
All this kind of reeks of poorly thought out design in need of at least some changes.
-
I ate about 40 or so 4 escapes split across the three killers I mainly play Myers, Trapper and LF before games started to feel not super sweaty for even a couple of hooks.
Now games swing wildly between me stomping and getting stomped with a very rare close fun game in the middle.
I don't think the SBMM was an improvement because it doesn't really seem to have fixed anything other than matching you with other good survivors when playing solo.
-
Seems like every time you grab someone from a locker these days they accuse you of hacking or stream sniping.
Its often pretty obvious when people have jumped in a locker even without killer instinct tracking.
Last one I had was as Myers, someone doing the gen on saloon balcony. I heard the locker door as I went up the stairs, so I kicked the gen and then grabbed the survivor.
Reported for stream sniping along with a bunch of other accusations. Its getting tiresome.
-
If you read through the thread the number 1 complaint is “I die to tombstone sometime in my first interaction with the killer and that’s annoying”. That’s not a terrible thing that’s just the nature of the game.
One of the best deaths I’ve had yet has been tombstone Myers on the game map. They were hanging in the shadows by a hooked survivor I walked around a corner going for the unhook and bam was grabbed and killed. It was a great jump scare that really got me.
That’s kind of the key, basically people play a game where they could die but then get pissy and tantrum when they do. I don’t get pissy when I die because it’s a game and if I die thematically to a mori then all the better because the animations are great. since the nerf you rarely see them anymore it’s a shame.
To counter tombstone piece the goal becomes not chase and loop as usual but deny Myers stalk it changes the game up and that’s refreshing.
I think tombstone piece and tombstone are some of the best add ons given how they change the game up. Purple and iri add ons should be impactful and these are.
If it makes you angry to die to it then maybe you need to step back a moment because it really shouldn’t. Every time they water down strong add ons because people get pissy about dying the game gets more generic. The game play gets stale as every game is the same loop, pallet, rinse repeat regardless of killer or power.
-
@Grandpa_Crack_Pipe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756406#Comment_2756406
Neither am I.
Taking fun into account is very clearly possible because it very definitely happens, but my problem starts when people scoff and put up quotation marks whenever """"fun"""" factors into changing anything, like it's some fairy tale told by liars to baby game developers.
Except people clearly can figure out what's generally fun and what isn't somehow, because we're still playing video games for some reason. Hope the "fun doesn't mean anything for balancing" crowd enjoy their validation and Dead Hards.
And you might be surprised to hear that i'm in favor of changing DH and a lot of other things that absolutely suck for killer, for balance and for fun.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756407#Comment_2756407
You're playing a horror game. Everyone else is playing a multiplayer game. Asym or not, you play against other players and expect a fair shot.
You're here for an entirely different reason than almost every other player. But as long as you're having fun, go wild.
Yeah and in that lies the problem. People would be fine with almost anything if the killer was a really hard to beat computer.
But because its PVP everyone's sensibilities get hurt constantly and we have to pander to the sore losers and make everything fair rather than exciting.
I hope they make custom game bots one day because frankly PVP blows.
-
@Grandpa_Crack_Pipe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756283#Comment_2756283
But can you see why everyone else hates it?
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756290#Comment_2756290
"People tend to have more fun when winning and less fun when losing" is true.
"Therefore, ######### everyone and don't even try to make it fun" is not a good place for this thought process to lead.
You can't make losing fun for everyone, but you at least need to make it as fair and interactive when you can, because "I lost due to being bad" and "I lost due to total bullshit I had no control over" hit at completely different severities.
Tombstone piece falls squarely into the latter. It breaks the conventions of the game over its knee, skips the fun, makes the enjoyable part of the game an 'avoid at all costs' and generally feels like a total robbery.
I'd rather it got evaporated from existence and Michael got some well-needed buffs to rocket him up the tier lists, but I get the feeling you want an outlet than you want something reasonable, so you've still got it.
Go nuts, bud.
Yeah but it just seems so silly and childish to hate on it because you might potentially get eliminated by it in an elimination game.
There is this real mentality that it all has to be fair all the time or somehow its not fun, but in asymmetric survival horror its not really meant to be fair.
The "fairer" it gets the more boring it gets because I want Halloween not Scooby Doo. Like I said people want safe chases not intense scary chases and that just sucks gameplay wise given the game's theme.
-
@Grandpa_Crack_Pipe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756234#Comment_2756234
No, it's only fun when it's interactive.
Blight and Oni are some of the most dangerous killers in the game to be around, far more so than Michael. Yet they're agreed on to be some of the most fun killers to go against. They're not safe, and yet they're fun.
Tombstone Michael is not fun, and not safe either. He's uninteractive. He walks at you, left clicks and instantly removes you from the match. He's not dreaded because he's sCaaAaaRy, he's dreaded because you're now guaranteed to have a gross frankensteined half-match where you skip the fun part to get right to the dead part as soon as you do anything with the killer.
Again-- what's usually the fun part.
He's not scary, or horrifying. That's you trying to flavor away the fact that your favored playstyle plain blows fat pog logs for everyone that isn't you and appropriately hates it.
Hey each to their own but it is interactive just in a more intense way.
I for one really enjoy facing tombstone myers as survivor because its flee or be killed not just flee to waste time.
Chases often feel so safe as survivor that there really is no threat from the killer at all. Myers takes that and tips it on its head. You can't even finish a gen in his face because you may die and that's how it should be.
I'm scared of the terror radius rather than wait till the last minute and here comes the loopy train. Its a much better game.
-
@Mileena_Kahn said:
If you’re playing killer and you’re playing in a scummy way such as shaking you head no, hitting on hook, camping the whole game, tunneling one person the entire match, and slugging to death, why do you get mad if survivors manage to get the gates open and teabag you? I understand the killers that play normally and still get teabagged, that’s understandable… but to the others (which is about 70% of the killer players), why? You kinda deserve it.
Frankly nothing you listed is scummy its just part of the game.
To view it as scummy and use it as some kind of justification for being abusive is more scummy than what you listed.
BM'ing shouldn't insult people either, because basically its just other people mashing buttons on their equipment and I'm supposed to feel bad, well good luck with that.
I think everyone needs to stop making the game so personal all the time. They also need to stop justifying being obnoxious to others simply because they choose to take everything so personally.
This is part of the reason I want a solo play mode because I think its far to much to expect the player base to grow up a bit at this point.
I'd rather game with bots than most of the take everything personally or too seriously, entitled, childish, tantrum throwing sore losers that make up a huge number of the player base.
-
I think it speaks volumes about the player base that people are wondering if folks should be gracious for displays of sportmaship or just niceties in general as opposed to being flat out abused after every game.
People should have the ability to say GG even if not given the hatch. Because it doesn't matter its a game.
-
@Grandpa_Crack_Pipe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2756160#Comment_2756160
Because most tier lists don't assume you're running Tombstone Piece literally every single game.
He doesn't suddenly become nurse, he's still an M1 killer and thus beatable, it just kinda sorta incredibly blows to get suddenly booted back to the main menu with little to no warning or input.
Someone gets booted, and the rest of the team gets the message "don't interact with the killer ever".
Which is usually the fun part.
Sort of in addition to what I responded above. The idea of "don't interact with the killer" once people figure out its tombstone some how being unfun.
Interacting with the killer is the fun part but you see from most people's posts its only fun if its really safe to do.
The moment its actually threatening and horrifying its not "fun" anymore. People don't want killer interaction they want "safe" killer interaction. Predictability with lots of second chances.
Which is a lackluster experience game wise and makes every game the same dull loopy chase experience. Its an exercise in tedium over thematic gameplay.
-
@Grandpa_Crack_Pipe said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2755913#Comment_2755913
Gameplay over flavor.
But its not really because the high stakes gameplay is part of the flavor, why even run from the killer if its so safe to be around them.
-
@Nathan13 said:
So far seems like 95% people here think it should be changed. I like Shino’s suggestion.
That's a shame as every time something is really threatening or unpredictable it tends to get complained about and watered down.
We shouldn't want the exact same survivor playstyle to be effective against every killer because that is really dull. The game becomes loop, pallet, rinse, repeat or sit on a gen. Every game the same regardless of killer.
Tombstone Myers is fun because he's threatening. A chase against him is high stakes and may result in insta death. You have to break line of sight to deny stalk, you have to be aware of your surroundings while working on a gen. You can't just circle the same pallet then run to your boon spot and reset the wound pressure with a quick heal.
The great thing about powerful killer addons and powers is that they make the killer threatening and as a result the game scarier. That's the whole point of survival horror.
-
Tombstone piece, and just full tombstone, Myers is this game as it should be.
He's creepy and threatening when he runs it, real horror.
I fail to see how anyone could find it annoying other than they want a non horror scooby doo loopy chase experience rather than a Halloween survival horror experience.
I prefer the latter as survivor and killer.
-
@Akumakaji said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2754263#Comment_2754263
Thanks! That was were that quote actually came from! All the classical Duke quotes are homages to some flicks, but the Duke is what I associate them with.
Yeah I know, I just like spreading some 80's B movie joy in case folks haven't heard of it before.
-
Custom game bots, take all the negative social element out of this game, which lets face it is the source of 90% of the lackluster play experience.
-
@Akumakaji said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2752525#Comment_2752525
Oh awesome. A Duke Nukem reference. Haven't heared one of those in ages.
They Live - 1988 - Roddy Piper.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2750806#Comment_2750806
These tactics are so strong, It doesn't take a good killer to win.
That doesn't counter my point.
In fact it supports it, if you are losing to bad killers then you probably aren't very good at survivor.
Camping works because alturistic teams feed it or can't coordinate a rescue.
-
@Ecstasy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2751240#Comment_2751240
Slashers should have stayed dead and buried.
Even in that realm of mediocre hollywood releases, I'll take a "13 Ghosts" or "Anaconda" every day of the week over "Urban Legends" or Last ######### Summer.
That first Scream was something special, but I couldn't imagine watching it today. Anything it had to say about the genre got run into the ground at least 20 years ago.
The sequels are hollow, hypocritical mess that shouldn't exist in the first place. The only redeeming value is some meta irony to fulfilling the same path of the horror they set out to criticize by doing the exact same commercial horror crap--and worse from giving its 3 leads super plot armor--while chugging out sequel after sequel of forgettable tertiary characters to slaughter until the whole franchise finally drops dead from exhaustion.
Hard truth is slashers as a whole have always been one of the weakest and laziest genre branches despite their popularity.
Lot of animosity toward slasher films here, as I said before though each to their own.
I'm afraid to say but just because you don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. Anaconda and 13 ghosts while entertaining are by no means much better than some slasher flicks. I can think of several that are head and shoulders above them.
I agree with you that king's comment is over interpretting the value of scream as a film in terms of genre.
It begs the question also why do you play DBD? A game based on the very genre you are railing against seems odd. I'm not having a go I'm genuinely curious.
-
@KingSlay3R2928 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2751292#Comment_2751292
It redefined slashers, it took what everyone thought the knew about slahers and threw it out the window. It also revitalized the genre as well. To say it didn't is ridiculous and well, just plain wrong.
It brought teen slasher flicks back to prominance at a time when they were waning as a genre but it didn't redefine much.
The slasher "who dunnit" and meta styles had been done before, it was just brought back to prominance by the original scream film and then done to death 3 times over with the sequels. Only the second one is remotely comparable to the first, even then the cinema death scene at the begining is so over the top its beyond ridiculous.
Films that run either a "who dunnit" and/or meta style include
Graduation day, Prom night, peeping tom, Black Christmas, my bloody valentine, the original friday the 13th, also friday the 13th a new beginning, and wes craven's a new nightmare often seen as a precursor that influences scream.
What scream had over these films was a cast that was popular at the time. This sets it apart as most slasher films have a B actor list or unknown actor list because they often don't review well.
It also parodies the genre somewhat and calls out some of the misogynistic elements of 70s-80's slasher flicks. Which is more a reflection of the 90's than a redefining of the horror genre. Most of the copy cat slasher films it influenced still had the same tired tropes, I know what you did last summer, urban legend etc.
Scream also homages a few precursor flicks such as when a stranger calls.
Its an ok film with a slowly declining series of sequels like any slasher franchise. It doesn't redefine much its just the best of the 90's slashers which isn't saying much as the 90's is kinda bereft of good slasher films in general.
-
@GuyFawx said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2751240#Comment_2751240
The only defining characteristic of a B movie is basically a low budget. Saying they hold up also isnt really a counter argument. The scream movies have always had a average budget with more put into sales than what we usually saw in a horror film. They have always been touted as the mash up of ideas with it know its sucess is based on horror fans. Sure they have been scrounging foe ideas to keep the audience guessing and its only saving grace atm is basically the fact the horror genre is seemingly dwindling. They definately brought back the slashers into the spot light where halloween basically started it. Never the less tho scream is shot sometimes like it was a low budget b movie which is why dewey was usually so dopey.
Yeah this is a good assessment of them as films.
-
@KingSlay3R2928 said:
Comparing the Scream movies to B-Horror movies? Seriously? The movies especially the first 3 still hold up really well. The first movie revitalized the slasher genre and pretty much set the standard for slashers for a very long time. If you think the movies make less and less sense then LOL
I'll get a mop for the fanboy gush.
Jokes aside and each to their own, the first one not bad the second weak but still not bad the third is terrible and definitely B-grade, just a bad movie all round.
Genre defining not really, maybe indicative of the 90's moreso than slasher genre defining. Definitely some good notches in Wes Cravens already substantial arsenal of horror films.
-
@Sluzzy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2738090#Comment_2738090
He slugged a lot and tinkerer told him where the others were at.
so they played well and you didn't that is all.
-
Maybe you're just not that good at survivor and have yet to reconcile with it.
That goes for folks blanket agreeing with a lot of these suggestions too, which from a mechanic stand point are really unbalanced and just kinda bad.
-
Want to avoid the ban... stop DC'ing simple.
-
@Bwsted said:
I mean, it's not like they're gonna die for real.
I'm not sure its fear so much as tension.
The game can often feel more desperate and tense as killer than as survivor which just seems a little off given the theme.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2745138#Comment_2745138
His argument's not wrong, though. It is the combination of Smartface Bubba and facecamping that has caused an uproar. Facecamping can be done without the Smartface mask and the effect on gameplay is the exact same as if the mask were still there.
Harassment isn't just appearance, it's actions. I doubt a Smartface Bubba standing around on a map doing nothing is seen as harassment the way a facecamping Bubba is.
This whole argument is unnecessary, though. The devs are actually working to remove facecamping from the game and have been working on it for a long time. It's not an easy fix. They even talked about it in one of their most recent dev updates. Removing the masks is easy and can be done right now. My issue with this whole thing is that nothing is being added to replace the masks and we're losing over half of Bubba's non-default masks. I don't like any of the remaining ones, and that sucks for people like me who like wearing the Meg and Dwight masks. If I'm losing those, I want new earnable cosmetics.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2745154#Comment_2745154
The Doctor: https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Herman_Carter
Under his nationality it says "African American."
I was right about The Hag, she is also African American: https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Lisa_Sherwood
In case you were curious, The Wraith is Nigerian: https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Philip_Ojomo
Yes and no. Face camping can be done without wearing the smart face but that doesn't make it inherently harassment.
To say face camping is harassment and want changes on that basis is just ridiculous. We could say anything in this game that inhibits my sense of participation, and hence fun, could be construed as some sort of targeted harassment. You then have a recipe to ban anything you may find unfun simply because you personally feel harassed by it.
A lot of this game contains elements that might make people feel victimized, targeted or triggered. Its a game where you chase down and kill relatively helpless opponents ala slasher films. Survivors also have a number of mechanics that when working together can also inhibit a killers ability to play as they may want to, hence the term bully squad becoming common use.
Should we then ban anything and everything in game that could be used as a tool to inhibit another player's fun?
Smart face didn't have an impact on the game mechanically but it was a tool for some players to advertise their motivation to harass others.
Even without this element there were some red flags about the bubba faces, in particular smart face, that rode a very fine line and its no real surprise that the more ignorant and malicious among the community would try to use it in that manner. (Its a sad truth and it bums me out too that this ######### is still an issue in 2022).
The problem was smart face... not face camping and BHVR addressed it in the most straightforward way possible just remove the masks and compensate the gamers who'd unlock them with some shards. Its the same as censoring hate speech in the chat. Report abuse if you see it and hopefully if its identified as hate speech people will be appropriately banned.
If you are face camped my advice is hang there and buy as much time as possible for your team to escape. Think of it as your heroic sacrifice in the face of adversity. If the killer stares you in the face nodding at you then take it the same way as people who BM you at the gates, childish crap best ignored.
-
@TragicSolitude said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2742998#Comment_2742998
Hmm... I wanna see if I can break this argument down into its most basic parts, making it as clinical as possible. Correct me if I get it wrong.
The combination of Bubba's Smartface mask and facecamping are used to target and harass minority players. It is not fun to be facecamped as it prevents a player from participating in the match.
Not all people who wear Smartface are acting in a racist manner; most are just wearing the cosmetic because they like it. Also, not all facecampers are doing it to be racist; most are just playing the game. Despite this, Bubba's Smartface mask and only Bubba's Smartface mask is being removed from DbD.
Bubba's Smartface mask has no impact on gameplay. Being facecamped is the part that feels like targeted harassment by preventing participation.
"Being facecamped is the part that feels like targeted harassment by preventing participation"
This is kind of it, it seems the argument is, I'm mad about face camping rather than I'm mad about actual harassment.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2742174#Comment_2742174
Again. I don't think you do, because you either have never played survivor enough to understand how you can harass people by face-camping them with Leatherface and rendering them unable to participate in the match, or you are just unaware.
The key part is that I am just bringing light to what was done to harass the player, because wearing the mask in and of itself wouldn't have revealed people's motives had they not stated why they did what they did which was target those people AND face-camp them in some instances.
The mere fact that this happened only further confirms what has already been talked on these forums thousands of times, that face-camping is too unbalanced and it only encourages players to use it for harassment purposes.
You are making assumptions again. This time about me as a person and player.
Even if camped you are still playing the game, chases and gens aren't the only part of the game.
Face camping alone isn't harassment, its just a scenario that can play out in the game.
The argument that its a tool for use as harassment is weak at best because that argument can be made about many game elements. Just because people face camped others in some targeted scenario does not immediately mean all face camping is some kind of targeted harassment.
The problematic element of this in terms of harassment was the mask and that has been addressed.
It sounds like you are angrier at being facecamped than you are about actual harassment.
EDIT: I also realize you qualify this in your original post but your whole argument is kinda based on it at the same time its contradictory.
-
@Zephinism said:
I'm at well over 1K hours and only times I fear the killer are when I get the exposed status affect against Ghostie or with Haunted Grounds midchase. Counting down those last seconds hoping the killer doesn't get a hit in can be exhilarating. T1 Myers/Shackle Hag are also 'scary' but in a different way and I don't think people fear them more than find their heartrate jumps.
Other killers aren't to be feared once you've played against them a couple of times imo and I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.
Its not really a good thing that most M1 killers aren't much to be feared.
Its survival horror I want to fight to survive not loopy waste killer time. Sadly as you go up in mmr its more and more of the loopy with the occasional scary game.
I find good tension games are jumpscare Myers, infinite T2 tombstone Myers, shackles hag, insidious bubba, NOED endgame, Insta hatchet Huntress, insta down clown. Games where chases and situations are genuinely threatening rather than tediously played out.
-
@Johnny_XMan said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2742015#Comment_2742015
Where did anyone say face-camping = a hate crime?
If you actually bothered to read, you would see that no one said that. The context in which it was brought up was that it is relative to the action which took place during the harassment. Which is that because of the way Leatherface's power currently works, there is nothing that survivor can do against it when face-camping. Thus they (the people harrassing) opt to use it to target certain groups.
Maybe learn to understand what is actually being said before you comment next time.
I fully understand what was said.
Do you attribute tunneling to some targeted racially motivated action, how about flashlight clicking, BM’ing?
its completely assumptive.
If you want to discuss the mechanics of camping and its impact on the game that is different from “face camping is a tool used by people to harass others”
Half the mechanics in this game could be described as tools used to harass others.
The key part of the recent changes is the removal of what was basically blackface bubba. It rode a fine line.
Camping, in particular face camping, is still going to be around and unless someone puts it to you post game that they camped because of some targeted harassment. You have no idea what their motivation is.
-
I’ve heard it all now facecamping is a hate crime Jesus Christ.
The level of overreaction to camping has hit a new threshold.
Comparing a completely inconsequential tedious element in a video game to a hate crime is just beyond belief.
-
I don't get why it has great skill checks that boost the timer that's all.
-
@onekingbee said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740474#Comment_2740474
Personal reflection is always a good thing, and you raise a good point. Maybe it's the matchmaking, or the constant sweat of the game, but some things wear a guy down. I'm not some pro player, just a casual player that wants a fun experience, and the ability to choose to leave when I want to, but spoiling others fun is not a side effect I want to have upon the game either. Maybe a "sweaty" mode and a "casual" mode need to be an option for matchmaking.
I'm pretty casual gamer myself and the highly competitive, and often obnoxious, players of this game can get under my skin too.
Unfortunately match making penalties are a necessity because you've seen the game when they switch them off its a DC bonanza.
First down DC, totem cleansed DC, lose first chase DC, first hook DC it gets nuts. There are some really unfun sweaty games sometimes but its online PVP there isn't much you can do about it other than recognise when its getting under your skin and step back for a moment.
Personally I'd enjoy this game more if it had custom bots and I could just play it solo offline once in a while, especially if I'm not feeling sociable which is often.
-
There is a difference between not expecting to win and not trying to win.
I think better way to word the same advice would be "before playing anything competitively learn to cope with loss."
Its fun to win but some people's fun is defined by winning. They make the worst people to play against because when they don't win they also don't have fun and usually try to ruin everyone elses fun along the way.
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740305#Comment_2740305
Yup.
I swear, about half my frustrations with killer at present spin out of the way survivors act. It's...oddly dehumanizing at times.
Yeah I get where you are coming from here.
Its a great game let down by a truely abysmal community.
-
@onekingbee said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2740461#Comment_2740461
Again, not my point. My point is I shouldn't be told to stay in a toxic game, or be penalized if I leave. If course I've rage quit, so has everyone else who's commented in this thread, but that's not what I'm saying. And I'm aware I can just die on hook, but what if I just want to quit a shite game? And it's not "so called" toxic behavior, of course camping is toxic.
The only thing toxic here is your attitude towards the game.
This is not a personal attack, just a moment for some personal reflection.
Basically if you are rage quitting because there is some element of gameplay you don't like... then the problem is you.
-
My favourite part of this
" I love spending a couple hundred bucks on a game to be told how to play it," While telling killers how to play by saying don't camp.
Also you don't have to DC against camping you can die on hook and leave the game.
I don't think you are DC'ing because of so called "toxic" killer behaviour, I think you are DC'ing because you don't want to die and that's called rage quitting.
The DC penalty punishes people who rage quit as it should.
-
Probably when they've sold enough Mikaela Reids.
-
Its a gamble like anything.
Bringing an offering does not guarantee a farm game, it doesn't entitle anyone to a farm game, an escape or "Fair" play, it doesn't mean you deserve hatch or hooks or even the slightest reward for it.
What will you get from streamers is a BP bonus that will apply to you and others that's all. Gamewise anything can and will still happen and expecting otherwise is a recipe for dissapointment.
This is why I want a solo mode
Because everytime anything happens in this game that the other side remotely doesn't like, they didn't get full value from their offering, they lost their item, they died early, they didn't get any hooks, they got camped, they got tunneled, they got flashlight blinded, hook sabo, body blocked etc etc etc. Then its an affront to their sense of fun and the greatest gaming crime even commited.
EDIT: I should clarify that this community can be exhausting and often I'd rather play this great game on my own in a solo mode then be thrust into game after game with these just bad attitude players.
-
Becoming accustomed and desensitising is one thing, sure you may not be scared of the killer in that way but you should at least find them threatening. That alone keeps it tense.
Problem isn’t that killers aren’t scary it’s that their just not threatening, surprising or unpredictable enough.
When they are, people complain that they have no counter play but that’s what makes the game interesting. If every killer can be countered and played around by the same loopy chase you get dull predictable killers, repetitive game play and a stale meta.
That’s where we are at.
-
@tester said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2736299#Comment_2736299
Thank you for another informative post Professor Pseudechis. I didn't expect to learn about Chi test today. So, I followed this description of test here https://support.google.com/docs/answer/7004263?hl=en
I don't pretend I fully understand it. But it looks like it needs 2 arrays: observed data and expected data. So I compared J column with 0.5. I had to add fake data in blue rows that had no data because I was getting error, so I added fake 4k and fake 0k in each. And the number I get is not what I expected. If I understand correctly, 1 is fair and 0 is not fair. I think I'm doing something wrong, but not sure what.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/YRCVOZ23VJKT/stats102-chi.jpg
I'd omit any killers you don't have results, chi squares don't deal well with 0 values and a high number of expected values that match will throw off the calculation. They also don't deal well with count data less than 5 in each sample so you need more games with each killer.
Yeah your two factor is going to be your expected outcome of 0.50 and your observed outcome.
Although I may have misled you a little here as the expected outcome is 2K/2E or draw. So you expect a peak in 2K/2E declining with 3-4K or 1-0K. What we have though is the inverse of that with wins 78, Draw 8, loss 24. To fit this against the expected 2k you are going to wind up with a huge chi square value given the inverse nature of the distribution compared to your expected. With that in mind chi square probably won't work very well here.
If we assume a normalized distribution based around a 2k/2e as the mean you could expect a frequency of win 0.25, draw 0.5, loss 0.25, the majority of the games are draws with a balanced probability of win/loss around that.
you'd expect to see an absolute frequncy of... loss 27.5, draw 55, win 27.5 from 110 games or thereabouts.
Observed though is 24, 8, 78 hugely skewed to win with a decline in the middle.
You could say that just looking at distribution of relative frequency that your game isn't balanced around 2k/2e from this sample set of data, or more likely SBMM corrects causing swings between wins and losses with a few "balanced" draws in between and a significant killer bias in outcome.
-
@tester said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2736098#Comment_2736098
Thank you. I converted win/loss column into percentages and also added a chart of matches with given number of kills. You right, percentages are better than ratios. I'm still amazed that we have such helpful and knowledgeable people here. I hope your hand health soon.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/ZUWRET5HVMHC/stats102.jpg
The other thing to be cautious about with this type of data is how its interpreted with respect to SBMM.
As a measure of SBMM there is only one consistant variable, you. There is no other data available about your opponents SBMM or even accurate measure of your own given the value is hidden. This creates a good data set with respect to your games but is a form of pseudo-replication on a larger scale because its confined by your personal SBMM and skill.
That means with respect to SBMM there is an N of 1 or a single consistent variable being measured which is you. So basically a single data point is unrealiable for broader interpretation.
What we can say from data like this though is that specifically in your match ups there is an over perfomance of killer. With the un-transformed numbers just looking at it I'd say you are sitting about 0.75 from a basic average calculation (Wins 4k+3K / Total games).
Its probably a significant trend given the numbers, how strong it is will be attenuated by sample size.
What can be gained from data like this,
- You do well as killer for a good range of killers, you've got the empirical data to show it too so Kudos to you. With respect to SBMM its probably not matching you as well as it could given the winning skew. However given the asymetric nature of the game and the reliance on teamwork from one side, a killer victory skew should be expected as the mechanics of killer are more consistant when compared to the variable nature of teamwork required on the survivor side. This is purely theorising but its what I'd expect so I wouldn't call a killer win skew unusual unless it was really skewed (>0.75).
- Unfortunately we don't have whether or not your opponents were teams or solos which is a confounding factor on perfomance. If you can get that info post game then its very valuable as I'd predict teams will positively/negatively drive win/loss ratio by a significant amount. The interaction co-efficient between these measures would be interesting as BHVR reported a 15% increase in wins by SWF.
- The game is not survivor sided, again however this doesn't mean its killer sided either, just with respect to you at your measured SBMM killer overperforms. You can draw conclusions from this but its very narrow and any suggestions on side bias, or buffs/nerfs, are spurious at best with this limitation.
- It adds value to your personal experience. For example "I get more kills than expected the SBMM may not be matching me well" here is my raw numbers to illustrate why I think this. That is valuable because end user experience is a big part of gaming.
What would make this data more valuable for wider interpretation.
100 players tracking 100 games each. Now you remove the pseudo-replication and have a nested measure of win/loss across killers, across players, across SBMM this is the minimum required to make any real suggestions about broader game balance. Taking into account relative SBMM rating and SWF would make it even more valuable.
How could you analyse this data to demostrate you are significantly overperforming as killer and make a solid point about your gameplay?
If we have an expected outcome of 2K/2E or 0.5 then you would compare your observed outcomes win/loss ratio against an expected 0.5 for each killer. A chi square analysis of observed vs expected would give you this. It can be calculated by hand if you are that commited and there are free online calculators where you just punch in the numbers and it will spit out your result, not the most accurate but hey its just for fun. This will tell you if your observed values are signifcantly greater than an expect balanced outcome based on sample size.
I know this is an essay but I just finished pulling apart my behavioural ecology invertebrate data consisting of about 2500 cells of data points nested across 7 field sites. A think tank exercise on game data interpretation was a bit of fun.
Cheers its my mouse hand so its really gimping my gaming.
-
@tester said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2736055#Comment_2736055
Holy crap I had to wait for 4 pages of replies for this! You are amazing! This is exactly the advice I needed. I'll research how to calculate error reduced mean in Google Sheets. Thank you very much!
I also don't get your W/L column. If its a win loss ratio given a win % then values should fall between 0 and 1. Also the raw data may not transform well given the sample size you'd probably want to transformn your win/loss percentage data for overall assessment.
Also forgive typing errors I have a broken hand.
-
Your interpretation of the data is counfounded by a few issues.
Firstly you have a heavy skew toward one end which will inflate total avergae in this case, median kill rate is probably a better measure for the overall kill rate rather than mean. There is also a lot of internal variance (especially sample size) amongst your descrete variable (killers) which will also increase error around the mean and reduce the accuracy of average.
For error reduced mean you'd want to log transform the data and take the transformed mean as this will give a more accurate measure of mid range. Looking at the numbers it will probably still fall on the killer side but likely not so inflated.
This is the problem with interpreting raw data at face value there are often caveates that mar conclusions. Its why statitics, while brutally boring, plays an essential part in data intpretation.
-
Its a bit of that sky is falling knee jerk reaction. There was a nerf and people just quit her, kind of like DS it still does its job, just it no longer gives you one minute of complete task immunity, so it went from every build to hardly used.
The legit reason though is she had an unpredictable mindgame that involved a lot of guesswork and was really in her favour. I didn't mind this because it was different and made her dangerous and fun to face.
Killers should be really threatening in chase and she was good but apparently many found that "unfun" so they wanted it nerfed to be the same as everything else. Because fairness means that the same looping works against every killer without any variety so every game is the same regardless of killer... but I digress.
She's till good but there is more directional information about her phasing making it kinda less useful than beofore and telegraphing when she's using her power making her more predictable. Which kinda sucks.
So her power became really used for mobility and short loops, but at long loops, which are the problem loops its not that great anymore. Its kind of a ######### change.
So people who really enjoy the unpredictability and baiting by using or not using the power felt the change is kinda meh and I don't blame them for trying something else. Is she weak overall no and she is still fun to play, but she is weaker than she was.
-
@AngyKiller said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2734443#Comment_2734443
Here's an idea:
Every Survivor hooked twice before the last generator pops is Exposed when the last generator pops. They are at their weakest, and the Entity is hungry for their souls. 😁
It would encourage Killers to spread out hooks so no Survivors are safe during the end-game! Less tunneling! 😇
That's not a bad idea
-
NOED is fine people need to stop getting upset because they died in the endgame.
You die early you tantrum, you die late you tantrum.
NOED is a great perk because it makes the endgame threatening. Most endgames are boring as piss because by that point you have won it unless you are on death hook and even then there is a pretty good chance to escape.
I wish NOED was built in when the EGC started everybody is exposed. That would make every game thrilling at the end.
-
@MrDardon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2733629#Comment_2733629
I don't listen to it while working, it plays in my head automatically.
I got that but even so my brain would probably pull something less tense out of the air to occupy my mind.
There is a lot of tension in that tune and that's what makes it so great for the chase.