pseudechis
pseudechis
About
- Username
- pseudechis
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
To avoid confusion remove the term tunneling, as its an arbitrary term used for a myriad of things, most of them BS, and its confounding your point.
A better point would be why is it ok to complain about killers playing very efficiently but not survivors playing very efficiently?
Well its not, but that's because both get complained about a lot from players on all sides.
However recently there has been a lot of vocalization about "tunneling" and when that happens sometimes silly fixes and changes get proposed that don't make any sense.
Basically the reason people moan about killers playing efficiently, is that when killers do, it often involves the early elimination of a player. Put simply some players don't like to be eliminated early. There it is in a nutshell. Early elimination.
Therein lies the problem as 4x survivor alive is rather lopsided past mid game, while 3x survivor is lopsided if achieved before mid game.
I personally don't think this is a big issue as getting eliminated early is just part of the game. But there is an army of people whom think this isn't fair, they offer up a myriad of different reasons for this, mostly highly emotional and accusatory of the other side for being unfair. There is an occasional rational one but often it doesn't really solve anything but they are trying to solve a non-issue in the first place, that's why there are no great solutions.
I like the fact that the threat of elimination is ever present in DBD its a great part of the game, I like the fact that the killer can choose to focus someone down and eliminate them just like a genuine horror film and like the fact the this game is mature enough to have no safety net in a lot of scenarios making it a very gritty and tense gaming experience.
I hope they never change it.
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597911#Comment_3597911
I think it’s a few things. The asymmetrical nature of the game means there are more Survivors than Killers. Survivors likely buy a lot more cosmetics, they show off to their friends and can actually see them being in 3rd person.
Business-wise it makes perfect sense to cater to Survivors for the above reasons and BHVR seems to be going all in with this mindset. Happier Survivors mean more purchases.
The core question is likely how happy can we make Survivors without driving Killers out of the game to the point Survivors are upset by wait times and leave the game?
Recent and upcoming balance changes make much more sense through this lens.
Yeah those points aren't lost on me.
I just think survivor is the most fun when you have to flee for your life rather than just game the mechanics till the gates open. One is fun the other kinda dull.
People play and enjoy it for all different reasons but the more they cater to the pure PVP crowd and less the horror survival crowd the less thematic and the more boringly mechanical the game becomes.
Lets face it DBD's mechanics especially for survivor aren't the most exciting its the threat of elimination that makes games thrilling without that its really got nothing to sell.
-
@HerInfernalMajesty said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597911#Comment_3597911
Something I have noticed lately is how much Survivor patience/impatience wins and loses matches. Most other Survivors in my matches are so impatient when it comes to saving someone from a hook, healing, etc.
I totally get that repairing gens quickly and trying to mitigate free Killer chase time is paramount. However there’s this behavior of “go, go, go” that sometimes runs counterproductive to Survival. It makes Survivors reveal themselves to Killers. It makes it a pain to heal in a safe spot away from a hook or a generator (which in some cases is valid!). Overall this impatient mindset where you go through game after game dc’ing, killing yourself on hook, or playing recklessly to get that perfect match eventually leads to losses on the part of said Survivor.
Playing patiently, slowing down and being careful is a great way of improving your Survivor game. I understand why that is difficult to follow however because chase is fun. Beating the Killer in a chase is fun. These aspects of the game are thrilling even. When I find myself craving this part of the game I decide to play as Killer since that’s most of what you do.
Couldn't agree more.
I mean its a rare thing now that you even get a few steps away from the hook before someone is rushing in for the save.
Also you usually have your pick of scratch marks and crows at game start as everyone runs around to the first gens giving away their position.
Its like some players brains just fell out when it comes to smart play and now it's BHVR's job to make sure they can keep playing foolishly and go unpunished for it.
Yeah when I crave a game of chases and high interaction I don't play survivor I play killer for that.
-
@Habil_K said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3596873#Comment_3596873
3gen was a very useful strategy for low tier killers.
The problem now is that this strategy is also useful for high-tier killers.
If 3gen is blocked because it is unconditionally bad, low-tier killers will become even weaker.
Weak killers need to be rewarded for useful strategies rather than blocked.
99 Heal is a representative example.
In this case, experienced nurses don't care.
All you have to do is follow it and hit it one more time.
But what about ‘Trapper’ and ‘Pig’?
It is very fatal, which is why the pick rate of selecting ‘SLOPPY BUTCHER’ is high.
Using just one perk is already a significant risk.
In this game, 1 space of the killer's perk must have the same exchange rate as 4 spaces of the survivor's perk.
(The killer has 4 perks. The survivor has 16 perks.)
What about 99gen?
Even if you know that weak killers are 99gen, it is not easy to check them.
Being weak in this game means lacking mobility for most weak killers.
However, I said this was excessive because it overlaps with ‘Ruin’.
Above this paragraph.
Finally, 99 Exit.
This is mostly done to rescue survivors if they are caught by the killer before power is supplied to the exit.
If the killer was strong, he would just open the door and leave, right?
Why do you do this?
I would do it because it's easy to save survivors from weak killers.
However, if you recklessly increase the level of interpersonal combat between killers, it will have a serious impact on balance.
I hope that perks such as 'REMEMBER ME', 'BLOOD WARDEN', 'FIRE UP', and 'TERMINUS', whose effects become stronger after power is supplied to the exit, will be actively utilized.
I think this is a solution that can reduce obsession with 3gen.
Thanks for reading.
This is called whataboutism a major part of the red herring style of argument.
We can list all kinds of strategies that the opposing team has but what do they have to do with 3-gen changes?
They are changing 3-gens and you counter to this isn't about how are they changing 3-gen or considering how it might impact overall gameplay its just to say well what about these other strategies that are irrelevant to the 3 gen scenario!
i.e Being on discord in a SWF is also a a strong survivor thing how come they still have that when we lose 3 gen - see how one is completely irrelevant to the other.
What does 99'ing the exit have to do with the mechanics of a 3 gen scenario?
We can draw from all kinds of tactical examples but it doesn't really have bearing on what mechanically will change about 3-gens. Especially when we don't even have the details on how it will change.
Its a kneejerk response at best and at worst a complete fallacy of a point to make.
-
@itstofuuu99 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597727#Comment_3597727
you can’t just tell people not to loop or run to a certain area of the map, especially when basement spawns in two of the most popular areas (main building and shack) because of the risk of getting hooked in it.
it’s outdated because dbd has changed believe it or not and is being balanced equally for both sides. and basement is not balanced and is heavily sided towards killer and gives them an easy win which requires very little strategy and skill whilst simultaneously having little to no counter in solo q. just because “it’s the killers space” isn’t a valid reasoning as to why it should be there and why it should stay, imo.
there are hooks located around the map for a reason, the killer can use them. rather than clutching with a one way entrance death zone.
even if you don’t get downed near basement, there’s always people running agi/iron grasp/mad grit and make it their mission to hook people in basement so they can camp it and get an easy win, because they know there’s very little survivors can do once they have someone hooked down there.
survivor assets and mechanics get nerfed because people who play killer complain about certain things being broken/op, killer assets also need nerfed because certain things are broken/op. basement being one of them.
Oh the ol' "its about balancing equally!" argument.
In a horror setting something are a lil unbalanced. I like the fact that the basement is dangerous because it should be.
If you wan a mechanically generic team A vs Team B game where you never die and get to re-spawn then COD is a great one. No threat no thinking just shoot mindlessly till you respawn.
I like the DBD feels like a horror film sometimes because that's what its meant to be. Basement is a great horror item and an iconic piece of DBD. I hope they never change it.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597710#Comment_3597710
I did read that exchanged and it looked like your comment "I think anyone who describes themselves as a "main" should immediately be banned from having any kind of opinion." was being addressed not what I mentioned and that's why I put my two cents in.
It is a discussion forum after all.
You raise a very good point and I have no retort to that one. Kudos good sir, I tip my hat!
-
@ProfessorDunwich said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597737#Comment_3597737
Unfortunately Killer feels reduced to being a party clown for Survivor amusement.
Can feel that way sometimes, as killer you have all the tools you need to beat a team but I do miss old moris.
There was something really visceral about being eliminated in a heartbeat that really kept you on your toes.
I get why people didn't like it, I get why waiting in a 10 min queue to load into a 2min game isn't the greatest, but man was it exciting to have a game with that level of threat.
Sometimes I wonder if its just really grumpy sore losers dictating the changes.
Would player opinion be different if the killer was a really hard bot and not another person? I never heard anyone complain that a raid boss in WOW was unfair to face you know what I mean.
One of the reasons why I really enjoy MWO, if you get caught out of position you get blasted and that's it game over, this can happen right at game start too.
I can't recall the MWO crowd moaning about this as much as the DBD crowd tends to or MWO introducing immunity to death in some circumstances. Are DBD players just more childish and reactive? Does the horror genre attract a more emotionally unstable crowd whom are less adept at playing well with others? Questions for the ages I guess.
-
@Kaitsja said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597648#Comment_3597648
As a general rule of thumb, I try to think about the other side and how things affect them. I'm not committed to this game enough to be in either camp.
That's great. 👍️ Neither am I.
But I play DBD because of a long enjoyment of horror films and the game is at its best when it plays out like a horror film. AS killer or survivor.
-
The basement is meant to be dangerous, stay away from it.
"Its hard to escape from the basement" that's the whole fricken point of it. That's the killer's space, it's scary and hard to escape from you are not meant to go in there and you do so at your own risk.
When being chased try this... don't run towards the basement.
"The basement is outdated" What does that even mean as an argument, the base concept of DBD hasn't changed no matter how hard people try to turn it into hello kitty island adventure instead of a horror game.
The basement is just as relevant as its always been, go in there and you may not come out, just as it should be.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597614#Comment_3597614
I disagree with the statement "Play the whole game or don't play at all."
You have the choice and if you don't enjoy one role, why should you have to play it? I happen to enjoy both roles but I would hate for the game to force your to play both.
Issue was addressed two posts back. Read up. 👆️
-
@Paternalpark said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597614#Comment_3597614
There'd be like 5 people left then.
Those five people probably have really good opinions about the game and don't engage in mindless tribalism attacking the other side as the problem.
-
@RareFantom47 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597614#Comment_3597614
When someone claims to be a "Survivor Main" they don't always mean they only play Survivor, it could simply mean that they prefer to play Survivor.
@Kaitsja said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3597614#Comment_3597614
I disagree with this. I "main" survivor, but I dabble in killer occasionally. When I first started playing dbd, I was a killer main. I didn't really like survivor. I even gravitated towards the harder killers at the time (Nurse, Huntress), and this was back when Nurse had 5 blinks.
I was being facetious but never mind.
More seriously I probably play a bit more killer than survivor but I wouldn't describe myself as a "main" of anything. Because frankly the moment you join a "camp" you lose all objectivity. We humans are inherently tribal and the stronger that tribalism is, typically the more blind to outside opinion and unreasonable we are.
I don't main a particular side, all I do is play DBD.
-
Both are really strong but in mechanical terms the removal of a survivor is better ongoing pressure than ability to insta down.
However its feast or famine because if you don't get the kill then its a lot harder to come back from that, so perma tier3 is better value at lower gamble, but tombstone can give you greater overall pressure if you leverage it well.
I'd say against average survivors Tombstone.
Against good coordinated survivors then perma tier 3.
-
@Hunkulese said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3596562#Comment_3596562
He's the worst designed killer in the game for how the game is actually played.
I really don't understand the criticism of tombstone. It adds a fun wrinkle to the game and you hardly ever see it. I have thousands of hours in the game and have been tombstoned probably less than five times.
I think part of why people think he's not good, is a lot of players have a very singular mind about how the game should be played and when you do that you severely limit the effectiveness of a lot of the mechanics.
Myer's power fits the theme of the Halloween films, creepy stalk followed by killing spree.
His addons do exactly what addons should do, they don't just augment his base power slightly but can also completely change the way he's played. Tombstone Myers is a completely different game from Jumpscare scratched mirror Myers.
Lastly his expensive addons are powerful, so much so that people piss and moan about them but that's what expensive addons should do, make the killer scary to face. (I know some people will say its not scary its annoying but they are the ones who get grumpy when they die, so grain of salt).
His design ticks so many boxes for a well designed killer, he doesn't need a lot of tweaks. If they greatly change that and ruin him it will be really bad.
-
@Aven_Fallen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3596562#Comment_3596562
I mean, you only forgot the Tombstones. Right? Right?? RIGHT???
I've never had a problem with tombstone, Judith's requires 2-3 survivors worth of full stalk to really get going meaning the team has a huge window to get objectives done before any real threat presents itself.
Tombstone piece is a lil more grey as it can result in one player failing by feeding Myers stalk but then another player getting eliminated, which can feel very unfair. However the counter point to that is its not ideal to eliminate that other player over the stalked one because you limit the power you have left for future stalks.
So if they make stalk passively regenerate so that Myers doesn't run out of power then tombstone piece will have to change or go because the passive regeneration removes any downside to it. But as for Judith's, if you feed enough stalk to Myers that he gets Judith's off then the team deserves a good stabbing.
Personally I really enjoy facing tombstone in all its forms because with the changes to moris there are very few killers who are just snuff you out terrifying anymore.
You run from Myers not because you need to sink his time so others can do objectives, you do it because he might have tombstone and can snuff you out in a heartbeat, what more can you ask for from a survival horror experience than a true horror.
Myers is one of the few killers who can still be that true horror.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3595731#Comment_3595731
That is what i tried to point out already in the recent post. There is no way the killer will become more scary because of more power. It has nothing to do with that.
Once the player reaches the point that the game wont be scary anymore, not even 100% killrate will change that. Have you ever seen a single person say "This killer has such a high winrate, i am scared to death!" No, its just annoying and frustrating but not more scary.
The thrill has nothing to do with how scary the killer is. The thrill comes from a chase, and this chase has to be ballanced. Sure, i give you that if the killer would be super easy, it wont help the game either, but a killer with a 50% winrate is not a joke and not to powerful.
We wont agree i suppose, but i think we both understand each others arguments by that point. Thats good enough for me.
Yeah I get your point. I mean I think we've both made a clear point. That's why I'm still engaged its been an interesting discussion.
I think your wrong on the concept of scare factor because do you sweat more fleeing from a good killer or when running circles around a bad killer? That sweat is tension, that tension is a good part of the game... it means the chase has meaning and losing the chase has consequences. Very important concept for DBD.
I just think its a shame that players would find that aspect annoying or frustrating. It strikes me as a mindset that is more focused on outcome than game experience. As the challenge should be fun and the higher the challenge the higher the fun.
Escaping from a good killer is so much more satisfying than running circles around a weak killer. While that comes down to player skill in the end, a small bias in kill rate doesn't undermine the impact of that skill while still maintaining the horror theme of the game.
If thematically appropriate, I don't that bias as unhealthy, providing it can still be played around by the survivors and it very much can be.
From my own standpoint I'd rather log into a survival horror like DBD safe in the knowledge that there was some kind of intrinsic threat that would make the game exciting to play as a survivor over mere mechanics deciding whether or not a game was thrilling. Because in the perfectly balanced environment the team element of survivor gives them the edge and that is the horror tension going in the wrong direction for the theme.
-
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3596766#Comment_3596766
Strawman: statement 1 that helps the other side
Strawman: statement 2 that makes them look hypocritical and silly
DBD forums as always
@ratcoffee said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3596787#Comment_3596787
is it a strawman if they're accurately summarizing the post they responded to
@Ryuhi said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3596820#Comment_3596820
It implies more than was actually said, so yes.
Just a note on the concept of strawman arguments because its a great buzzword that gets misused often.
Neither of the examples you raise are strawman.
A hypocritical point doesn't necessarily make the person a hypocrite and highlighting hypocrisy in an argument is not indicative of a strawman. Same goes for irrational concepts they are often silly and can be highlighted as such on the basis of that irrationality, again doing so does not constitute a strawman if the argument is in of itself irrational.
The term strawman is seen as some kind of online "I win" button but like most concepts and phrases it gets used incorrectly more often than not. A strawman is misrepresenting the point, or the person making it, in order to more easily refute the point rather than directly addressing it.
No I don't agree with the OP, but their point is fallacious not because its a strawman, but rather because its a red herring fallacy.
Bringing up a topic that is irrelevant to the point as a functional counter to the point. This is far more common than strawman arguments on these forums.
i.e. How does 99'ing things have anything to do with 3-genning as a tactic?... it doesn't hence the red herring.
-
I'd like everyone calling for nerfs to just play against him and play him as much as possible and use that time to learn to play around him.
Much more productive and fun than calling for nerfs right away because the same generic looping tactic doesn't auto work against him.
-
Yeah he's great to play and play against.
I've only played as him once so far because typical a new killer drops and the killer queue times are nuts. But after several games against him... he's a lil menace.
Great killer all round. The one match I played him without addons just to get a feel for his power, looking forward to trying out some addon combos.
-
If you assume the motivation of your opponent and choose to get caught as a result you kinda deserve to get sacrificed.
"I was just curious if you think in that specific scenario, with that specific killer who can send you the clearest "I'm Friendly" message, if that is just their way of getting the 4k as a strategy."
Its this quote here that says it all, "the clearest I'm friendly message", there really is no established rule about crouching a couple of times as some kind of universal message that the killer has to be nice and let everyone go.
Its kinda like people who point at pig, they expect to be let go afterwards. If you crouch in front of the killer and do that then you are an easy target and gotta expect that its just as likely you'll get downed and hooked.
If players create some arbitrary idea around signals that mean its a "friendly" farm match then I say a killer who wants the 4k is welcome to exploit that to the fullest. Let the suckers be suckered, I'd consider that an effective mindgame.
-
The only change Myers needs is for stalk to slowly passively regen on survivors over time so that you never wind up without a power.
Otherwise he's one of the best designed killers in the game.
-
The problem with "tunneling" is that they gave it a name. Now everyone sees it everywhere and blames it for everything.
-
Did they release more details about the changes? Because it feels like people are jumping the gun with their ideas of what is changing.
I mean for all anybody knows they could not buff it at all and just tweak it to work a lil differently.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3595546#Comment_3595546
All we say here at this point is very subjective again.
Should the game killer sided because of the theme. You say yes, i say no. Bottom line.
To answer your question: None
A reason why ballance is more important then having a theme "fullfilled" is simply the nature of the game and how it changes over time for most persons. When you start playing DBD, it can be very scary for survivors and the usual outcome of a match is that the killer gets you, until you get a grip on your role. After a few hours, the game looses its fright factor. It becomes a duel and less a horror experience. The duel makes the game good, not the scaryness. You had that in your first hours, so therefore, the theme is fullfilled by that point, and no killrate will ever change that.
Yeah and that's a fair point that the scare factor wears off, but that only makes it more important to have the innate killer bias.
How do you maintain player tension for survivors when players are no longer scared of the game? By maintaining a base line of reasonable threat. That baseline is the killer bias in kill rate.
You've said it yourself survivor play can be really boring. What makes it exciting to even play DBD is the threat of elimination. There is very little that's rewarding in survivor play without that innate threat of elimination.
As I've said before if there is nothing to fear from the killer why flee in the first place? At that point its no longer a survival horror its just a safe game of loopy chase which gets really dull and "same'y" really fast.
Why is it exciting to interact with the killer, because it matters to interact with the killer. It can be game ending to interact with the killer, the moment that interaction doesn't matter neither does the game.
I think you're underestimating the importance of this as to the very motivation for people to play. Annoying, frustrating, unfair people can call it all sorts of things after the fact. But why do they keep coming back even when its "annoying" etc, because there is an innate thrill and that thrill relies on the killer being dangerous.
-
@Grigerbest said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3595506#Comment_3595506
It's not about it.
You just not presenting to people an empty sheet of paper and saying: - "Soon it will be a picture on it". You know?
Thats just not the way they should've presented a player cards to their players. I do agree, they kinda ruined the expectations.
What is the point of implementing player cards with just 1 badge and 1 icon? That you HAVE TO BUY with real money? It's pointless, if you ask me.
Sure it could have been better but it doesn't, as written by the OP, render the purchasing of the DLC pointless does it. Not unless your chief goal of having the DLC is to get the banners secondary to the DLC content that matters which is the killer.
I'm sure they'll release more banners in time.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3595301#Comment_3595301
I think that is a highly subjective POV there. It might be true that some considere a frightning killer that dominates most of the time exciting, but there are many who dont care about that at all and would argue a fair outcome of the match is what should be aimed for. Others cant stand if they even loose at all and are very biased towards that nonsense. So it is not really a very good argument unless a poll (which is impossible) clarifys that.
It is funny how the conversation has been changed. In the old past, survivors were often considered the power role and killers were complaining about that how unballanced the game for them is. Now, it is pretty clear that this has overall shifted and same people come with this argument, that the killer actually SHOULD be more powerful. A little bit hypocritical, dont you think?
Sure both our views are subjective you don't have to agree with my point as I clearly don't agree with yours. That's not the purpose here.
You asked how is this balanced and is that fair? and I gave the answer it isn't but that is entirely ok in this asymmetric horror environment. Like that answer or not its a valid answer.
Hypocrisy has nothing to do with it. Can't you see how the perception of survivor being the "power role" is detrimental to the theme of the game?
The whole premise of the game, even how its promoted by BHVR, is that of a horror/slasher experience being played out. Drawing heavily on the themes and characters of 80's-90's slasher film craze.
Now conceptually who is the "power role" in a slasher film? I'll give you a hint its not the survivors.
So my point again, the one you can't seem to fathom, is how much of a bias toward killer is too much that it undermines the survivor play experience?
A slight killer bias maintains the theme, makes playing survivor exciting and 1v1 is a counter to the 4v1 team nature of survivor. To achieve that thematic balance you would expect a slight killer bias in kill rate which is what we see.
You might see this as a problem or an affront to the fun but I say it checks all necessary boxes to emulate the kind of slasher flicks that DBD is trying to emulate and that is part of the fun.
-
@JudithMorel said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3595426#Comment_3595426
not the point... the point is bhvr dropped the ball with the new player card "feature".
How so?
It doesn't have as many meaningless features as people want it to have on outset?
I'm sure that will change over time and the ability to drop real world money on digital cosmetics will remain intact for many years to come.
-
One of the best ways to learn how to work around killers and counter killers is to play as those killers.
If you're 4k'ing every game as you claim then you should have a good understanding of how to play and play around the killer roster.
I don't think any of the listed killers have been that bad except maybe skull merchant in its original design it had too much game stall.
Peak DBD for me will always be chains of hate, sure there was a lot of busted stuff during chains of hate still, but man the gameplay was more vicious than it is now.
-
I think the point of getting the DLC is so you can play as Chucky. Swag is secondary to that.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
I hope they rework DS so it can’t be used offensively. Because really, that’s what most people wanted to do with DS if the killer wasn’t tunneling, so they wouldn’t “waste” their DS.
Yeah although a longer stun probably isn't going to be that bad, the real problem of DS was the DS/UB combo players would leverage it offensively and just body block the killer safe in the knowledge they couldn't be picked up or slugged.
I hope we don't return to that because there should never be a mechanics scenario where you have nothing to fear from the killer.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3594620#Comment_3594620
Quote Peanits: "If we're talking about solely kills, kill rate and win rate are equal."
Yes in terms of numerical measure sure, but we are talking about fairness and how much of a bias in outcome is unfair?
So if what is considered a win by the community is highly subjective, (as Peanits highlighted) then the measure of kill rate is what we have to go on to assess "fairness" numerically.
I still maintain that a slight killer bias in kill rate is not so unfair as to undermine the survivor player experience. In fact the excitement level of playing survivor, because lets face it the mechanics of survivor can be pretty dull, is contingent on there being tangible threat from the killer.
This state of effect is a precursor before you even consider player skill, given the theme of the game and perfectly acceptable for DBD.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3594873#Comment_3594873
Not a lot? For a competetive game?
Look for example LoL, which is by no means perfectly ballanced:
https://www.leagueofgraphs.com/champions/progressions
Or remember Starcraft when Protoss was considered overpowered because of less the 1% edge overall?
ooh "here are stats on a vaguely similar topic but from a completely different system unrelated to the concerns here yet somehow directly equivalent to them."
I'm not saying there isn't a comparison to be made but in the context of DBD 10% Kill rate swing is not as big as you think and the stats from another system don't really refute that point as directly as you're claiming they do. That not exactly how data works.
-
ugh, I don' think a character who smokes being represented as such is gonna cause any major impacts on global health.
Same goes for the noose change, "hang'em high" was part of the old west.
How much do we need to bubble wrap the sensibilities of the modern snowflake?
I find it really odd that in a game where the goal is to brutally torture and murder 4 people we are debating the censoring of a cigarette.
EDIT and no I'm not a smoker.
-
People hyperfocus on mechanics as a lot of players are "power gamers" as it were.
So a recent release gets tweaked because its a bit over-tuned after the PTB and its often the end of the world to the power gamer crowd who are looking to squeeze every ounce of competitiveness out of the mechanics.
(I'm not saying there is anything wrong with power gaming its just one way to indulge in gaming).
-
I think survivors should try and run and escape from the killer kinda like the game demands. Rather than look to BHVR to attenuate the game so they don't have to run and escape from the killer.
I mean you have all the tools you need to escape from a "tunneling" killer.
-
To get value out of ruin you need to be pushing survivors off gens. That's all.
I don't think new survivors are so confused that they don't realize a gen is regressing. I mean I realize collective human intelligence has plummeted with the advent of social media but I don't think we are that low yet, that we can blanket assume new players will be confused by ruin.
-
No because its only a game.
Attaching this much emotional weight to it is unhealthy and a really good reason to stop playing for a bit and gain some true perspective.
Its like getting emotionally attached to monopoly, the idea is a lil silly.
-
I miss playing around a basement bubba, getting a successful rescue out of the basement against a bubba was a real thrill.
It still happens from time to time but there is a much greater window for escape now which makes it less exciting.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Well, if it have a cooldown, so you dont have unlimmited surrenders.
As it is today, even with DC punishment if :
- People dont like the killer = DC
- People dont like the map = DC
- People getting downed as the first one = DC
- People failing in mindgames = DC
Unlimited surrenders would be abused.
Exactly this it just opens the flood gates for the rage quitters.
A 3 person team hasn't lost the game yet. If the killer was targeting another player then 2-3 gens should get done in that time. 3 players at 2 gens is not an auto losing scenario. But try and convince the defeatists among us of that.
-
@Atsuka_Anarchy said:
I main Myers and Pig, I feel your pain. I can't keep running Tombstone or Mirror just to have a chance to 4k.
I Play a lot of scratched mirror jumpscare Myers, its a great way to make playing any other version of him feel a lot simpler.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3594534#Comment_3594534
To put this simple: 10% is a lot. It does not sound much, but in any semi-competetive game, 10% more winrate is considered broken.
So your argument, that the killer should have this advantage might make sense because it is a horror game, killer should be a threat) ect ect but it does not. The game is so extremly unballanced between solo and SWF, that it is pointless to even aim for anything higher then a 50/50, and this can only be realisticly achieved by giving solo players a tremendous buff.
You continue to conflate KILL rate and WIN rate. Peanits already did a good job of explaining why they differentiate the two.
The difference between solo and SWF isn't the topic here and while teamwork is one of the primary counters to killer powers, a solo team still has all the tools they need available to achieve good teamwork.
Of course a PUG group will not perform the same as a pre-made that's true of any online setting PVP or otherwise, its not a revelation to make that point. Its also not a counter my point, that the intrinsic threat of elimination is what makes the survivor experience what it is and that intrinsic threat is represented in an expected killer bias in KILL rate.
Whether people find that fun or not is up to the individual but I think DBD has a pretty good take on it with the current KILL rate stats.
-
"I hate getting tunneled when I play as survivor, and I'm sure everyone else does too, which is why I always try to be nice as killer and go out of my way to NOT tunnel."
I don't mind being tunneled neither do most of the folks I game with. If your point needs you to assume everyone agrees with you then its not a great point.
Also not re-hooking a survivor or going for an early elimination really has nothing to do with being nice or not.
It can be more boring to play survivor if the killer isn't committed to eliminating you than it is to have to run for your life in a high stakes chase. When there is no real threat what's the point of fleeing?
"but it occurs to me that by being nice we're being counterproductive; if tunneling isn't constantly happening, then survivors aren't running into it and complaining about it as much, so the devs aren't pressured to fix it. Whereas if EVERY killer was constantly tunneling, the survivor players would all be up in arms about it and something would get done."
Your goal is to artificially inflate the chances of tunneling so it can be perceived as a problem and get changed because you don't like it. So you announce this plan on the forums.
Just wow.
-
@xEa said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3593501#Comment_3593501
Talking about the survivor "fantasy": Playing for example Laurie Strode, who always (Resurrection is not cannon! 😅) survives is the same argument as the killer fantasy. The survivor should never be caught. Those arguments are just silly, its a video game and should be fun for everyone. The better player wins. Designing the game so one side is much more powerful does not work in the long run. I can not imagine having fun loosing all the time, no matter if killer of survivor. It gets even more frustrating when one side is clearly less skilled and still has the upper hand because playing "the power role". No thanks to that.
At no point did I say that killer should always win or survivor always lose. Absolute arguments are exactly as you put it, just plain silly.
In a survival horror setting what makes the experience exciting and hence fun is the tension. Tension only exists if there is a genuine threat from the antagonist. There must be the ever present threat of being caught otherwise what's the point?
Your question was how is 60% kill rate balanced? the answer is, it’s not entirely balanced but that’s ok in this setting.
As to have the kind of tension that should exist in a survival horror there needs to be a slight killer bias in outcome otherwise you aren’t fighting against the odds as survivor. This bias is then attenuated by survivor teamwork hence why its 4v1.
Its asymmetric and that asymmetry will create some fluctuating bias in outcome and as I said a slight killer bias in kill rate is not out of place given the games setting. In fact you'd expect it if things were balancing well, because 1v1 survivors should be at a disadvantage vs the killer mechanically.
A better question would be… How much killer bias is too much that it skews the game beyond what is reasonable? I don’t think a 10% swing in outcome is so large that it undermines the survivor player experience.
That intrinsic threat enhances the survivor experience before you even begin to assess perceptions of player skill.
-
@mecca said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3592535#Comment_3592535
Ok, but what about survivor fantasy? This argument seems always viewed from one side. This is a video game, not like a thematic simulator where the killer is supposed to automatically win. It doesn't feel good to play as survivor and knowing the killer is less skilled but winning because of cheese mechanics, etc. Right now the game is like that with huge killrates.
The killer isn't automatically winning and thinking so is grossly overblowing the 10% skew. As I always say if you need an extreme example to make your point then you have a weak point.
So what is the survivor fantasy? From a thematic perspective its about trying to survivor a nightmare realm and escape from the killer against all the odds.
So the fantasy role for survivor is to survive against the odds. Which is both a fun challenge and thematically appropriate.
If you are logging in to a game as survivor expecting to be some hero that's gonna go toe to toe with the killer and come out on top then you have kinda missed the point of DBD and horror survival in general.
What I see most games has nothing to do with cheese mechanics, just people who think they are better than they are blaming cheese mechanics for their losses.
@mecca said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3593230#Comment_3593230
As long as you are OK with only winning against potato killers then it doesn't sound like much of an accomplishment to win. For me, nope.
A case in point is the series of back and forth that lead to this post quoted.
I'd say from this kind of mindset that it's a good probability that you just aren't very good at the game or at least not as good as you want to be (That's ok by the way many players aren't).
Where things differ is my failures are my fault, while your failures are the game's fault, see the difference there. These two different lines of thinking often separate those who improve and do well from those who flatline and stagnate.
-
@Dogma_loki said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3592547#Comment_3592547
Cool story bro.
You trying to convince us or yourself?
Either way, I’m not buying it.
Do you think survivors log on just to fulfill some weird “ power” fantasy killer mains have?
Given that my post was in reply to someone agreeing with that very idea then I'd say there are players much like myself who enjoy having to flee from a scary powerful killer when playing survivor.
Part of the fun of playing survivor is the fact that its supposed to be scary and challenging.
You didn't really read much of the topic before posting did you?
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3592535#Comment_3592535
As a survivor, I would probably not play the game if it was literally equally balanced. I want escaping to be a bigger deal - almost like a bragging right. I went face to face with the killer and actually escaped. It wouldn't be really scary or fun if it was a perfectly even match going against Myers himself, for example. Going up against a famous killer should be dealing with a serious and challenging threat that is NOT in our favor.
I'm not all that interested in a red vs blue match.
Now, I originally started as a survivor main, but since most of my friends no longer play dbd, I have moved into a killer main role. However, so do sign up for solo queue often - just not the majority of the time.
This is exactly my point.
Many of the game elements people decry as unfun or even boring, if those elements were to be removed, would then make the game become truly unfun and boring.
That killer bias in outcome is an essential part of the thematic game experience as survivor.
-
@mecca said:
Its not balanced or fair. Games are supposed to be about skill. And fun.
The power role fantasy killer mains have about killer is an excuse to minimize skill in a video game for the purpose of feeding own ego.
It's not fun losing by default as one of a game.
While you have a valid opinion I'd say that it only really holds true if you value game outcome over game play.
The whole killer power fantasy is part of the draw for playing killer in the first place. Without it DBD loses an integral part of what it means to take on the role of the antagonist.
Why isn't it just red team vs blue team? One side has to fix the gens while one side has to stop them being fixed?
Because there is an overlay called theme and a big part of that theme for DBD is playing as the monster. Its not a stretch by any sense that playing as the monster should feel appropriately monstrous.
-
@Seraphor said:
You can't be the final girl if no one else dies.
Every game should be a 3K for thematic consistency.
I'd love to see a game mode like "last man standing" or some such.
A survivor can't escape till they are the last one alive.
Think of the extra dynamic at play, we are a team against the killer till endgame then its everyone for themselves. So gritty.
-
I think Peanits highlighted it really well and it comes down to "mechanical balance" vs "thematic balance."
In simplest terms, mechanically when calculating kill rate you could argue that 50/50 was the ideal measure for a balanced experience as both teams have the same relative outcome chance of die/live.
When accounting for the theme of DBD though a perfect mechanical outcome starts making less sense.
Given its horror film theme, you'd expect a slight killer bias in outcome, after all weak antagonists make for weak stories. Something modern story telling is really guilty of lately.
If DBD is trying to emulate a horror film experience, in this case the 80's slasher craze, then it is entirely acceptable for the killer to have a favorable kill rate bias.
How much this should be favored is up for debate but I don't think a 10% swing on the average is so game breaking that it undermines the game mechanics.
In fact I'd say that 60% is a relatively conservative kill estimate that balances well between a 50% "true mechanical balance" vs the more probable 80-90% you'd find in a good slasher flick scenario.
-
The idea that too much speed stacking without cost is not great on either side, I think, is pretty well accepted and acknowledged by BHVR.
That's why perks that do it are being changed.
I don't think it speaks to some flawed "balance philosophy" no matter how much "what-about-ism" people want to pile onto the topic.