ratcoffee
ratcoffee
About
- Username
- ratcoffee
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Raptorrotas said:
Why is everyone treating survivors as a monolith capable of having a draw?
Nothing in the game treats them as a full fledged team, the sole escapee doesnt lose because 3 die and the sole dead guy doesnt win when the other 3 escape.
A 2k isnt a draw, its 2 survivors winning and the other 3 players in the trial losing.
IIdentity V atleast gives % bonus points for 3+ escapes as something to mark its survivors as a team.
It's a draw for the killer. They bested two survivors and were bested by the other two
-
@Toystory3Monkey said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3795174#Comment_3795174
"killers get slightly more kills than survivors escape on average therefore the game is killer sided" do you even hear yourself?
btw, nurse needs buffs, she has poor killrates. and they need to nerf freddy, i heard he is one of the top % killers. stats are everything, right?
In the MLB, the home team scores 4.6 runs per game on average to the away team's 4.1. The home team has a win rate of 53% to the away team's 47%.
Following your logic, the game of baseball favors the away team, because the results are slightly better for the home team.
-
@Toystory3Monkey said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3795104#Comment_3795104
I did the math above in the thread and it fell on deaf ears because people are too busy making a victim of themselves instead of admitting the truth lmao.
let me repeat the takeaway again very short: 60% killrate in conditions where one side is represented by a single player having full agency and capability of learning for their side while the other side consists of mostly random people incapable of fully expressing skill due to lack of an ability to optimize themselves and depending on each other's performance INHERENTLY means the game is survivor sided because the killrate is closer to 50% than it is to 75%+.
If the game was killer sided, the survivors would barely EVER get even a single person through gates, let alone more than 2 and killrates would be above 75% since most games would naturally result into 3k+hatch. That's not the case though, survivors are able to get 2 outs or move often enough to make killrates lean closer to 50% than 75%.
to put it another way: if survivors werent victims (actual ones) of poor matchmaking and lack of communications that deny them the ability to learn working as a team and drag each other down whenever there's a weak link, they'd be winning most of their games as long as they aren't severely outskilled / throwing. the game is balanced around the assumption survivors are always underpeforming so when they are not underperforming and actually put the roughly equal skill & effort input as the killer, the game is severely in their favour.
but you can keep making up more elaborate mental gymnastics instead of admitting the game is ultimately survivor sided and that's okay for it to be like that to a certain extent because survivors players are handicapped in terms of skill expression by this game's poor matchmaking. but folks here rather deny the obvious and make fools out of themself.
"The game favors survivors because killer not winning is an actual possibility, only when thekiller wins every game would it be killer sided " do you hear yourself
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794500#Comment_3794500
Most of these I think can be fair to say being in the realm of opinion on both ends, so Resilience is the only one I'll care to defend on other grounds. It was 9% back when we had the release game, and we had 65s gens on release. Now I didn't play that far back, but I felt it was perfectly fine with 80s gens.
9% saves ~7.5s on 90s gens, and ~6.4s on 80s gens, so I don't think it is shaving off that much time. Also, it comes with an inherent risk (more visible if you play stealth Killers at a higher rate, or meme with stealth perks) that staying injured can give Killer free wins by a snowball at times. All too often people greed staying injured, and lose a 2nd chase before going down as a result. I like risk+reward perks a lot personally, even if I think Dark Arrogance is garbage and should be buffed to 30-35%. Overall Resil feels good and the perfect balance for a risk/reward design, hence why it hasn't been touched in the entire history of the game (to my knowledge and 0 patch history on the wiki).
The only true complaint I have less of an argument against is 99ing the heal, but that partially is fixed by Hemorrhage and needing the Surv to bring a Med-kit/self-care while keeping their hands free (no flashbang). That being said, I wouldn't mind Resilience being nerfed to give the inverse percentage of your heal level. 0% healed gives full 9%, 50% healed gives 4.5% 99% healed gives ~.1% boost.
That would be an interesting nerf. I also tend to agree that it doesn't really need the nerf, but it's good to at least talk about
-
There are challenges to use a fully charged Potential Energy load on a gen. Loading it and immediately dumping it is the most efficient way of doing that challenge.
-
@kit_mason said:
Why do survivors think this game is killer sided?
It's just a way to excuse their own lack of skill, which is the defining factor in more games than "sidedness" ever has been.u gonna give specific counterarguments to survivor ideasof what about killer is overpowered, the same way the OP of the thread did? or are u just gonna say "uh survivors need to get good" without substance? because rn you aren't presenting any meaningful critique. i'd love you to present evidence first of all of survivor player ideas of why the game favors killers, and second of all why those ideas are wrong, if you have any examples
-
@mizark3 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3794374#Comment_3794374
Yeah, Deja Vu is probably the only perk that deserves a change, since BHVR said it got a temp buff until a 3-gen solution was found. Not sure why you'd include Lithe/OTR/Resil/MFT in there unless you are saying buffs. Lithe is basically an inferior SB, OTR is denied by turbo-tunneling off hook or just not tunneling at all, Resil is still countered by Hemorrhage, and MFT was already butchered long ago.
i would disagree with Deja Vu needing a change, because the 6% offsets the time needed to get to the gen, it's a net neutral. however I can at least ackowledge the validity of the argument you're making, it makes sense.
Lithe in particular is the easiest of the exhaustion perks to use correctly - you can't waste it like with Sprint Burst, and it's much easier to activate than Balanced Landing. I could definitely see an argument for increasing the exhaustion cooldown on Lithe to give it a downside as compared to SB / BL.
OTR is a pet peeve because a streamer I watch a lot seems to get bodyblocked by OTR players quite a bit, so maybe I just see it misused too often. I think it could stand to simply lose collision, but on the other hand, "so what" is a fair argument against nerfs. bodyblocking is a tool and putting yourself in harm's way after being unhooked is a fair tunneling risk, so there's also a fair argument against. (bodyblocking with DS I see as different because with DS the survivor ends up on the ground doing nothing, whereas with OTR the survivor can take chase again or run off and mend)
Resilience is one of the only perks that genuinely, reliably increases gen speeds. If someone wants to make an argument against any survivor gen speed perk, that's the one to argue against. I personally don't think perks are the issue (it's a combination of survivor items and killer expectations) and would encourage killers stop blaming perks specifically, but I think if there are any perks that aid in gen rushing, Resi is the closest to being viable at it.
I'm stupid and meant to say We'll Make It instead of MFT. MFT is fine. We'll Make It is also fine IMO, but being able to reset that quickly is super strong and I can see the validity in arguing that the numbers are slightly overtuned & it should be cranked down a little, even if I disagree.
-
Genuinely the only survivor perks you could possibly argue need even a slight nerf are Deja Vu, Distortion, Lithe, Off the Record, Resilience, and [edit: we'll make it, I accidentally said Made For This]. Maybe BGP and Adrenaline but even those are borderline. Some of those I would personally argue against but I can see where they're coming from.
I'm sorry, but Overcome is too strong? Exponential is too strong? Circle of No Self Heal is too strong? Prove Thyself, which was slower than a solo gen BEFORE it was nerfed, is too strong? "Literally what even is that icon" (troubleshooter) is too strong?
-
@Burniebotss said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3793763#Comment_3793763
survivor gameplay is always boring, you sit on a gen or die, it’s not against the rules and it doesn’t matter if the enemy doesn’t like your strategy. Play how you want and if you shame someone for their play style you’re just another complainer. They bought their game they get to choose how they play . Also chases are overrated, traps are more fun.
I was literally responding to someone who asked what problems people have with it??????
"hey why do people dislike this"
"ok here's why people dislike it"
"how dare you whiners try to force me to play in a certain way"
istg some people come on these forums with the sole purpose of getting into a fight how are people getting mad at me for doing exactly what was asked of me
-
@PuddleOfBludd said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3793763#Comment_3793763
You paid for a game. What you did not pay for is the ability to dictate to other people how they play it. Slugging is a strategy, it doesn’t matter if it’s one that you like. The same way that flashlight, sabo build to prevent hooks is a strategy whether or not the killer likes it.
And from my experience, most of the time that I run into killers that are slugging, it’s because my teammates are running exactly that build. If not, it’s likely the game or games the killer had before the one that I joined likely had that happening.
I'm not trying to dictate how other people play the game. I'm explaining the reasons someone might have for disliking going against a particular play style. If you care to read the post I responded to, you'll see I was explaining the problems with that playstyle, is because the person I was responding to was asking what is the problem with that play style.
I could very well point out the irony of you accusing me of dictating how others play because I explained why people dislike one particular play style, while in your second paragraph shaming a particular survivor playstyle. I also find it interesting that in a thread about one particular type of slugging, you took killer players side by defending an entirely different type of slugging by assuming without that evidence that the reason for the killer playstyle was survivors using the playstyle you were shaming.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
What's the issue, exactly? Killers are allowed to bait and mindgame. If the killer is trying to bait, then punish him with mass gen progression. Slugging isn't breaking any game rules.
Because the optimal play is boring for everyone involved. The slug is bored sitting sitting on the ground doing nothing, the other survivors are bored sitting on gens, and the killer is, i would imagine, bored standing around waiting in vain for anything to happen. I certainly hate to imagine someone who gets enjoyment out of standing around in the game, interacting with nobody, wasting their own and everyone else's time, forcing people to only engage in a quarter or less of the mechanics of the game they paid for, and not choosing instead to do literally anything else.
Also "it's not against the rules" is always a terrible argument for anything.
-
You do realize how self defeating your Killer Already Won argument is, right? "The killer already won so you should be fine spending 4 on the floor so the killer can get a 4k" reads like "Bezos already has more than enough money, so you should be OK with your taxes increasing so he can have a tax break and have even more too-much-money." The game being in a decisive state is a reason to end it, not a reason to prolong it further.
Also any game where "alt tab out and do something else" is at all a part of the gameplay loop has a serious problem. The game should not be encouraging you to do something else. "We love the idea that people who play our game send a significant amount of in game time not playing our game", said no developer ever.
-
Trickster needs multiple hits to get a health state
Deathslinger can get a hit and still not take a health state, also he needs to reload after each shot
-
Submit a bug report!
But yeah today I played against 2 huntrii (which is a plural of Huntress I just invented) and both of them had much quieter TR than normal
-
@keepruinthewayitis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792510#Comment_3792510
hmm i was told it was 60% so as a killer if i play 10 games i am Gauranteed to get a 3k on 6 out of 10 of these games? and what if i dont.. what if i get a 3k in only 3 of those matches youd say "skill issue " wouldnt you? well logic dictates that the reverse is true survivors escaping 4 out of 10 matches is a skill issue.
a team of survivors has 24 perks at their disposal ( the for they bring in and BT and deliverance for each) while the killer only has 4. if a survivor cant win when the odds are MASSIVELY stacked in their favour .. then skill issue get good .what
I don't understand please find a different way of explaining
-
You said "killers need to recognize their mistakes and get better" is not a balance argument
You also said, paraphrased, "survivors need to recognize their mistakes and get better" in the context of making a balance argument.
The fact you did this in consecutive posts, and the fact you didn't realize this, and didn't realize this is what I was pointing out, speaks wonders. I truly think there's nothing I can further say to you that will help you see the reality of this game's current balance state.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792554#Comment_3792554
Where is that a balancing suggestion?
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792547#Comment_3792547
No. You dont get it.
First: the game does not tell you to make mistakes. The players do.
Second. I dont want survivors to make 0 mistakes. I NEVER said that. However, the amount of mistakes that lead to a weak killer with one regression perk winning is substantial. Im asking for players learning, using common sense and playing better before calling something op. This goes for both sides. Killers should learn how to create pressure effectively as well as using their power optimally and survivors should understand gen agency, smart unhooking and looping.
This is the same reason why pig was on a watch list despite her changes barely being a buff. Thats why Freddy got nerfed regardless when he came out despite being a really bad killer from the get go.
I demanding playing well, not perfect by any mean but well, so much to ask for?
If i may ask, what do you propose to compensate for bad play then?
😐
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792547#Comment_3792547
No. You dont get it.
First: the game does not tell you to make mistakes. The players do.
Second. I dont want survivors to make 0 mistakes. I NEVER said that. However, the amount of mistakes that lead to a weak killer with one regression perk winning is substantial. Im asking for players learning, using common sense and playing better before calling something op. This goes for both sides. Killers should learn how to create pressure effectively as well as using their power optimally and survivors should understand gen agency, smart unhooking and looping.
This is the same reason why pig was on a watch list despite her changes barely being a buff. Thats why Freddy got nerfed regardless when he came out despite being a really bad killer from the get go.
I demanding playing well, not perfect by any mean but well, so much to ask for?
If i may ask, what do you propose to compensate for bad play then?
I propose killers recognize that if it takes that many survivor mistakes for them to win, they're probably making a whole lot of mistakes that they aren't acknowledging or even noticing.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792543#Comment_3792543
What? I know that the game makes me win due to survivors playing badly. However, the solution to that is survivors playing better. Not catering to bad play.
Humans make mistakes. You probably make dozens of misplays a game and don't even realize it. It's up to you to recognize and punish the mistakes your opponent makes - the game isn't handing you a win because your opponents are human.
You're asking for a game where your opponents make no mistakes and you still have a fair shot of winning without feeling like you're struggling. You're asking for a singleplayer game against AI at that point.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792540#Comment_3792540
No. The games mechanics dont lead to survivors making mistakes. Thats is completely wrong. If a survivor understands that gens are important, they will not do chests to get a green key. If a survivor know that they play against a weak killer power, they will beeline to shack to waste as much time as possible. The game does not tell you "dont use check spots". The game also doesnt tell you to not drop that pallet or get overconfident because you play against a trapper.
Most of the games im winning due to survivors playing bad. If we balance about survivors playing bad all the time, then the ones that dont play bad will dominate.
Highly disagree.
Idk what to tell you man that's how the game works maybe you just don't like the game 🤷♂️
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792520#Comment_3792520
To confirm you, yes. Im still winning most of my matches as pig. However, whats important is to look at why. Why is the reason important? Because your talking about overall balance.
I win because of:
- soloq - communication mistakes
- overconfidence of survivors after me losing 4 gens for one down
- survivors trying to go for flashy saves / pallet saves
- survivors going for totems / chests
- survivors going for uneccessary bodyblocks when i have stbfl
- survivors not understanding how the trap rng work
- survivors making basic mistakes in looping and pathing
- survivors misusing strong perks
- survivors giving up because they went down first
- survivors giving up because i play pig
- survivors giving up because x reason
There are cetainly some more reasons that i cant think of right now. Most of these come down to survivor mistakes. Not to me being exceptionally good at the game. I play pig. Wasting a pigs time is not hard due to her chase being awful.
The teams i relatively consistently lose against are the teams that focus on gens, never do uneccessary stuff, are all solid in looping, go to areas where there is nothing to defend for me, making me lose more time for the down than i gain, use strong items, offerings and perks and showcase good pathing. They also pre drop and shift w.
If i lose against these guys, this has nothing to do with me being so bad at dbd, its me reaching the limit of what i can do with the tools im given.
You can of course think otherwise.
I mean what you're describing here is you winning because you punished survivor mistakes harder than they punished your mistakes and losing because they made fewer mistakes than you. The capacity for misplays to happen and the level to which they affect the outcome of the game is part of the game balance, not some confounding external factor.
I once read a review for a short film that bashed it because one of the characters was a little girl, and they said the story wouldn't have had as much emotional resonance with audiences if the character was an adult man, for instance. You're not reviewing the film at that point, you're reviewing a different version of the film that you have invented and intentionally made worse. The film didn't have an adult man in that one role, so the reviewer should not have criticized it for what it would have been like if that were the case. The game's mechanics lead to survivors making mistakes, so it's wrong to discount the effects of those mistakes in discussing game balance.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792276#Comment_3792276
Not my experience playing Pig. Sure, I dont tunnel or take more than one slowdown perk, but isnt this what a nice game should be?
Every game is a real challenge for me. Also, do I really have to document how many map offerings i see per session? You wont like the ratio.
I think how many kills you get in each game would be a better thing to track than map offerings. Either you're losing as or more often than you're winning, which (respectfully) makes you an exceptional player, or you're winning more often than not, which is the only fair metric of balance.
Even better, documenting how often a large sample of players get each result would be even more helpful, because then we're looking at a more statistically representative sample of the game's player base instead of a single potentially exceptional sample space. Which is why I brought up Nightlight in my other comment that I was working on when your post came in.
-
@keepruinthewayitis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792249#Comment_3792249
if you think this game is killer sided well.. i got this really nice bridge to sell you.. im sure you'll love it .
Kill rate on nightlight's 57.7%, compared to escape rate of 42.3%.
Killer win percentage is 51.5%. You could compare that to the survivor team win percentage of 35.5% (remainin 13% are draws). You could also compare that to the rate of survivor non-hatch escapes (since hatch escapes are considered a draw for survivors) which is 37.7%
If you wanted to simplify that into raw winrate (wins plus half draws) killer would have a 58% win rate to survivors team winrate of 42% or individual winrate of 44.7%
What's more, nightlight's numbers consistently skew more in favor of survivor than the numbers BHVR releases whenever they do an official stats post, albeit only by a couple percentage points.
In any case, I'd love it if you could explain how killer metrics of success being well above 50% while survivor metrics barely struggle to reach 45% and by many measures not even reaching 40% indicates anything other than a killer favored game.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792249#Comment_3792249
Certain killers. Not killer in general i assume.
Accounting for the full range of player skill distribution, the current balance of the game leads to favorable outcomes for killer players at higher frequencies than outcomes similarly favorable outcomes for survivor. Certain killers struggling against particularly skilled, highly coordinated or over-kitted teams or on certain maps is a phenomenon but it is an exceptional one. It is indeed "killers in general" the game favors.
-
@legiondoctor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3792198#Comment_3792198
Us vs them aka how dare we ask for balance
Game is already killer sided so idk why you'd ask for killer buffs if you want balance 🤷♂️
-
Always tiring when people make trying to balance stuff an us vs them. Like I want more stuff to be viable too, but now that you've put it like that, a small part of me hopes they don't, just so they can send the message that the game's balance is not a PVP interaction between survivor players and survivor haters.
Also the way the OP was written is quite amusing to me, it sounds like a jshlat bit. "Would you rather have killer buffs but no survivor buffs, or survivor buffs but no survivor buffs"
-
@solarjin1 said:
nither! both was overly hate cause they was born in the most hated meta ever (eruption/COB) with a kit design perfectly for it. Knight power pretty interesting to utilize especially now that u can't instant drop a guard. Skull merchant pretty easy to use but in my opinion she not intolerable to face/use.
The worst two design characters go to the hag and twins by a landslide.
I love versing Hag:(
-
@Leonardo1ita said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3791440#Comment_3791440
If a killer really wants to tunnel, they'll do it anyway in this situation. If you unhook them early, and there's no Off The Record or DS, you do them a massive favour.
Yeah that's what I meant when I said "...or are actively the thing they were trying to prevent" thanks for confirming what I said 👍
-
@VomitMommy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3791533#Comment_3791533
progressing your objective is not wasting time
Slugged survivor is also progression. Their timer is limited...
if you have 1/2 survivors hooked, then you aren't not hooking survivors. the guy i was responding to was arguing that "hooking isn't worth their time anymore" which imo implies that they'll never have 1/2 survivors hooked because they're straight up not hooking. i'd agree that 2 hooked and 1 slugged is a stronger position to be in than 2 hooked and 1 on your shoulder, so in that specific scenario there is a disadvantage to picking, but that also implies that picking was the correct decision in 66% of the cases in question - again, far from homeboy's claim that it's simply "not worth their time"
Ok, then I would disagree with that statement.
Hooking is fastest way to end the game, but you really need 1-2 survivors to hook. Others can be slugged all the time.
I am not saying that's how I play, but it's most efficient way playing the killer imo.
slugged survivor is also progression
240 seconds minimum vs 140 seconds maximum, imo it's inarguable that slugging is a slower way of advancing your win con than hooking & thus wastes more time
-
@VomitMommy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3791455#Comment_3791455
- Time waste.
- There are many perks around hooks for survivors. Why let them use it, if you didn't bring any?
- Risk of getting stunned/flashlight saved when picking up.
If I have 1/2 survivors already hooked, fresh hooks are pointless unless I use perk for it. It's better to always slug them and go for next chase.
- progressing your objective is not wasting time
- there's like 3 usable perks based around hooks for survivors and they're all mediocre at best. refusing to hook to counter them is like that one otzdarva video he staged with viewers as a joke, where he manages to kill all 4 survivors by teleporting to lockers as dredge and he frames it as "they countered my sloppy butcher"
- i guess technically? the liklihood of getting flashlight/stun saved and the net time lost if it happens are far outweighed by the benefit of forcing survivors to get off gens and go for the unhook within the next 70 seconds, activating pain res, activating pop, activating grim embrace, getting stacks of no way out, finding the next chase with BBQ, Alien Instinct, or Friends to the End, activating Blood Echo, etc, etc, but if you're just talking about things that might happen that are not strictly to your benefit that is technically those could happen. personally if i were that risk averse i would simply not play a game like dbd, but to each their own
if you have 1/2 survivors hooked, then you aren't not hooking survivors. the guy i was responding to was arguing that "hooking isn't worth their time anymore" which imo implies that they'll never have 1/2 survivors hooked because they're straight up not hooking. i'd agree that 2 hooked and 1 slugged is a stronger position to be in than 2 hooked and 1 on your shoulder, so in that specific scenario there is a disadvantage to picking, but that also implies that picking was the correct decision in 66% of the cases in question - again, far from homeboy's claim that it's simply "not worth their time"
-
@Akumakaji said:
You look at this the wrong way: killers aren't slugging more and more, because there is no downside to it, they are slugging, because there are so many disadvantages to hooking and its by now more of a survivors tool to let the killer waste time, no longer a way for the killer to add pressure.
The +10s hook timer was just a small change on paper, but it was the tipping point that convinced many killers ,me included, that hooking isn't worth their time anymore, for they have no time for such frivolities in todays day and age, where gens just fly.
what are these disadvantages to hooking you speak of
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3791349#Comment_3791349
it's not ideal? It's literally optimal to greed your teammate on hook as much as possible for a hook stage and that's literally nullifying map pressure killer is trying to create by having a survivor hooked.
How is it 'literally optimal'? Because leaving that survivor on hook is 'literally' turning the game into a 1v3, which we've been told over and over again is by far the best thing for the killer to do.
So why is it both optimal for the killer to make it a 1v3 as fast as possible, while also being optimal for the survivors to make it a 1v3 as fast as possible?
i think they're generally aware that sometimes, it makes sense to stick a gen and finish it before rescuing, but they are generally unaware why that is sometimes the case.
There's a whole lot of strategy that goes into sticking gens vs unhooking a survivor, and in most cases the biggest factor in that decision is weighing the risk of the gen being regressed against the work the extra survivor can do. Usually it is better to go for the unhook immediately - I'd say the cutoff is about 75% gen completion or 22.5 seconds left on the gen. Any more than that and you're wasting a whole bunch of time letting the survivor hang and do nothing.
The cases when you wouldn't go for the immediate unhook are either unaffected by the hook change or are actively the thing they were trying to prevent in the first place so, good tbh.
-
@Leonardo1ita said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3790498#Comment_3790498
"Nobody needs to tunnel". And that's where you're wrong: with 4 survivors always going gens, eventually you will need to tunnel, unless you have Devour Hope of another super gimmicky build.
"with 4 survivors always doing gens"
w-what are you doing that 4 survivors are always on gens?
-
@ReverseVelocity said:
Does that imply that Killer mainly being the role with +100% incentives for all this time means the killer role is cooked?
Not that I think it's really a great indicator of anything, but still.
killer has never been "mainly" the role with +100% incentives in my experience
it's always been fairly balanced until now
-
@nickoli2233 said:
A brand new killer just came out you goober, of course more survivors are needed.
i would believe this except in my last like 10 games since the patch released, only 1-2 of them were against dracula so it's not like people are itching to try the new killer
also a brand new survivor came out but where are the people itching to try the brand new survivor… you goober
-
After thinking about it I think they should:
- remove 2nd phase skill checks
- Extend the duration of 2nd phase by 20 seconds for every attempt made, if the survivor goes second on their first hook.
this reduces the effectiveness of trying to hard quit while allowing for those clutch moments where a 4% makes all the difference
-
On the one hand something needs to be done about giving up on hook, on the other hand some of my favorite moments came from clutch kobe plays. It'd be sad to see those go. It would probably be for the best though.
-
He hasn't been out long enough for people to
- get to high ranks,
- play enough games in high ranks to accurately assess his level of performance, and
- get good enough to play him to fullest potential in the first place
Maybe you're right, maybe you're not and you just haven't figured his kit out yet. The point is it's not even been a day let's not jump the gun
-
IMO they should increase the initial immunity timer and also increase the speed at which the bar fills after the immunity wears off, particularly at mid ranges. Too many of yall are too comfortable treating the AFC as "I'm allowed to do this amount of face camping" and asking for an increase in the self unhook bar capacity is reflective of that mindset.
The feature is ANTI face camp, not Rationed face camp. Increase the time before it kicks in to avoid punishing killers for reloading or placing traps, but also increase the speed the unhook bar fills at so it's even more abundantly clear that AFC bar is not supposed to be a resource that the killer manages
-
My thoughts on the matter when the changes were announced
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3785161#Comment_3785161
Ah yes. a mediocre perk in top 5 perks of the game.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/JEGK2Z0F65NP/image.png
Gen-speed perk are easily the strongest way to punish camping in the game. the extra 10 seconds enables you to do gen before friends against camping killers. the whole excuse is that they added +10 second to generators only to realize that no survivor is actually doing 90 seconds gens. they're 84 and 79 second gens. I see the perk enough to critic about it.
if only i had explained that the reason it's so popular is because it's free and feels like it helps even though it makes little difference.
i guess there is the other benefit I didn't mention: it's autopilot for avoiding 3gens by telling you what gens to get done early, similar to how Windows is autopilot for knowing where to go next in chase, so it is helpful for that. still, not a gen rush perk in that case since running between gens takes more time than the amount of time saved by the perk.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3785129#Comment_3785129
Yes it is. remember entire excuse for why survivor are getting 10 second hook time is generator taking 10 second longer. Deja vu makes generator take less time for no downside.
even if deja vu increased repair speed by 6% on all gens it would be mediocre at best. deja vu gives a bonus 6% gen speed. having a single stack of thanataphobia decreases the gen speed by 2% for each survivor, so 8% total slowdown. having one stack of dying light reduces 3 survivors repair speeds by 3%, which decreases gen speeds by 9%.
literally having just 1 stack of either of those two perks provides enough slowdown to offset the net difference in gen speed from one instance of deja vu - and those perks can get 10 and 11 stacks respectively (yes, thana technically only gets 4 but it provides the slowdown equivalent of 10 stacks) if you want to say deja vu is an OP gen rush perk, you necessarily have to hold that those two perks are even more powerful as gen defense perks. I think we both agree that would be silly to try to claim.
add that to the fact that deja vu doesn't give you 6% on the unmarked gens, and imo it's quite clear it's not the OP tool you're claiming it to be
-
Should be 1 chest and 45 seconds to heal tbh
-
changes I see this causing:
- survivors play even more sweaty
- kill rate inflates, so BHVR potentially gives basekit killer nerfs to compensate
- more games where people give up, making the time you spent in killer queue wasted
- fewer survivors playing the game, so ridiculous queue times for killer
I'd love more survivor teammates to tryhard in my games and I'd love basekit killer nerfs to make looping for 5 gens even more consistent, but I assume you wouldn’t want to wait longer only for your game to have a greater chance of people giving up.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3785049#Comment_3785049
Just like survivor cannot seem to play the game without Med-kit Red syringes and Deja vu gen-rushing.
We really out here complaining about a perk that doesn't even make up for the time it takes to get to a marked generator
The reason it's so popular is it turns the progress bar green and because you don't need to buy a survivor to get it. It's not some ridiculous OP tool of gen rushing.
-
No, absolutely not, Trapper is imo the worst killer to play (unfortunately, since he is kinda the face of the series)
-
@UndeddJester said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3783442#Comment_3783442
I know you meant "sweet spot"...
But the idea of BHVR seeking a "sweat spot" just amuses me xD
"sweat spot"? that's just my chair after i stand up from a gaming session 😆
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3783490#Comment_3783490
I simply wouldn't balance DBD with only kill rate.
Neither is BHVR, just as I explained:
When we reach that point, now we can use the kill distribution of each killer to balance those that are overperforming or underperforming until we get a balanced average […] But we can only do that once we have reached that target 60% killrate, and that is just what BHVR did.
But good dodge to avoid answering there.
saying "you either have to use my way of balancing the game using only kill rate, or come up with a different way using only that stat" is a false dichotomy
What is false is that I said to you "do it only with the kill rate" at any point, specially after explaining that not even BHVR uses it as the only data for doing it.
In fact, you are the one who said that "there is such high variance in the data set is a reason specifically to Not extrapolate based on the average of all those data, not a reason you Have to". So, it is you who said that the average kill rate is not needed to do balancing at all, not the other way.
I assume when BHVR says they want to achieve a 60% kill rate, they mean that kill rate has a casual correlation with some other internal stats that they don't share with us, stats that contain more helpful information but for whatever reason (for example, trying to protect trade secrets or their own technologies) they don't feel it would be prudent to release to the public
Yeah, let's just simply forget all the reasons, including the math and dev statements, that explain why it should be a 60% kill rate on average, and let's start making unfounded assumptions just because I don't want to agree with it. Totally logical approach.
and that in getting those numbers to what they think is fair and fun, they estimate that kill rate will hit 60%
Totally agree, as to get any other number to a place where it is fair and fun, like having an equal winning chance to everyone no matter their skill level or character used, the kill rate should by 60%.
I know Peanits has said they look at far more than just kill rate, which would seem to support that theory.
Or, and hear me out in this one, he meant that they look at a lot of other data because even if the kill rate is helpful for overall balancing, it is complementary to other data that indicate other, more specific things. To give an example, even if a killer has a 60% kill rate, if his kill distribution has a lot of 3/4Ks, it will indicate that he is winning more than he should and needs to be nerfed. Again, just as I explained, which casually coincides with what he said in the quotes @Moonras2 shared.
But hey, yet again, "whatever makes you happy".
what I'm getting from this is that you, too, agree that your previous assertions that "50% kill rate means 0% win rate" was erronious, and that things are actually a whole lot more complicated. glad to see that you've seen sense.
@totallynotamegmain said:
this is devolving really fast can we calm down?
absolutely. i love you, @totallynotamegmain you're the cutest non-meg-main i've ever met.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3783479#Comment_3783479
you explained incorrectly. the fact that there is such high variance in the data set is a reason specifically to Not extrapolate based on the average of all those data, not a reason you Have to.
Then again, explain to me how would you balance DbD with only those data sets, when:
- The win conditions for both sides are completely asymmetrical.
- You can't directly compare skill levels of both sides, as they require completely different sets of skills and game sense.
- One side is a team of 4 players that can have different skill levels.
- That side is not even considered a team per win conditions, and each individual player in it will win or lose individually.
- You have 5 possible match outcomes, which define the wins or losses of 5 different players.
Come on, explain the correct way of doing it without taking in count nothing else that those data sets, if I'm so wrong in my explanation of how and why.
this is what I mean, you fundamentally don't understand why just the average kill rate is not a helpful stat for the kind of analysis you're trying to do
Maybe because I never, here or in any of the past post about this topic, argued that only having the kill rate is helpful to anything, not I'm trying to do any "kind of analysis".
What I had always said and argue is that "For balancing reasons, the kill rate should be 60%, and having it being that number is the only way the game will be balanced between killers and survivors" in response to everytime you people had claimed that it being 60% means the game is killer sided, and I had explained in detail how and why it has to be that way multiple times already.
Just that. Like I said to @mizark3 earlier, anything else is product of your imagination.
I simply wouldn't balance DBD with only kill rate.
saying "you either have to use my way of balancing the game using only kill rate, or come up with a different way using only that stat" is a false dichotomy. I would simply opt to use stats with a higher resolution - such as the kill distribution stats on Nightlight.
I assume when BHVR says they want to achieve a 60% kill rate, they mean that kill rate has a casual correlation with some other internal stats that they don't share with us, stats that contain more helpful information but for whatever reason (for example, trying to protect trade secrets or their own technologies) they don't feel it would be prudent to release to the public, and that in getting those numbers to what they think is fair and fun, they estimate that kill rate will hit 60%. I know Peanits has said they look at far more than just kill rate, which would seem to support that theory.