ratcoffee
ratcoffee
About
- Username
- ratcoffee
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3705938#Comment_3705938
I have a great graphics card and even I struggle hard with scratch marks from time to time.
Shaders give a big advantage. The sooner we all can accept that, the better. People don't use it to make the game look better. A ton of people in the competetive scene play the game on the lowest graphics options, where the game looks pretty bad already. I think a little more red will not make it look like butterflies.
Is it cheating? In my opinion, yes. In the devs opinion? Seemingly not.
I already said shaders give an advantage. Once again, my point was that a whole lot of things give advantage. Having headphones instead of speakers gives an advantage.
I used shaders to make the game look better back when I played a lot so it's inaccurate to say people don't do that. I also think people who use the ridiculous comp filters that are used as an extreme example are silly, but I recognize people can change their monitor's settings to get the same effect, so between being someone who uses filters not for an advantage and knowing if you use it for advantage you can get the same advantage through normal hardware settings, I can't get behind classifying shaders as a cheat
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3705883#Comment_3705883
Doesn't matter. They both give a competitive advantage. Filters can set it up so you can literally see things through walls. Why is that fair or allowed?
Having a good graphics card gives a competetive advantage, as does having a good keyboard with a high polling rate. At some level you have to realize life isn't fair and some sources of advantage you realistically just need to put up with. Certainly I would hope you would never advocate handing out bans for people who exceed a certain frame rate or screen resolution, or for having hardware that exceeds a certain limit on poll rate.
Also shaders can't help you see anything that you couldn't already see. Any wall that you can see through with a shader, you can also see through without a shader, it's just harder. I agree that some extreme examples of shaders are particularly ridiculous, but implying that anyone who uses a shader is doing it to that extreme in order to get a competetive advantage is also ridiculous.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3705838#Comment_3705838
So its ok to use one thing that gives a competitive advantage over another because why?
I imagine it's because mods require changing the game files whereas filters are effectively monitor/display settings.
-
it was as Hillbilly on The Game. Enough said.
My second game was also as Hillbilly and was on RPD.
-
@LeFennecFox said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3704583#Comment_3704583
The thing is everyone is high mmr because the soft cap is super low and hard to get below. You have a wide range of skill levels that co exist in the same skill bracket.
All the more reason the argument of "what happens at perfect play" doesn't matter; you're getting a huge array of skill levels in the "top bracket"
@Killing_Time said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3704583#Comment_3704583
So based on this logic, because the professional players play most of the roster, most of the roster is fine? Trapper is just fine and can actually deal with COMPETENT survivors?
I mean you were the one using "gets played in high MMR" as a balance metric, not me. All I said was that discussions of theoretical perfect play are pointless
-
@Killing_Time said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3704311#Comment_3704311
Explain to me why at high MMR... You only see 4 killers then?
Well, there's no real way of knowing if you're in High MMR or not, but the 10k+ hour streamers I follow regularly see at least half the roster, so I would imagine that's just incorrect
-
@Killing_Time said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3697672#Comment_3697672
So this explains WHY when you get to high MMR... You only see Nurse, Blight, Spirit, & Wesker buddy. In a 4v1 game, how does it make sense that essentially the power role is weaker? If Docktah plays a PERFECT game vs PERFECT survivors... He loses EVERY SINGLE TIME! How is that proper balance?
Nurse is skill... Period. A God Nurse wins because of her skill. Where do you see them? The highest .01% oh player base. That's why balance is bad. Wraith only stands a chance at winning if survivors goof off or mess up. If they don't…he loses every single time.
I really don't like the argument "if you and your opponent play the game perfectly…" because nobody plays perfect. Games where you think you played perfect, you made mistakes you just didn't notice. Games where you think your opponent made mistakes, you either weren't around for them or you failed to capitalize on them. This is coming from someone who used to say "if a nurse player plays perfect she always wins," I no longer think that's a meaningful argument for that exact reason.
-
@Withered8 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3703600#Comment_3703600
He's not that bad but I think every other killer is just better, back in the day actually he used to be considered an A tier killer, i think this showcases the power creep in the game tbh because yea he's not unplayable but every other killer is just better, like legion and ghostface are better at what myers does and freddy has more map pressure and a slightly better chase power available.
How is Legion better at what Myers does? imo they're nothing alike
-
Myers is not that bad. He's not good, but outside of organized comp matches he's decidedly not bottom 2, he's just out of bottom 5 at worst
-
I'm taking a break from the game. Maybe I'm burned out, maybe fluctuations in the player base have made the game less appealing, maybe the design philosophy has changed. I'm not currently enjoying the game, I'll see in a couple months how I feel.
Forums are a mixed bag. Some people I quite like, some people I disagree with but find make for great discussion (partly because I misunderstand what they're saying and have to have it explained differently lol) and some people fit into a third category I will tactfully not describe.
-
Agreed on Windows. It's good, particularly for new players, but it is maybe overvalued; particularly at a higher level Any Means provides the ability to reset pallets and Alert gives you information on the killer's whereabouts, albeit with the downside of having to remember which pallets got kicked.
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3703311#Comment_3703311
I currently don’t always tunnel off the hook, especially if I find someone else while a survivor is hooked.
But when 5 second DS is live, it won’t matter if I’m in a chase or not, because when I hear that unhook noise, I should run right over to that hook, so I can tunnel that survivor, just in case they might want to weaponize DS against me.
I don't understand this logic - either the logic of posting it in the first place, or the logic of what you say you plan on doing.
By going on the forums and loudly proclaiming your intent to tunnel as a direct result of this change, it seems as if you're trying to guilt someone for having done the change. The entire community knows "tunneling" has a negative connotation, so going out of your way to say you plan on doing it is clearly a pointed act. Maybe that's not what you mean, but it looks like you're saying "take that, survivors! next time you'll think twice before existing in a game where devs buffed one of your perks," regardless of actual intent behind it.
Beyond that, tunneling everyone off hook all the time to prevent them from using DS aggressively gives people who run DS a chance to use their DS. People who do not run DS will simply die, because they did not have DS. your strategy would thus punish people for not doing the exact thing you say you're trying to prevent.
Like, you're trying to do something here, and I'm sure you have decent logic behind it (I'd love you to explain what that logic is) but all I can garner from this post is "how dare you have the audacity to have the devs buff this perk? I'll make you regret not using it!" I'd love to see where I misunderstood.
-
@UnusedAccount said:
If 2K is a loss why do people complain about Killers wanting a 4k?
That doesn't follow at all (why would how one possible kill count is classified have any effect on how people react to other players opinions about a different possible kill count?)
It's also based on a false premise. People generally don't complain about killers "wanting a 4k," they tend to complain about killers playing for a 4k in very specific circumstances, such as searching for the 4th survivor without knowng where they are and without hooking the 3rd. Sure there are exceptions, but I find people complain about specific play styles or perceived attitudes towards the game
-
I'm at a level where NOED is fine, but the OP is absolutely right that NOED carries people to am MMR that they don't belong in, and some people's defense of NOED misses the mark, despite what I said about the perk being fine.
In chess, people are expected to learn the fundamentals of board control and tactics in order to improve, and people of specific ratings are expected to have certain grasps of certain concepts. Using NOED is like memorizing a set of opening traps in chess; if you have an understanding of the fundamentals it can help make games more spicy, but in less experienced hands it can lead to players winning games based on the fact they new a trick their opponent didn't. It becomes a test of that one line instead of the player's overall ability. If someone wins enough games like that using gimmicks, pretty quickly they'll find their rating up to a point where not only do their gimmicks not work as well, but their opponents have a stronger grasp on the fundamentals than they do and so they can't win without the use of those gimmicks. NOED works similarly, it can increase your ability to win at low levels and boost you to heights where people are able to beat you despite NOED and where they have better fundamentals too, leading to feeling miserable as you get matched with players with thousands more hours than you.
"Just cleanse all the bones before endgame" is a terrible argument because of Pentimento and because there's no way of knowing if the killer has NOED before endgame, so at that point a killer may as well just not bring in NOED and simply use Hex: Survivor Pointlessly Cleansing Dull Totems as their fifth perk slot. There is plenty of counterplay to NOED, but pre-cleansing everything is not it.
-
In addition to needing to do a basic m1 instead of a lunge or just getting near them, you can't tombstone a survivor who is doing an action, such as repairing a generator, cleansing a totem, opening an exit gate, getting in or out of a locker, or vaulting a window or pallet.
It's possible the Meg let go of the gen just as you got the tombstone
-
@Seraphor said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701897#Comment_3701897
Win conditions aren't concrete. What I should have said is a 2K isn't definitively a tie, or officially a tie.
There can be different types of 3K. Was it a 3K at 5 gens and someone got that hatch, or did the gates get openned and then the killer hooked and killed 3 survivors during EGC? Both are very different games, and the same goes for 1K, 2K and 4K games.
If you personally want to consider it a tie when you get 2 kills, that's your prerogative, but it's not a standard you can apply to all games for other players.
But yes, you're on the right track in regards to kill rates. A balanced kill rate should be somewhere between an avarage 2K and 3K. A 2.5K average would be 62.5%, which is roughly where the strongest killers currently sit.
Genuinely bewildered as to how the idea that a 62.5% killrate is "balanced" and causes an even win rate got so popular. The only way i can see that argument working is if you think it's impossible to get anything other than a 2 or 3k, or you think you can transfer kills from one game to another, otherwise it's impossible to get any meaningful data about winrate from kill rate (as long as you're using "kills per game" as a metric for who wins that game). I'd love someone to tell me what I'm missing here.
-
@AquaticCitizen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3701472#Comment_3701472
This is just untrue. SBMM has been a known feature for a while and its what determines how you get paired up with other people.
Ranking system as in iron through challenger like what league of legends has. specific ranked categories directly tied to mmr / win ratio
-
You're dropping the pallet too early, the killer isn't getting stunned. You need to drop the pallet after they fully complete the pick up animation, which is later than it looks
-
@Seraphor said:
I almost exclusively played Mirror Myers during the Blood Moon event so... sorry I guess?
I think the EGC stats are kinda pointless. EGC activates in basically every game, the only games it doesn't are 3K + hatch escape games before the last gen is repaired.
Oh no, I'm not complaining! I was just saying I see Myers so little I was sure he'd be lower. I'm sure I've seen more Plagues, Blights, even Xenomorphs than Mikers in recent months, so I'm surprised he's so popular. I kinda wish I had him more, I love Myers.
I hope they excluded 4th survivors from EGC kill stats because that would skew the numbers a lot. I think one thing the EGC numbers teach us, particularly the kill vs rescue ones, is that camping to secure a kill endgame is solidly killer sided (at least if thelast survivor kills are excluded). Not super informative but not entirely useless
-
@supersonic853 said:
Average hook count? They seem to be avoiding it on purpose at this point lol.
Having the percent distribution of games with each possible hook count (potentially even additionally seperated by kill count) would also be super interesting, thought hat's a particularly complex thing to examine
-
I love the slow turn as Myers as the sacrifice animation plays, peak comedy
-
60% kill rate does not mean 40% winrate for killers. A killer can win anywhere between 20-80% of matches, they can draw anywhere in the range of 0-80% of matches, and they can lose anywhere between 0-40% of matches with a 60% kill rate. The range of possible outcomes is massive. The fact that such a wide range of possible outcomes exists is the exact reason why you can't assume the mathematical average of those numbers applies to individual match results
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3699276#Comment_3699276
I already read it: A lot of twisted logic and assumptions that, in reality, it's nothing more than a big strawman argument (who said anything about the hatch?) that completely miss my real points. That's why I'm not going to even try to answer it.
And by the way, the question edit was only to add the 3º one in the second case, even before seeing your need for "clarification" of a simple math problem that you provided. You can check by seeing the unedited copy on your post and then seeing mine. But funny that you seem to try to call me out for doing a shadow edit, with a shadow edit.
Like I said, have a nice day.
Who said anything about hatch?
You didn't, and that's the problem. If a survivor escapes in a match that's a 3k, it's most likely because of a hatch. You wanted me to answer that a hypothetical survivor that played in all 8 of those games would have a 100% winrate, and I acknowledged that was the answer you were looking for, but I also pointed out that there was something you neglected to take into consideration in making your argument. In trying to accuse me of strawmanning, you further reinforce the context your math didn't consider.
I don't know why you say I "completely missed your real points." You said you needed me to do the "math homework" you assigned before the debate continued, implying that you had yet to make any points. I did that homework while adding some additional context about exactly what those numbers mean. How can I have missed your points if you hadn't made any?
A more cynical person than I might assume any number of nefarious intentions, one example of which I did speculate on ut have decided to remove from this comment as it's unbecomng this discussion. Personally I think the reality is just simpler; you're not as familiar with the math necessary to discuss win rates via 3/4k as you think you are (feel free to reread my post to try for a better understanding) and you genuinely do believe your analysis to be correct (if you haven't gotten to that unit yet in HS math, take this as a head start, if you have done stats in math class before, take this as an opportunity to sign up for a review course). Have a great day, and here's hoping you one day (re?)learn the math necessary to realize your analysis in this thread was misguided
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3699261#Comment_3699261
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3699263#Comment_3699263
So, both of you, instead of being honest, do the math and see what the numbers mean (among other things, that a 60% killrate on average doesn't mean that there won't be players that wins more than 40% of the time and others less [that's why, again, it's an average], and because the asymmetrical nature of the game and all of the outcome possibilities the only way that every player has a balanced and equal chance of winning is getting as close as possible to the mathematical equality of 40% winrate that 60% killrate provides, which is what I have explained numerous times to both of you and others in other posts already), would simply evade the question and respond with twisted logic because that directly contradicts your narrative of "Killers OP, 60% killrate unfair".
I think that I have proved my point (again), and the best part of this is that I used one of your "examples" of why I'm wrong to do it. Have a nice day.
You may think you've proved your point but you think wrong; I recommend you read the post of mine you quoted to find out why, it explains your statistical misunderstanding of how averages work. I could rewrite what I already said but directing you to read what's already there is more efficient.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3699239#Comment_3699239
Dude, it is a simple math problem that you, yourself, provided. I don't know what I need to clarify here.
Read the main situation you provided ("If a killer plays 8 games, wins 5 with a 3k, and then loses the next 3 with a 0k each time") and answer the questions according to the two cases I provided for that same situation.
The Real answer to your set of questions is that it doesn't matter, because as I've pointed out you can have a 62.5% win rate with a less than 50% kill rate.
You're trying to catch me out with gotchas such as the theoretical 100% winrate survivor (it would actually be a 37.5% win rate, as hatch escapes are at best a draw for survivor), the overall average winrate of slightly over 50% for survivors (again falsely assuming hatches are wins, the more accurate number is again 37.5%, but even with hatches counting as escapes that's still less than the 62.5% killer win rate in my hypothetical, btw) and then constructing counter-hypotheticals where a killer can only ever get at max a 2k, can never win, and forces the winrate to just around 30%.
Your attempts at gotchas prove you incorrect. You want to talk about averages, but your specific scenario where kills are reallocated between matches to make every individual match as close to the average as possible is one of the "specific made up scenarios" you decry, as ridiculous as my own made up scenario. A kill rate of just under 50% can mean any winrate from 0% to 62.5%, we cannot meaningfully detirmine what the actual win rate is. Your reallocation of kills to construct an "average" match is an elementary misunderstanding of how averages work . You cannot meaningfully construct an average win rate from kill rate, as the latter has far lower data resolution; if you want to use "averages" to discuss win rate where a 3/4k is the win condition, ONLY statistics wherein the average rate of each of those outcomes occurs per match is sufficient to prove any point about win rate, kill rate can tell you nothing.
I see you edited the questions after I pointed out how unclear they were. Thanks for doing that. Would have preferred a clarification post separate from that, but at least we got on the same page in the end
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3699230#Comment_3699230
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3699234#Comment_3699234
Do the math homework I gave you, and then we continue the debate.
I literally just told you I do not understand what you were saying. I cannot answer those questions until you clarify what the questions were
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3699149#Comment_3699149
Seeing that @Archael already answered you, I have another question: In those 8 games, the same one survivor always escaped.
1.- What is the winrate of that sole survivor on those 8 games?
2.- Counting the escapes of the other 3 survivors in the 3 0K games, what is the winrate of all the survivors in those 8 games?And another: In the same scenario of 8 games, another killer kills the same amount of survivors, but equally distributed between the 8 games.
1.- What is the maximum "nK" that the killer would have done in those 8 games?
2.- Taking in count that, what is the winrate of this killer?When you answer, you would see why thanks to the asymmetry of win conditions you have to balance it taking in count averages, not specific made up scenarios. And if you not, I already wrote walls of text in other posts explaining it to you (and others like you), so I will not do it again.
edit: the post originally had more ambiguous wording on its questions. I have left my original response, pre-edit, for posterity.
I wanna make sure I understand what you're saying here. It seems like your first question is asking "what is the winrate of the survivors in these games, if you only count the survivors who escaped." Your second point seems to be "we cannot make any assumptions based on kill rate alone, therefore we must make the assumption of the absolute minimum possible winrate". Are those the positions you are trying to take here? I'm racking my brain and cannot come up with another interpretation of what you've said - albeit, i've chosen a rather uncharitable framing of the points you make, but they are the natural conclusionsof what I feel you've said - but I find it hard to believe that's what you'd argue. Could you clarify what your actual points are?
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3699076#Comment_3699076
Another person that doesn't know what an average is, apparently.
And no, a 50% killrate would mean 2 survivors killed on average per match, which also means that killers draw their games on average.
If a killer plays 8 games, wins 5 with a 3k, and then loses the next 3 with a 0k each time:
- What is the killer's win rate?
- What is the killer's kill rate?
- What result, on average, is the killer getting?
-
Killer has a better chance of finding the hatch than survivor in endgame so you can simply search for hatch.
If you really need it you can bring the "hatch spawns at shack" or "hatch spawns at main" offering and go to that location after hooking the 3rd survivor. Especially if you play a high mobility killer like Wraith or Xeno, to name a vcouple examples
-
That's one of the main reasons I would run Object of Obsession.
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3698224#Comment_3698224
No, they want a mori that doesn't require 2 hooks, as at that point the mori is irrelevant. Also, the word "free" is disingenuous. You know it's not free.
I felt the fact I was being hyperbolic when I said "free" was pretty clear so I guess we're even.
Getting back on topic, I will once again reiterate that I agree that Sadako's power is underwhelming- as I have already said. I just think the statement that OP and others have made - that they think the power is not functioning - comes from an expectation that the power ought to reliably be usable to bypass the core mechanic of hook states, which I think is unhealthy for the game. Furthermore, I think the assertion that her power "doesn't function" is equally hyperbolic to my saying that people want a "free" mori. I can only speculate why you objected to my use of hyperbole and not the OP's
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3698197#Comment_3698197
A mediocre passive slow down and a tp that survivors can control. That's it.
Does that sound good to you? Or fun for that matter.
I mean yeah it's not great but its better than a lot of people give it credit for & I think the only reason it seems so bad is people want the condemn to = a free mori at 0 hooks
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3698185#Comment_3698185
The problem is she has nothing else.
If you think of only the potential that condemn has as an offensive weapon and ignore the passive slowdown, maybe.
Also a global tp isn't bad
-
The devs clearly don't want moris that bypass hook stages to be a weapon Killers use, they want it to be a punishment for survivors that mess up royally. Current tombstone nonwithstanding, they've been actively trying to prevent play styles based around giving people fewer hooks to work with without giving survivors meaningful ways of preventing it. Honestly I agree with that philosophy. The game was made with 3 hook states in mind, a mori at 0-1 hook states bypasses this core balance consideration
-
@kaoraku said:
My answer is to a post if you actually read it is about the move forward and backward on the slugged survivor. So i tried to show how entitled and one sided it is. Somehow everybody always want to punish the killer for doing something. So if that should be bannable, the other one should be too. And not the bleed out, that post was about something else.
I think if survivors should bleed themself out it would be unfair. I mean many times you have to manage even the slugging, so they wouldn't get a lucky hatchescape. I understand that it can be unfunny for 4 minutes, but bullysquads and others are unfunny too, and a killer cannot even bleed himself out just disconnect or wait in a corner while they get bored.
And your attempt to demonstrate that just so happened to miss a whole lot of context, so I explained the context you missed.
I don't understand how you argue that killer players ought to be able to keep slugs in the game, while complaining about bully squads being able to keep killers in the game. Surely either both are OK or neither are OK. In my opinion that double standard would be far more entitled than anything I said.
-
@kaoraku said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3623078#Comment_3623078
So every tbagging survivors should be penalized too?
This thread was about slugging for a bleed out, which some people were arguing constitutes hostage holding since it forces players to spend several extra minutes in a game they've already lost with no agency to leave or do anything else.
So, if a survivor finds a way to use teabagging to force the killer to stay in a match for several minutes after the killer has already lost (in a way that parallels the way that slugging for a bleed out, while removing the killer's ability to do anything) then the survivor should be penalized, yes.
(Edit: I want to clarify, I don't think either should be penalized, I think survivors should have a way to voluntarily end the game if they're being slugged for a bleedout. In the original post I made, I was explaining how one might detect malicious bleedouts without punishing regular slugging. This post was meant to illustrate why comparing bleed outs to teabags was not a good point of comparison)
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3691980#Comment_3691980
There are 2 possible beliefs one can hold that are mutually exlusive.
- Balance the game around high level players
- Balance the game around average skill players
If you believe 1 is true, then the huntress buff makes a lot of sense. If you believe 2 is true, then when is nurse getting massive buffs since she has the lowest kill rate in the game?
Hard disagree that you have to choose one or the other to balance around.
Back when I played Dota, they made changes to balance for both - for example, playing IO as a carry (it was designed to be hard support) got popular in competetive and one team was basically uncounterable with that strat, so they nerfed th carry IO strat.
However, the spider hero Broodmother wad really strong in low level games because she had conditional invisibility that low level players struggled to counter, so they removed that invisibility (i played her for the scouting so I kept dominating with her).
You can absolutely balance for all levels of the game at once, you just need to realize that Kill Rate and Win Rate don't give you enough information to make balance decisions (something BHVE have thankfully acknowledged often)
-
Nice game, really impressive getting the win in such a short period of time. I remember a game I plated as bubba like that but didn't record, happy you got the video
Sorry people are getting distracted talking about gen rush & missing the point
-
What if they made it deactivate only when another survivor gets hooked and disabled all forms of self pick up while it's active
-
I would say it's powerful, so long as you recognize you no longer have to dry kick generators when you use it (if you're also frequently kicking gens with it, the perk is a little redundant). I wouldn't really say it's OP since it's not super frequent that it activates on multiple gens at once and even when it does it feels justified
-
Actually on second thought that's not a comment I want to put out there. I meant to make a light joke at one user's expense and then move on to give that user some indirect advice, but I realized the way I phrased it sounded harsher/ruder than I meant and I couldn't come up with a better phrasing for it, so I'm just gonna overwrite that comment with this one.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3686676#Comment_3686676
"head nodding"
Wait, what? I've only ever done this as a killer and survivor to be cute. When someone does it to me I also see it as being cute. When did it become toxic?
For basically anything you do in the game someone will call it toxic. I've been called toxic for getting a pallet stun and playing as Wraith, among other things. When it's something as ridiculous as those things I have to just roll my eyes
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3687145#Comment_3687145
OTR doesn't give you an endurance hit once you're healed. So you'd be injuring, then downing that survivor like you'd do a regular non-OTR gamer once they're healed. Then they can get their DS.
Nah, I've had games as Bubba where people blocked my chainsaw with OTR while they were fully healthy because they still kept the endurance.
It Should deacticate the endurance when you get fully healed IMO, but it doesn't
-
@BlightedDolphin said:
The problem with this is that it still hard counters stealth killers, which was the issue with it in the first place.
The perk isn't in a very good spot right now but it shouldn't go back to countering stealth. It needs a new effect at this point because it's current one is either going to be useless like it is now or too good against stealth.
why does this post begin with the phrase "the problem"
we don't talk about Plague by saying "the problem with Plague is that she counters healing builds," we don't talk about the legion by saying "the problem with Legion is they counter grouping up." why can we recognize that some killers are designed to accomplish certain tasks well and punish certain play styles, and accept that as good design, but when survivors have tools that work against certain killers, we start discussing it in the context of the "problem" it causes
-
Exactly what we needed, a nerf to Overcome
I joke of course. I do think that would be a bit too strong as survivors are already often on the back foot even with full access to exhaustion perks.
-
@goodfriday said:
Hey can we nerf noed to only work up to a maximum of maybe just 60 seconds lasting only and remove the movement speed bonus as well then the perk deactivates?
Identity V's version of NOED is literally just on a timer, no hex totem to cleanse, after like 2 minutes it completely deactivates
-
I disagree that the "doesn't work on unhook" effect is gonna be super impactful. In most cases it's still going to activate, it'll just force people to learn to 99 the last gen until the unhook happens the same way survivors already do to avoid Blood Warden.
I'm more concerned with the reduction to 3 second speed burst, but we'll have to see how it plays out
Then again, I was half worried that they were gonna completely remove the speed burst and only let it heal you from dying to injured, or something like that so maybe that's where my expectation comes from.
I never thought Adren needed changes and honestly the reason for the change feels like "people will always complain about something, and the devs want to look like they're responding to complaints," but I feel like people are either overexaggerating how powerful Adren is, or overexaggerating how impactful the changes will be. IDK maybe this is just copium.
-
overall W changes. i've complained about solo q feeling miserable and neglected - these changes won't fix every problem i have with it, but they show BHVR is willing to make improvements to the solo experience, something i had previously been worried they were missing. glad my doomerism was misplaced and hope to see more improvements in the coming months.
-
@xltechno said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3686795#Comment_3686795
Most of them have counterplay on the survivor side. Like gen regression to gen rush. So I think they cancel each other out.
that's true, but also is completely not related to what we were talking about.
you said that only survivors complain about the other side using tactics. i gave examples of survivor tactics that killers often complain about.
-
@xltechno said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3686780#Comment_3686780
Survivors are often the only ones who complain about tactics. So there's no point in asking that question. Rather than using off-board tactics, you should gain experience and learn counter techniques even in one game.
Killer players complain about lots of different survivor tactics. I see complaints about gen progression or "gen rushing", stealth or "excessive hiding", and grasp rescues, body blocking and aggressive play with Head On / flashlights (which all get called "bullying") all the time.