ratcoffee
ratcoffee
About
- Username
- ratcoffee
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Crowman said:
Antifacmping doesn't do anything against non facecamping strategies. Idk why you guys thought it was some system meant to give you free unhooks outside of facecamping.
Ironic that before it released there were a bunch of killer players sure it would give survivors free unhooks for breathing within 64 meters of a hook, and now there are a bunch of survivor players upset that it doesn't.
-
hard disagree. when i see there's a dredge i take a little extra time peeking at the loops near my gen and that's usually enough to keep the killer occupied for at least a majority of nightfall if I happen to be the person they. it's a challenge but it's manageable if you know what the basic tiles look like, what kind of fillers there are, etc.
-
I think if you play m&k and bind your scroll wheel to use your power you can force the chainsaw to overheat quickly that way
-
@UndeddJester said:
I am 95% sure people have the wrong idea of what AFC is meant to do.
People want to not be camped period... it's not for that... it's a system to give a bigger window for survivors to counterplay the camper. Let's take a proxy camping Nurse, Huntress, Hillbilly, Blight, or Deathslinger...
If you put the hooked survivor between you and the killer by approaching opposite of where the killer is stood, preferably without being seen, all of them need to get around the hooked survivor hit box to hit you.
Playing this well near guarantees the unhook. Preventing the unhook with this is a hell of a lot harder for the killer to do than what it was before.
This bigger counterplay window can be made even better using anti camp/tunnel perks. You can take kinship, take reassurance, take deliverance, take decisive strike, take borrowed time, take off the record, take dead hard, take guardian, all of these perks are able to help against a camping killer, and all are made better with AFC in play...
AFC isn't there to stop camping and ensure the survivors escape from hook... it's there to give you a bigger window to outplay the killer... which is exactly what it's doing.
It's mainly there to force baby killers to learn the other aspects of the game and give baby survivors who haven't learned how to coordinate saves a chance imo. Your analysis is also a great point too
-
When I play survivor I want someone who will give fun and challenging chases. Some of my friends agree, others want someone who's going to goof around. Surprising as it may seem, different survivor players have different ideas of what they want in the game; just because people are playing the same overall role does not mean they necessarily share any of the same thoughts
-
I like my rework idea for MFT more:
Haste from MFT only activates once you've healed other survivors for a full health state (either instantly if you are already injured, or the next time you're injured if healthy). Haste deactivates upon getting healed to full or getting hooked, and requires performing another full heal to activate it again.
That way killers are guaranteed to not face someone with MFT on first chase, if two survivors with the perk reset each other only one gets to keep the perk, but survivors don't feel like they're losing a huge amount of utility
-
@Livion said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/393706/i-hate-to-be-that-person-but
I have to admit that I did notice this but in general, everyone is three gening (trapper is surprisingly prominent) characters like hag are normal but pyramid head?, and I don't mean like a last resort is their whole game plan and I don't get why people are starting to do this (maybe it's just a bunch of bad luck but we'll see)
I think it's a positive feedback loop. People who learned to primarily do gen defense know how to do primarily gen defense strategies and struggle with other strats. The loop works like this:
-when they do other strats, they struggle because they're not used to them
-when they do 3 gen strats, they win slightly more often
-it's hard to admit that you haven't yet practiced a skill enough to be good at it yet, and it's much easier to say the skill is itself too weak
-thus, killers who prefer that playstyle convince themselves that it's the only way of winning and double down on it, using it more and more
the same thing can be said of many survivors who bring chase builds; convincing themselves that getting 5 more seconds per chase is the only way to win the game when they simply aren't as well versed in more different playstyles that are more balanced or excel in more specific areas
-
I think the reason is simple: it's free for new players, and impactful in a way that new players who are afraid of staying injured find particularly helpful.
Also the fact that new players don't have enough perspective to understand why it's bad
-
@Reinami said:
Already had survivors exploiting it, by running the chase near the hooked guy who was near shack making me think they were looping shack, but then they just run away. So i start trying to mindgame while they aren't there, meanwhile person unhooks themselves.
how long were you mindgaming yourself that self-unhook activated?
you need to be kissing the survivor for 20 seconds to get it to go, and the further you are the slower the charge comes. like if you lost a survivor running around shack I'm almost tempted to assume the survivor got manually unhooked and you missed whoever unhooked them too
-
I remember a video a killer player posted the last time DC penalties got disabled where they disconnected on map load every game until they got the map they wanted. I fear killers would treat it as a "DC with no penalty" or a "reroll for better RNG" button and everyone's queues would feature a bunch of remakes
-
Love that you said this about both a killer and a survivor perk. Equal opportunity hot takes
-
Seems pretty good tbh. Grace period lets you kick a gen and reload at a locker + bar fills slow enough where going back to secure second stage is still viable for killers who want to do that; really seems like the feature has laser focused on forcing baby killers to go out and find another survivor (thus causing them to actually learn & play the full game)
-
Your add-ons are considered part of your item, so yes they will also be filled
-
no
why
-
@Coffeecrashing said:
Dead Hard is STILL in the top 10, and it might see increased use after the anti-camp update, because there will be less survivors being hit immediately after being unhooked.
i mean there's only like what, four good exhaustion perks and DH is the lowest use rate of the four
-
@Chaogod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3556967#Comment_3556967
No it's not impossible. No matter which killer you pick. See video I posted above.
It litterally is. Like your source is a person whos job is to play this game all day everyday who asked other people who play this game all day everyday. I am talking about average people. Not people who live and breathe the game. SFW has an overt EXTREME advantage when the game was never designed with you having coms. If they are playing against someone who plays the game for 8 hours a day, every single day, then yeah they are gonna deal with SFW better because they know the game to an absurd degree which pretty much any normal person who plays the game doesn't. All that video proves is "can the top players play with an arbitrariy rule and still win? Yup!".
This looks like you just lost your match and you don't like it. So you want easy mode. But the thing is, that kill rate is for a long time already above 50%.
You realize 50% is not not a good kill rate in a game where you have to kill 4 people right? Which correct me I am wrong, is not the the entended range they want. That doesn't translate to "two survivors escape each match". I don't think its an unreasonable request. Hell you can give extra XP or bloodpoints. Its clear people want to force this game to be competetive so might be better off just adding a competetive mode on the other hand. But it's clear you play exclusively survivor who looks at satistics on a website that is making a best guess. SFW is busted in a game that already bends over backwards constantly for the other side who explode the fourms because the game is even for a change.
the last time I played in a 4 man swf with coms it was to laugh at my friends when they messed up head on plays
-
Also, very important, mitigates the effect of multiple survivors with the perk because if 2 survivors with the perk reset each other only one gets to keep the charge
-
@Melinko said:
So, you were stunned as the killer?
I'm a little confused here.
There is a lot of perks that survivors run that keep them from being downed (Dead Hard, etc) but I think I'm missing part of this story?
I think @jamally093 is saying that they swung at a survivor in a pallet, and what happened was:
- the survivor got hit and made a "getting hit" sound, then...
- they got stunned, then...
- the survivor, as if by magic, became un-hit and was healthy instead of injured
If that's what you're describing, that seems to be a problem with internet speeds. The survivor had already dropped the pallet according to the server meaning you were already stunned according to the server, but the server did not yet send that info to your computer yet. Your computer therefore let you swing and injure the survivor, but then it told you "oh no you were stunned before you swung so that hit never actually counted"
It stinks but it's unavoidable especially if your internet is having a bad day and happens to both sides
-
I hope they give Refined Serum and Blight Serum back in the blood web. Love my zoomies
-
@Alionis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3554271#Comment_3554271
Looks like this was updated since you posted it. I'm guessing the wiki people weren't happy with you trying to use it to discredit them.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/TB6JRAK8ME14/image.png
As it says, the wiki's source is the game's own code, unless mentioned otherwise. Seems pretty credible to me.
That was not my intention at all; I love the wiki and have never found it to be inaccurate and I have no doubt the MMR article is the same.
I was trying to throw the guy a bone a little. The thing he posted a screenshot of, claiming it was evidence of a source, didn't actually have any information documenting how it was sourced (it just mentioned how the wiki was approved by BHVR) so I screenshot the page that actually had that information.
On reflection, especially since I had been in conflict with him and the shift in tone was jarring, I probably should have written a message specifying that was what I was doing, and I could have highlighted the part I was trying to emphasize or cropped it differently so it didn't look like I was trying to denigrate the phenomenal work our wiki editors do. I can totally see how someone looking at my post would get that impression though and that was truly careless of me.
I personally wouldn't be so conceited as to think that those changes were made on my behalf, but I'm glad that page got updated to reflect the effort and accuracy of the wiki. Thanks for updating me to the change within 5 minutes of it being posted.
On the off chance any wiki staffers see this post, once again you have my humblest apologies for any unintended offense and I appreciate everything you do
(Edited because my phone auto posted halfway through writing for some reason and then i noticed typos)
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3556193#Comment_3556193
I know what you are going to say next if I say "Yes", so before you say it, the table that @Maelstrom808 posted is wrong. The real average for the "AK per match" according to his data is 2.114545454545455 survivors killed per match. The best part is that those "AK per match" are not even accurate as they are individually ceiling rounded (if we take the data on the rest of the table, the real "AK per match" of Skull Merchant is 2.656 per match with a kill rate of 66.40%) and the overall kill rates is also wrong as the real average is 52.84393939393939% kill rate, making the real "Overall AK per Match" 2.113757575757576.
So, I don't know how he got that 2.25 "General AK per match" and that average kill rate but he got it wrong, as according to his table the real averages are 52.84% for kill rate and 2.11 for survivors killed per match if we round them correctly.
With this cleared, the answer to your question is "ON AVERAGE, yes, that would mean mostly 2K with rarely 3K". But I'm sure you are going to simply ignore everything that has being said about balancing, skill factor, some players doing more wins or losses than others and that number being an average yet again and ask me "then how it is possible that by the distribution of "3-4k" indicates that killers are winning 45.7% of their games, then?" or something like that proving, yet again, that you don't know what an average is and/or you just decided to ignore what has being already explained and keep going till you are "right".
So go ahead, have your false "Catch you, I win!" moment if that would make you to at least stop with your nonsense already.
Yeah man I'm gonna be honest, even ignoring everything else you've said in this thread there's one very obvious mistake you've made in this post that really does not align with anything I've ever seen done in the academic field of statistics, specifically as it relates to reporting significant figures
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3553943#Comment_3553943
The article is unsourced and also kicks your argument to the curb.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/KQ6Y5EAVYODM/image.png
Need any more source than that?
If the final amount of kills is the ONLY determining factor for whether the killer gains or loses MMR, then that means that killers WIN more matches than they LOSE
And? They still win less times on average than survivors.
However, you have also been presented with factual proof that your assertion is incorrect. 60% kill rate does not, at all, -guarantee- a 40% win rate.
But it is the only way to guarantee having a mathematical average chance of winning equal for everybody, survivors and each individual killer. It's not hard to understand, much less when explained in detail multiple times.
Explain how it is that a 60% kill rate can produce an 80% win-rate if it is, instead, supposed to -guarantee- a 40% win-rate.
Again, I did already, multiple times. Go and read them again.
And I and others have explained to you why it does not directly translate into win and loss percentages.
And you are all wrong because, again, I explained how and why it is the only way to get an equal win rate for everybody by setting win rates for survivors at 40% and make every killer individually have an average kill rate of 2.4 survivors per match which translate in another 40% win rate for every single one of them.
At this point, though, you are absolutely detaching yourself from the game's practice in an effort to try and create a mathematical equivalence between two sides of an asymmetrical multiplayer.
From the Official Wiki article I posted:
- In essence, each Survivor is in an individual mini-Trial with the Killer and vice versa, in which wins, losses, and draws can occur.
Also, the 60% kill rate is something that the devs want themselves. So if anybody is doing that in any case, are the devs. I'm just following the MMR rules and what they say.
This is where I'm going to state that you are being disingenuous in your argumentation. You've hung up your argumentation so far on the MMR system in order to facilitate the 'Actually, it's a 1v1' argument, as a way to dodge the fact that survivors lose more as a team than killers lose.
There is no "team" in MMR. Even in game, you don't get any more BP points or awards for more than one of you escaping. You don't get an "Survivor team wins!" anywhere. You either had escaped, or you had being killed. If you are going to ignore every fact and keep saying I'm being disingenuous, please specify where in all the game are you told that if any specific number of survivors escape then survivors have won, when it makes pretty clear, icons included, that you and only you either escaped or got killed.
Since this is inconvenient to you, you then change the definition of a win to get OFF the MMR system and still declare the hatch a win.
Because in game terms, it is an escape with all that comes with it: BP, Emblems, Experience points, retain your item. Everything. And it is a free, optional, easy way of getting an escape from the game that requires more luck than skill. It is not inconvenient, it is logical.
You are arguing over three different subsections of stats: MMR, win% as team, and win% as individual. And whenever the stats don't agree with your assertions, you switch tracks and start arguing about a different branch.
Again there is no win rates as a team because not even in game the survivors are a team, and I'm strictly guided by MMR which yes, have the exception on hatches because it is still an escape but as it is based on luck is counted as a draw in MMR terms, but an escape nonetheless. So I didn't switch tracks anywhere, it's you who is trying to make a completely new one grasping at it.
And you are blatantly disregarding any stats that are shown. The data in Nightlight shows 46% to 40%. So yes, killers are winning more than survivor teams are.
No, killers are not winning more than survivors (much less "teams", as kill rates obviously counts only survivors, not groups of 4) because survivors have right now an higher win rate on average than killers as already pointed and proved multiple times.
And they're also winning more than individual survivors by a metric that YOU brought into the discussion.
Not true, by all the things already more than explained and pointed. But whatever makes you sleep better at night.
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3553074#Comment_3553074
I mean that it is the MMR what dictates what is a win or a lost for both killers and survivors. A killer only wins with a 3K.
And for your explanation, starting with Nightlight not being a reliable source, as it depends on their users uploading their data to the page and as right now it only counts 22637 matches... again: Averages. Averages and balancing.
In a game like DbD, if you want every killer to have the same chance to win between them and the other side, first you need to make sure that the mathematical equality is achieved. In other words, you first need to get the average to 60% kill rate, which would mean 2.4 survivors per match killed, and then balance individually those killers than can do more or less than that. That's why the devs wanted the kill rate to be 60%, and that's how you get a 40% for everybody. There would still be players that can get more or less wins on both sides as skill is obviously another factor for this, but on average everybody would still have the same chance to win on that ideal scenario.
But the best part of this is that you yourself have proved than in any case, according to Nightlight, the game is slightly survivor sided and not killer sided, as survivors are winning 47.3% of their games, and killers only 46.04% on average. In other words, you are still wrong.
22k samples is more than enough to form a decent conclusion. As you've been very insistent on talking about averages, I'm sure you're familiar with the Central Limit Theorem, which would back up using 22k matches as a representative sample size.
The survivor escape rates also include all the hatch escapes. If you insist on using the believed MMR win/loss conditions to gauge balance (which I think is flawed but that's beside the point) you have to adjust for the fact that the MMR system does not count the hatch escape as a win for the survivors but counts it as an escape in survivor stats
Looking at the Left for Dead achievement, only 8.2% of people have powered the exit gate as the sole survivor and escaped, ever. That number's going to be far less in one month. However, I'll be generous and assume that those numbers don't account for games where the gates were powered with 2 people left, but only one got to walk out. I'm willing to entertain the idea that as many as 16.4% of 3k games end that way - twice the percentage of people who have the Left for Dead achievement. Doing the math on the data we referenced earlier, it seems normalizing for hatch escapes brings the survivor winrate (according to your metric) down to around 44% (actually less than that, but I'm being generous with rounding)
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3553042#Comment_3553042
i still see 2k's as losses because it means that survivors powered exit gate. on average, survivors power the exit gate 53% of the games. this number is raw value but you have to consider how many survivor power exit gate then also die in end game randomly and give killer's 3k's or 4k's. I would not be surprised if survivor power exit gates for over 60% of their games.
if looking at 50% kill-rate killers. let's look at freddy who is only 0.7 off from perfect 50%.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/6V3EIJ1SHSHI/image.png
if you add 4 escapes, 3 escapes and 2 escapes, survivors power exit gate around 59% of the time. So a 50% kill-rate killer is winning games at around 41% frequency.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/E5F2NIVZGPEZ/image.png
there are barely any killer's at 60% but closest one is this killer right here who wins around ~57% of the time on 3k and 4k's and survivor power exit gate roughly 43% of the time.
killer player want killer to be at around 60% ratio while survivor want 50% kill-rate killers. at the same time, kill-rates are statistics and they do not factor in the player's skill or micro elements of the game. it is all averages.
Well I see 2k as a draw so agree to disagree I guess
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3553042#Comment_3553042
Do you understand what an average is? It means that some killers would have higher kill rate than 60%, and other would have it lower.
That is why it is an average, and what you said don't contradicts the fact that 60% kill rate means 40% win rate for killers and 40% win rates for survivors on average. There would be also some survivors that escape and win more times than other survivors do, but those didn't fit your narrative there.
And yes, you can use the MMR metric to calculate this as it is the reason of the MMR working that way and devs wanting a 60% kill rate.
I'm not sure what you mean by "you can use the MMR metric to calculate this." MMR has literally not come up in this discussion until you mentioned it just now
in any case, i'd love you to explain how increasing kill rates from 53% to 60% would decrease killer winrates from what they are at 46% right now to just 40%
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552941#Comment_3552941
Let's take 100 matches.
- 100 matches = 400 survivors.
- 60% killrate = 240 survivors.
- 240 in 100 matches = 2.4 survivors killed per match.
- Or, if you want it shorter: 60% of 4 = 2.4
So, to put it simply, that would means 2K in most games with occasional 3K on average.
A 50% kill rate would means that killer always draw with survivors (2K in every game), while survivors win 50% of their games. So, no wins for killers. That's why a 53% killrate is not even close to be "killer sided", at contrary, it means that killers are losing most of their games.
In other words, in his attempt to claim how grateful he is that the game is "a little killer sided", he has proved that it is full survivor sided.
Let's take your example of 100 matches again. Killer plays 100 matches, gets a 3k in 80 of them and a 0k in the remaining 20. This comes up to 3 * 80 = 240 survivors killed, just as in your example. However, the killer win rate (by the metric you chose) is 80%, far off from the 60% kill rate.
Now, a second example of 100 matches. Killer gets a 4k in 40 matches, 3k in 10 matches and 1k in the remaining 50. In this case, the killer has again gotten 240 kills across 100 matches for a 60% kill rate, but has only a 50% win rate.
The point here is, if youre going to use a metric like "3k+ is a win, 2k is a tie, 1k- is a loss" you can't use kill rate stats to figure out how often killers manage to accomplish that. You would need to look directly at the stats for how common each result is. And what do you know, Nightlight has that stat:
Killers win 46% of the time and lose 40% of the time - their win% is 5 percentage points higher than their loss%. Survivor win% is 5 percentage points below their loss%.
-
@WilliamSN said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552868#Comment_3552868
your argument that the game is killer sided boils down to "Well if the survivors run straight at the killer, the game is killer sided!"
A good balancing philosophy is trickle down balancing, an item/Perk being balanced in high MMR will mean its fine for every MMR below.
However the contrary is not true, for example, while FTP+Buckle up in Mid-low MMR rarely gets big value, the same combo in High MMR is full on broken and makes Killers absolutely miserable.
Point still stands, when both sides play the game correctly, its extremely survivor sided and theres no way around it.
Essentially what I'm getting from you here is that the game is not killer sided on average, if you ignore all the people who make it killer sided on average. That is indeed how averages work, yes
-
@WilliamSN said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552779#Comment_3552779
When even in comp settings with heavy perk + item restrictions for survivors the killers still struggle to 1-2K , thats a blatant indicator that DBD is not "killer sided" in the slightest. "Skill issue" claims are also invalid because well... they are literally *competitive players*
As i've stated before, Above mid MMR the game leans HARD survivor sided, once survivors learn how to juice an extra 30-40 seconds out of a chase , its gg over for killers because there simply isn't enough time in the match to account for 60-70 second chases, you quite literally only get about 4-6 chases in before all 5 gens are popped.
In my post I specified I was talking about the game on average. If you care to read my original post I did mention the caveat that at the top level the game skews strongly in favor of survivors, but with the double-caveat that most people aren't playing at that level so it's irrelevant when talking about averages
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3552533#Comment_3552533
Everyone is pointing out that it's not killer sided though...
That's what they're trying to do, but they're using evidence that it's killer sided in order to do it. Which is fine, it's good that on the individual level the game is killer sided! It's just also good to be honest about this fact
-
A lot of people are listing reasons why it's ok the game is killer sided, and citing them as reasons why they think the game isn't killer sided. That's great, a lot of them are great reasons, and I agree with them! The problem is, they're reasons why it's OK that the game is killer-sided, not evidence that it's not.
-
@caipt said:
53% is 7% lower than the desired killrate by bhvr when they balance. thats not killer sided-
when Riot made League of Legends, they wanted the champ Yuumi to not be viable & lose when played in the mid lane (that is, have a 0% winrate in the mid lane). however, mid Yuumi has a 20% winrate! Quick: does this mean that League of Legends is balanced in favor of Yuumi mid, or does it mean that Yuumi mid is slightly more viable than the developers intended (while still being bad)?
-
@caipt said:
53% is 7% lower than the desired killrate by bhvr when they balance. thats not killer sided-
53% kill rate is slightly killer sided. It's less killer sided than the devs (and I, as a survivor player) want the game to be, as I already pointed out in my post, but killers having a greater than 50% chance to sacrifice any one given survivor is indeed killer favored
-
@Mooks said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550370#Comment_3550370
Yes. I messed up. And nobody noticed but you had to call me out. Now I am sad. I blame BHVR and the lazy devs.
It's clearly the fault of the toxic [other side] mains for forcing you to type the wrong thing 😉
-
make survivors scream when you 2 emote them
-
@TheOneElric said:
Naaaaah, reminds me WAY too much of classic superhero landings.
Counterpoint: that's why it should exist
(On the flipside, it seems too situationally niche to be used with any frequency. How often do you have an opportunity to fall onto the killer as a survivor?)
-
Releasing another victim complex killer post just as more content specifically for killers is released
Shameless. Truly shameless
-
The devs have explicitly stated on many occasions that they don't want to punish killers if survivors choose to loop next to hook. As part of the anti face camping feature, the bar progress slows down or stops completely if there are survivors in the area.
Feel free to tell devs that you think the existing reduction in self unhook progress for nearby survivors is insufficient and should be buffed. I think that's far more productive than baselessly claiming it will be impossible to so much as start your primary objective as Killer
-
are you using botany knowledge
-
@Camping_Bubba said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550474#Comment_3550474
I love that micro-aggressive mindset: Killers don't camp because they may think it's the right move to make! It's because they are new! Or bad! Or trolls! But NEVER because they just felt it was the right move to make!
Basically; Any excuse to blame them and demand more player agency be removed, so say the Almighty Survivors! 😂
I love the mindset that survivors are all dictatorial jerks who are also too unintelligent to understand nuance and take the most hostile possible strawman-level position imaginable.
It's not possible that survivors could understand there are a wide variety of potential scenarios wherein a killer might find themself within range of a hook, many of which might be legitimate, no. A survivor would never recognize that there is a difference between [the trend specifically in low skill matches for a killer to sit within 5 meters of a hooked survivor in a way that prevents low skill survivors from rescuing, thus ruining the game for low-skill players, many of whom are casual and can't afford the time investment to sweat and therefore at low levels turning the game into a waiting to die simulator while also rocketing casual killer players into higher mmr brackets forcing them to play sweaty games they might not be prepared for] and [a killer who has just hooked a survivor noticing that there's a second survivor right nearby and being forced to loop them around the hook in order to prevent a quick and totally unsafe unhook]. There's absolutely no way a survivor could ever conceive of the difference between the two, let alone think the first [should be prevented to preserve the casual player experience on both sides] while thinking the second [is actually something that should be punished for survivors because that's far too aggressive play on their part].
Would be unhealthy to *simply* think of survivors playing the role opposite you in an asymmetrical video game, no, you *must* find a reason why they're all actually cartoon villains come to life and trying to be dictators of the world or something.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550278#Comment_3550278
You got it wrong. What i want is for structures to be fair. Again, i made a whole post about it. Shack if played correctloy by the survivor is not fair for any m1 based killer. Its just forcing the pallet and thats it. No mindgame, just running after them without any chance for a hit. I think thats bad. A good structure should make it possible for any m1 killer to get a hit if they play well, and the survivor to dodge the killer if they played well. Best example of this is in my opinion the TL-wall.
And that's why I said, paraphrased, "me accusing you of thinking [thing you don't think] would be a bad interpretation of what you said"
I see where you're coming from with that point, but I disagree. IMO you would have to buff all filler pallets so there are no more unsafe pallets; all fillers become at the very least border cases - that's what you want, right, either side can has equal theoretical chances at any given tile? - or you would have to intentionally design the maps so they on average favor killers
-
no. I know this isn't what you want to hear but just as 3 gunning with SM was not reportable (just frowned upon) so is using that perk combo not reportable
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550410#Comment_3550410
Wow and this thing costs 4,000BP. Do any of you use it or intentionally buy them in your Bloodwebs?
It's a free DH without an animation. You can get a full self heal with a med kit and then use the leftover charges plus this addon to get an extra health state the next time you get chased
-
Anyone who's played survivor and rolled inexperienced teammates knows that gen speeds are only as broken as the survivors allow them to be
IMO the biggest cause of gen speeds being what they are today is the killer basekit buffs from 6.1.0 - survivors who were used to being able to goof off, open chests, cleanse totems for BP, etc had to choose between either continuing to have fun in between gens and all but be guaranteed to be sacrificed, or hit gens hard in order to have a chance at survival. the sweatiest of the sweaty survivors were always doing peak gen efficiency, but 6.1.0 made a lot more survivors feel like they needed to super-sweat in order to win so the overall percentage of hyperefficient survivors increased
Survivor basekit has been buffed since then and some perks (notably MFT) have helped survivors stabilize. Because of the new tool for survivor as well as the changes that forced players who care about escapes to be gen efficient, I think that's the main driver for gen efficiency. I also think, as I said earlier, you can't do anything to gens at the higher level without guaranteeing a 5% escape rate for casual survivors due to casual survivors being disastrously inefficient
-
@Mooks said:
uh, no??
it can only be used to support my arguments that the game is {insert my side} sided. Any argument of {insert other side} sidedness can be easily explained by just total noobs playing like bots!
Don't people usually want to argue that DBD is [other side]- favored
In order to then argue for buffs to their side
-
@Xyvielia said:
Commodious or Anniversary w Socket Swivels for speed boost is the best option w BNP.
I also have a surplus of BNP’s and Engineer’s Toolboxes, which are the second best option to Commodius, imo, when coupled w Wire Spool for extra charges since Engineer’s boxes already have pretty good speed value.
just so you know, commodious with wire spool is slightly better than swivel socket - SS saves 14.222... seconds, but WS saves 14.666... seconds. also, since toolboxes give you greater skill check chances, WS lasts longer, giving you more chances to get great skill checks
-
it doesn't technically matter because the BNP on its own shaves off a fixed amount of time
however, BNP is best when paired with a toolbox that shaves a lot of time off gens because the more gen speed you stack, the easier it is to knock out one gen
as @DragonMasterDarren said, the best option is a Commodious Toolbox (or one of the event variants) when paired with the spool of wire add-on (+12 charges) because that chops an additional 14 and 2/3 seconds (!!!!!) off of gen time for a total of just under half a minute of time saved
I also like to pair it with Deja Vu because then you can find where the closest 3gen is and use it to quickly eliminate that, making it easier to address the other gens more slowly
-
main: dwight
secondary: rebecca, nic
will play for variety: anyone else
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3550199#Comment_3550199
So it's fine that I'm just a bot following without any counterplay?
Nevertheless.... This has driven off topic.
that feels like a really bad interpretation of what pulsar was saying. like all he said was that there should be some structures that are strong for survivors. he even specified he does not think that all of them should be survivor sided, just that some should - as in, it's not fair to survivors to give killer the advantage in every structure, regardless of what resources have been used. i could counter by saying "just because you want a guaranteed hit at every structure (etc etc)" but that would be an equally unfair assesment of what you're saying
-
So when is Lightborn getting changed so it doesn't block blinds when the killer is picking a survivor up?
you know, since we're asking for the main utility of perks be nerfed in favor of only leaving their more niche and not-worth-it use cases
-
@Killing_Time said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3546869#Comment_3546869
Wraith got NERFED HARD by the speed up reduction after uncloak what do you mean? He's arguably probably the most addon reliant killer in the game. He guess have some very VERY good add on tho.
The buff where they removed lightburn. They also added the ability to wipe out Hag traps without a flashlight