ratcoffee
ratcoffee
About
- Username
- ratcoffee
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
I'm on 1600 sensitivity. Honestly, I recommend whatever sens you're the most comfortable with. For optimal play, making sure the amount you turn feels right for the amount you moved your mouse is more important than following a rule. I would recommend investing in a larger mousepad or even a mat if you're going to be playing a lot with KB&M
I also often lift my mouse, that's a natural consequence of looping and is common for a lot of KB&M games
This thread should have been in Off-Topic though, just saying
-
on the one hand: you make a good point
on the other hand: infinite tombstone go BRRRRRRRRR
-
50% gen progress can be modified by things like skill checks, toolboxes, or perks that give gen speed. 45 seconds is always 45 seconds - can't be changed by anything. They sound similar but there's actually that important distinction between the two's activation requirement
-
@Stabby_Widdershins said:
Considering how strong the Basement is (one way in and out)...I have to disagree.
If a Survivor is being brought to the Basement, it's because either they played badly, or the Killer played really well. No need to make it easier with an extra basement to avoid.
@Crowman said:
We already have a couple maps with psuedo basements.
Thompson House's upstairs and the 1 hook.
Temple of Purgation's temple basement and it can even spawn the basement.
Haddonfield the upstairs of Myer's house is a single hook
Garden of Joy also has an upstairs and a hook though it's a bit easier to escape than the others above.
We don't really need 2 full basements to spawn on a map.
@Dream_Whisper said:
If by chance I want two basement in any given map, it would have to connect one to another; but it would kinda defeat the purpose and be more of a lower level then a difficult to escape room.
oh no i meant "maps should have more than two POTENTIAL places to spawn a basement" not that multiple basements should spawn in one match
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3315926#Comment_3315926
No, I'm using the definition of "competitive" and "zero-sum game", if you think that only games played professionally are the only competitive games or the only ones played at high level skill is your problem.
And your conclusion is that playing to win in the most efficient and competitive way is disrespect the rival by making him lose early... got it:
No more triples in the NBA to gain point advantages, no more punches to the head in boxing to avoid early KOs, the same in MMA with kicks or grappling, no more buying the red and oranges streets in Monopoly as they are statically the most rewarding. Ban combos longer than 2 hits from fighting games. Forbid to be able to kill someone from behind in FPS. Oh, and ban any survivor that do a gen in less than 40 seconds, is disrespecting the killer by not letting him commit to chases and ending the game by the time he got his second hook.
Obviously, your logic is flawless.
what do you mean by "No, I'm using the definition of 'competetive'"
there are a couple possible ideas you could be getting at here, and I don't want to assume you're saying one thing when you mean another
-
@Stabby_Widdershins said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3315964#Comment_3315964
"ending it early" is intentionally targetting one player even when better opportunities to chase other players existAnd...who decides what the best opportunity to chase players? I'd hold that the Killer, who is playing...THE KILLER...decides what his/her best move is at any given moment. Yet Survivors continually insult me for not doing what THEY want me to do.
I could just as easily ask questions like "Where does it say killers are owed [x] amount of fun before the survivors escape,"I also asked that in my post. It was 'Where's the timer telling Survivors to slow down on gens, because they are doing them too fast?' My point was that neither side owes it to the other to play badly for some vague idea of 'time owed' or 'fun owed'.
Tunneling is not an absolute necessity and it is incorrect to treat it as suchI agree. Sure.
A lot of the arguments in favor of tunneling seem to be "it's technically allowed" and in my opinion that's a weak argument in favor of anything.Yes and no. You are correct, but it's more nuanced than that. Allot of 'anti tunneling' seem to be based off this idea that Tunneling should not be allowed. SOothe ideas are 'Steal BP' and 'Punish Killers' and 'Ban anyone I hate'. Ideas that start with the erroneous idea that Tunneling (and camping, and slugging) are clearly not allowed, just because Survivors say so.
My point was that no one is owed [x] amount of game time, or fun, or anything else. So there is no 'ending the game early', because there is no early.
If the Survivors somehow manage to do all 5 gens & open the exit gates in 2 minutes (again; without cheating or using exploits); Then they did not 'end the match too early'. Yes; such times should be looked at, if it ever happens. But no one can say 'they owed the Killer more time to kill'.
Just like, if the Killer feels 2-3 gens popping means he needs to tunnel someone out; He does not owe it to them to spread out hooks just because they don't want to be 'killed too early'.
I hate that 'too early' mindset, because it's exactly the mindset that sees people screaming for 'punishments' instead of FIXES. People with wounded egos felt they were owed some amount of arbitrary game time or fun, and thus feel they should be compensated, or their opponent should be punished, for breaking this 'fun rule'.
It's also why Survivors treat Killers like [bleep] in the end game chat; It's an excuse of 'They were mean/toxic first by (tunneling/camping/slugging), so I'm justified in being mean back'.
Which is why I hate the mindset. No offense. There is no 'too early', or the devs would have programmed a timer.
I was going to make some remarks on some of the flavor of your arguments, but honestly I think it'd be more productive to cut to the chase.
I think a lot of this boils down to people assuming hostility on the other side. I might have seen like one person say "there should be a rule against tunneling," like, ever. and i'm pretty sure they were joking. of the hundred or so people I've seen complain about tunneling, it's usually either "I find tunneling a scummy tactic" or "BHVR should do more to disincentive it." instead of asking for punishment, usually I see the other way around - people saying killers should be rewarded for not tunneling (bonuses for hooking different survivors consecutively) and it's generally from a perspective of wanting more interesting gameplay for everyone (though, obviously, focusing primarily on survivors).
I think a lot of vocal anti-tunneling advocates assume killer players target specific players to be malicious and so the way they discuss it is in response to that percieved maliciousness. likewise, killer players who do what might be considered tunneling assume that survivors want the killer to just act as a doormat, when really everyone just wants what they feel is a chance.
-
@Stabby_Widdershins said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3315926#Comment_3315926
Questions:
- What is 'ending it early'?
- Where does it say Survivors are owed [x] about of fun before they can be killed?
- Where is the rule stating Killers have to wait until [x] gens pop?
- Where's the timer showing killers how long before they can get their first kill?
- Where's the timer telling Survivors to slow down on gens, because they are doing them too fast?
In short; there is no 'ending it early'. There's not being 'disrespectful' for trying to win (within the rules of the game. IE: No cheating or abusing exploits). And people need to realize that.
"ending it early" is intentionally targetting one player even when better opportunities to chase other players exist
as for the rest of your other questions, the answer is "just because there isn't a rule against playing in a particular way does not mean that you have to, or even should, do it." My argument is that nothing is forcing you to play in a particular way. As a survivor, I like being tunneled because often the kind of killer player that tunnels (or at least the type that tunnels me) isn't very good in chase so I get to feel good at the game; but I know many other people (generally people who don't play the game much and don't want to sweat) who don't like games like that.
I could just as easily ask questions like "Where does it say killers are owed [x] amount of fun before the survivors escape," or "where is the rule saying survivors need to wait until [x] hook stages," but I wouldnt, because if I did that, I would most likely be engaging in a bad faith response to your post.
To make sure we're understanding each other, my argument is this: Tunneling is not an absolute necessity and it is incorrect to treat it as such. It can be conditionally useful if you want to play with a certain style or achieve a certain goal, but just as there's no rule saying the killer needs to let survivors get a certain a certain amount of progress done, there's no rule saying that they have to not do that. A lot of the arguments in favor of tunneling seem to be "it's technically allowed" and in my opinion that's a weak argument in favor of anything.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/360768/enough-is-enough
Efficient survivor play revolves around the tunneling and removal of generators. Efficient killer play likewise is removing one player from the game as fast as possible. Things like Borrowed time base kit have only made me tunnel harder than ever. Why? Because SWF is completely broken and has been for 6 years with no limitation. Also we have videos were it is "routine" to make one generator take 35 seconds. That's completely absurd.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3315473#Comment_3315473
Actually their stats showed that something like 55% of players at that time played every game in a SWF.
The 8% figure was 4 man SWF teams. In my experience a lot more people play SWF all the time now.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3315416#Comment_3315416
This guy gets it.
efficient survivor gameplay revolves around splitting pressure around the map as much as possible. i can't tell you how many killer games i've won off the back of finding all the survivors grouped up.
35 second generators are not "routine" and require ridiculous amounts of luck, setup and coordination. you see the 35 second generator but not the 5 minutes of setup to get to that point (although, that said, gen speedup perks could absolutely do with a nerf and when gens happen that fast it is a problem)
it was that 55% of games had a SWF, not that 55% of people played in a SWF all the time, those are two very different concepts. my experience disagrees with yours with regards the percent of SWFs in the game increasing. I played about a dozen killer games last night, I had one 4-person SWF, one group of 3 with a random, and a handful where I suspected there might be a pair and two randoms, but the majority seemed to be solo queue only. Even if that were the case, the SWFs I was playing against for the most part were easy to win against still and not like the stereotypical sweaty SEAL Team 6 everyone seems to worry about
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3315518#Comment_3315518
Yes, by nature and design, as any zero-sum game. Being symmetrical or asymmetrical is not relevant (BTW, fighting games its what is called "Partial asymmetrical"), what is relevant is that again, someone wins, someone lose.
And I gave you that two examples because those was two competitive "party" games that their player base turned in a high skill competitive game. That doesn't means a party game is not competitive, only that now because how it is played someone requires top play for being good at the game. So in Smash Bros you either find people to play it at low skill level as a party fun game, or if you want to play the main ranked mode you either play to get good or you would lose. And if you don't find fun in getting good at it, again, is your problem.
And you are misunderstanding "cooperate with your friends" with "party game". One of the selling points of any team multiplayer game is cooperating with your friends, that doesn't means it is a low skill party game. Are games like Overwatch or CoD party games just because I can do a squad with friends? Your argument don't make any sense.
Again, a zero-sum game with a ranked system where people are rewarded or punished for winning or losing, where two teams compete against each other and where you need some degree of skill to be good at it, but is not a high skill competitive game... is that really so hard to understand?
oh I see, you're using a different definition of "competetive" than i expected
you meant "you are playing against someone else and not just exclusively cooperatively," not "it is an esport" which is what I assumed
yeah the fact that you're going against other people is, imo, not reason enough to be disrespectful to someone else's experience by intentionally ending it early (for either side)
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3315473#Comment_3315473
That's sound like a "you" problem. DbD, by nature and design, is a competitive game. Any zero-sum game is a competitive game. At first maybe people played it just for fun, but as time passes people would start playing to win in the most optimal way instead, and this happened even with Tetris's versus mode:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L_l4dj0KRA
The best example for this would be Super Smash Bros. It was planned as a 4 player party fighting game, then people started to play it competitively by playing as optimally as the game allowed them by the competitive nature of a fighting game, not just for the fun of playing it, but the fun of getting good and skilled at it. Now, unless you are with friend and wanting to have fun, the predominant way to play it is 1v1 without items.
What you are asking is for people to stop playing competitively in a skill ranked competitive game because you want to play it like a party game just for the fun of playing and not winning. Sorry, but no.
"by nature and design" lol. lmao. the game was clearly designed and marketed as a fun party game, a lot of the early marketing in particular was centered around the idea of the KYF being a primary game mode
I'd also point out the two games you've mentioned are symmetrical games (not asymmetrical like dbd) and are not the most modern iteration of their franchise/style. most casual tetris players likely play on their phones, some facebook app, or maybe a website if they're feeling spicy. most casual smash players will be playing ultimate (not melee) on their switch. the reason those specific games are seen as competetive is because only the competetive players are left playing it. dbd, by comparison, is still very active among all sorts of players.
i'll also note that anecdotally, basically everyone i know who plays DBD shares my attitude that its casual, and this goes for both survivors and killers. most of the (small minority of) super sweaty players i know even recognize its a party game and that although they enjoy playing it competitively its not the only way, or even the primary way, to play
-
@MrMori said:
Someone DCing or bleeding out would already rob you of an adept. Ending the game too fast? No adept. No idea why this new system is a problem to anyone. It's not that hard to get a 4k if you just give it a few attempts.
they did say that DC counts as a kill for the purpose of the achievement. still worth looking at 3k + hatch as an option
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3315458#Comment_3315458
And where do you get that 5% SWF? Just curious.
And the difference is I'm not ruining someone else day, I'm just playing optimally in a competitive game taking in count that I could encounter other people playing that way. Again, you can't expect other to not play to win just because you want to play chill and "have fun".
Also, I said that because was the OP who suggested that tunneling at the start of the game against SoloQ is a no-no. Even if it was a no-no, the killer don't have a way to tell they are a SWF until the late game.
i guess i misremembered, there was a dev stream where they said the percent of 4 person SWF was around 8.5% and I thought it was something different. same ballpark though
most people don't see dbd as a competetive game but rather a party game, and the reason they don't like people camping and tunneling is because they think someone optimizing a party game and treating public matches as if they were not only a competetive game but also a match being played for money is unfun.
as i said, if you want to avoid SWFs, simply dodge until you get people trickling into the lobby, but given that you like to play competetively maybe you should actively seek out SWFs since that's the environment you're looking for
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/360768/enough-is-enough
And how would a killer differentiate between a coordinated full SWF with voicechat from a SoloQ squad at the start of the game? Should I risk the possibility for survivors to be coordinated and let them do 3 gens in less than 2 minutes because the possibility of them not being Gen Rushing?
Having 4 survivors at 3 gens could mean a lost game, having 4 survivors at 2 gens is a lost game unless you stack up regression perks, have a good 3 gen situation and they start to pile up mistakes. As long as survivors can Gen Rush tunneling would not only be a necessity, it would be most effective to do at the start of the game to take out one survivor ASAP.
Not only that, but most of the time tunneling is only doable if the survivors allow you to do it. While you are tunneling that one survivor there is at least two of them totally free to do gens undisturbed, and with the basekit BT unless you can hit the unhooked survivor the moment he touch the ground the chase would be longer than usual. Stop doing unsafe unhooks in front of the killer, stop going "Hero mode x 3" and going all in to the rescue, and you would see how you would make less appealing for the killer to tunnel.
"How can this be a good experience for anyone?" The real question is "Why the killer has to sacrifice his chance of winning so it can be a good experience for you?". Stop pretending like you having fun in a competitive game is most important than people playing it optimally.
"i should ruin someone else's day on the off chance they might have friends they play with" is uh, quite the argument
SWFs load in all at once. if you don't want to go against SWFs, dodge until you get lobbies where people load in at different times - there's no dodge penalty and you won't have to risk being a complete scumbag to one person just on the 5% chance that they're in a 4-person SWF (5% of all games have 4 person swf, and i'm making the assumption that they're all comp squads, even though that's probably not true)
-
@Batusalen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3309243#Comment_3309243
That doesn't makes any sense as with Ruin you can't kick the gens until the hex is done, so if you have a gen kicking build it's better to have other perk than Ruin.
But I don't think the problem is for it being an hex either, but more that hexes are so easy to turn off as totem placement is often at plain sight and the game have the bad habit to put your hex in the most visible place possible (4 straight games where Devour Hope was just besides a gen, impossible to miss even if you wasn't looking for it).
What they should do is to rework totem placement in map generation or allow the killers to put the hex where they want as survivors do with their boons.
it makes perfect sense.
-ruin prevents you from kicking gens
-kicking gens is really strong
-ruin prevents you from doing the thing that is strong
-your proposed change would cause ruin to work for longer while doing less passive regression
-ruin would therefore provide less value, and prevent value for other perks for longer
-this would make ruin worse
-
it's already bad enough, that would make it even worse in this meta where gen kicking is so powerful
-
ok
-
love this bait