sinkra
sinkra
About
- Username
- sinkra
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,257
- Last Active
Comments
-
It's not just about survivors giving up if winning feels impossible, it's that they've made survivor gameplay so boring with all the nerfs to fun perks that many survivors just don't have the willpower to continue.
-
@ChaosWam said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3669480#Comment_3669480
Oh yeah, the good ol' days of survivors being 100% safe holding W and dropping pallets because the break animation was just long enough to reach the next safe loop/pallet.
The kill rate pre-6.1 was 53%. If killers think the game was unfair pre-6.1 when they already had a higher than 50% kill rate, it tells me they don't want a fair and balanced game.
-
@mikewelk said:
Camping at endgame is justifiable. Being hooked during endgame should feel risky and not a free escape for survivors...
"Free escape"? They managed to get through 5 gens without dying, that's already an achievement. The killer shouldn't get a free kill at that point just because.
-
Not to mention we literally have zero way of communicating with "friends" in-game. Someone added me as a friend after a match, and to my disappointment there isn't even a way to send a message?
-
Designate one member to go around the map disabling her drones to clear a safe path for the rest of the team.
-
@I_Cant_Loop said:
The solo queue kill rate is 60%, which is exactly where the devs want it to be. That means on average, survivors are escaping 40% of the time. If you play with friends on comms, your escape rate is even higher - closer to 50%. Escaping is supposed to be difficult and not guaranteed. That's why the target rate is 40% which is still almost half of your matches. Not sure what else is going to make you happy. Is the killer supposed to be the punching bag instead? Seems like that's the only thing that would make some players happy.
Do you think most survivor players would prefer a 60% kill rate or a balanced 50% kill rate like it used to be? Who is this 60% kill rate supposed to benefit?
-
@Caiman said:
I wish both sides would stop using the top 5% of players to justify nerfing the other 95%.
Even new killers are complaining the game is too easy now
-
@ArkInk said:
You're saying this like there haven't been survivor win streaks either, which are much harder to pull off typically cause it means denying the killer every single kill.
Any recent streaks after all the survivor nerfs?
-
@Hitman2000 said:
U picking one player and see this as a proof that every killer player is doing win streaks with seberak hundreds of wins
pls get some knowledge into statistics
and if u really think killer is op and u can win every game: play killer and show us all how easy killer is ;)
Do I need to explain that if this game had a functioning MMR system that a 100 game win streak would be practically impossible unless you're the top ranked player in the world?
Recent comment I read on Reddit
"In October, I tracked my games on my main, the Singularity. Out of 291 games played that month, I won 287, I lost 2 and I tied 2. So, with the "old MMR", I had a 98.6% winrate.
In November so far, I played 178 games. I won 173 times, lost 3 times and tied twice. This means a winrate of 97.1%.
So, yes, my winrate lowered, and this will probably be harmful if I want to reach my personal best of 153 wins in a row again."
It's absolutely outrageous that this is even possible in a game that's supposed to have a functioning MMR system.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/407257/a-simple-solution-for-lobby-dodging
How about no? What if you encounter people with racist names or typing such atrocities in chat, and now the guy that does not want to play with them has to get a penalty? How would you make an excuse for people that dodge with good reason?
If you see that you report them. Let's be real, nobody is dodging lobbies because they didn't like another person's name. They're doing it because they think it looks challenging and want an easier lobby.
-
Remember killers don't want a balanced game (50/50). The proof is that the kill rate pre-6.1 was 53% according to devs, yet killers complained that the game was survivor sided even though stats showed it was almost perfectly balanced.
-
@Thusly_Boned said:
I play both sides equally (and at 4K hours that is a really good taste of each side), and while surv is a little bit down now, this "wE suRvs are jUSt maDe to sUfFeR" talk is just absurd.
I don't think survivor play is appreciably worse than it has been at any point in my tenure. And while some things have been lost, others have been gained. There's an ebb and flow, and it is felt on alternatively on both sides.
People brush it off, but as a strictly solo player, I found the new surv HUD to be a goddamn revelation. Best single thing either side has gotten in years. Having an idea of what your team is up to in solo was a massive change.
BnPs weren't lost, I think they're better.
Medkits weren't lost, they were balanced (a souped up green medkit was stupid OP, probably the strongest item in the game, and I abused them, it was almost criminal).
Prove Thyself was always pretty mid, not much has changed. Anyone focusing on Prove Thyself probably isn't all that good.
Gen times got increased marginally, but the old (and much more effective) killer slowdown meta was gutted.
I think 6.1.0, while disruptive, was in part very necessary. I think the game was surv leaning before, and the surv meta was stale as hell. OG DH was the most busted thing in the game and had been for years. It had to go. Think of a busted perk on the other side, Eruption. That was nerfed to the ground almost immediately in comparison.
The only loss I felt that seemed really excessive to me was the stun duration of DS. That was egregious, but another rework is coming, so there's hope.
In the end, this is just another "us v. them" topic that only reflects how biased some people's perspectives are. I try not to be gatekeeper-y, but more and more I feel like if a player doesn't have somewhat equal time in both sides (not just having trialed the "other" side), I don't really care about their opinion on game balance.
You can't just put the shoe on the other foot for a minute, you have walk in it in equal measure. Some of these ######### takes just reek of people who play like a 90/10 split.
How can you say the game pre-6.1 was survivor sided when the average kill rate was 53%? That means it was close to balanced and slightly killer sided. Here you can see the devs boasted about increasing the kill rate from 53% to 61% after 6.1. There were more than a thousand comments and I didn't see any survivor main happy about this change. Many just quit the game.
https://old.reddit.com/r/deadbydaylight/comments/xez20h/stats_610_in_review/
-
Survivors shouldn't expect good news because devs literally said they want to sacrifice balance for role-playing a horror fantasy. They think that when survivors die most games it makes the game more fun for them because killers feel more scary or something.
-
The unique characters and cosmetics. Sable will be the new face of DBD.
-
I checked the steam chart and the game was getting more players every year (on average) until the 6.1 patch in June 2022, when devs suddenly decided they wanted a 60% kill rate instead of a balanced 50%. Since then the playerbase has remained static or shrunk. I don't think it's a coincidence. I think the game would have way more players today if they had kept it balanced instead of putting 80% of their playerbase at a disadvantage.
-
Knowing how BHVR wants every survivor perk to have a trade-off these days they'll probably buff DS to 5 seconds but then makes you hindered for 5 seconds afterward, just so that killers don't complain about survivors getting anything useful.
-
I'm actually against DS being buffed for 2 reasons: It's behind DLC so unless it becomes a general perk. Also because I don't want my ability to play survivor completely defendant on a perk. It seems like devs only want a few perks to be useful and 90% useless which reduces variety and experimentation.
-
Gens back to 80 seconds would be a good start.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3667286#Comment_3667286
Incorrect.
I play both sides, so that argument is invalid. There's a reason tournaments have heavy restrictions on survivors, because at the highest level killers simply are not strong enough to deal with them when they bring their best.
There are killer streamers going on win streaks of hundreds of games in a row. There's not a single survivor player in the world who can escape hundreds of games in a row, especially in solo q. Even 10 escapes in a row would be a massive achievement. Look at how much killers complained about MFT even when they were still winning most games. They don't want to survivors to have ANYTHING that makes the game challenging for them. The worst thing is that devs have listened to killer mains and ruined the game for 80% of their playerbase.
-
This post is a good example of what the 60% target kill rate has led to, killers feeling entitled to get a 3k/4k most games and any kind of challenge is seen as unfair.
-
I forgot to mention Corrupt Intervention. 3 GENERATORS BLOCKED FOR 120 SECONDS?! Then the killer can simply patrol the few gens remaining AT THE START. This is absolutely ridiculous. It's not even interactive, these perks passively prevent survivors from doing their one objective.
-
@solarjin1 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3666544#Comment_3666544
they talking about some x comp killer player who now mainly play survivor apparently. The only reason I even know this is cuz they post the same comment in three to four different threads.
60% escape rate in solo q would literally be one of the best players in the world. Meanwhile it's normal for average killer players with meta perks to have a 75% kill rate.
-
@xltechno said:
Even in such an environment, advanced survivors boast a 60% escape rate.
For those who don't, it might be a good idea to take a moment to think about why they are different.
By the way, these survivors all agree that tunnels and camps are tactics, and while it's true that they may not be fun for survivors sometimes, but counterattacks are possible.
Where did you get the 60% number? According to BHVR's own stats high MMR survivors have an escape rate of 43.09%.
-
Devs have said they consider camping and tunneling a valid strategy. On some killers like Twins you can face camp without the bar even filling.
-
@Xernoton said:
There already is an anti face camping mechanic. How you managed to not capitalise on that despite these killers face camping is a mystery. I need more context here.
Where they actually face camping or was it proxy camping? What does face camping mean in your opinion? What happened for the AFC not to take effect?
The anti-camp mechanic is a joke because the bar fills so slowly and the radius is small. It actually trains killers into more effective campers because now they proxy camp. The devs just can't bring themselves to nerf killers in any way because streamers will complain if they can't win almost every game. It's a killer sided game now and devs expect survivors to just be fodder for killers' entertainment.
-
@Snowbawlzzz said:
I play both roles roughly 50/50 every day and I enjoy both for the most part. Survivors coming here on the forums to throw their hands up and lament the state of their games are usually people that don't play killer ever. Playing killer makes you good at survivor; when you observe a survivor doing something that annoys you as killer, you will put that tactic in the memory bank and pull it out in your next survivor game.
But one thing I *will* say is a big negative about the survivor experience is that the overly-oppressive anti-loop killers suck the fun out of the role. The chase is the most thrilling part of the game and killers like Knight and Dudeflinger that just force downs completely ruin the game.
I played about half killer but I can't do it anymore because there's no challenge. Getting a 4k doesn't even feel like I won anything, it just makes me feel bad because the survivors stood no chance. Every killer main has a 70%+ kill rate when they're trying to win and not allowing pity escapes. The devs have ruined this game for survivors.
-
@Marc_go_solo said:
I do really enjoy Dead By Daylight. Especially because of my playstyle of randomness which makes every game a learning curve. Each trial is a mini slasher movie. It's just a game I get a lot of fun out of.
Do DBD care about survivors? Considering they are 4/5ths of the game, they do. Balance changes do not have to be "Well, they got it so we need something", but some don't see that. The whole "BHVR doesn't care about x" malarky is a joke; always was, but it's more recognised now. For every claim of bias for one side, there's also evidence on the other.
As for why I enjoy it? I've explained it roughly, but basically it's because of the variety. Granted, there will be certain builds some Killers prefer, which becomes more common and makes it a bit more predictable as to how to deal with it, but that's understandable, just as much as the other way round. I find plenty of variety.
When the devs straight up say they want the killer to be "an unstoppable force", that doesn't imply they care about survivor gameplay.
Direct quote from them:
"To ensure the Killer feels like an unstoppable force to be feared, we’re making slight improvements to many aspects of Killer gameplay."
-
It's no surprise people are playing in the most effective way possible to win. If it's a problem the blame isn't on killers, it's on devs for making tunneling and camping so effective.
-
@Tsulan said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3665953#Comment_3665953
A competitive game where similar sized teams face each other, should have 50/50.
This isn´t applyable to DbD though. Since its 1vs4, a traditional 1vs1 will always be unbalanced.
You literally don't know what the word balanced is if you think 60/40 is more balanced than 50/50.
-
@MalekithHatesSnow said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3665725#Comment_3665725
Why is this so typical? You got 3 gens nerfed and then you spin it into some kind of killer buff tell me what do you want? 2 kicks only? No gen regression at all? It's never the survivor's fault always the killer we're not bad the killer is just op
Returning to a 50% kill rate like it was for years before the devs decided to sacrifice balance for role-playing.
-
A dev recently said they are very happy with the 60% kill rate and have no plans to change it.
https://i.imgur.com/CfU2Xiq.jpeg -
Because they want the game to be easy mode for killers for some unknown reason, "to fulfill the horror fantasy" of the game whatever that means. They couldn't even bring themselves to nerf gen regression without buffing it at the same time.
-
@jonifire said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3665559#Comment_3665559
According to the devs goal of 60% kill rate, the game is still too easy for survivors.
The real kill rate higher than 60% but killers are manipulating the stats with their behavior and not trying to win because the game is too easy for them. Here are my stats from more nearly 200 games as survivor. 42% escape rate. However, 32% of my escapes were only because the killer was afk/messing around/let me escape on purpose at end. My real adjusted escape rate is 33.5% when the killer is trying to win. You can look at good killers who track their stats and their kill rate is 70-80%,.
-
@jonifire said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3665559#Comment_3665559
According to the devs goal of 60% kill rate, the game is still too easy for survivors.
I don't think 60% was ever their original goal. What happened was killer main streamers complained about anything that made the game feel challenging for them, when according to stats the game was balanced back then with 50% kill rate even with DS/DH. Then BHVR listened to those streamers and were surprised to see kill rates jump to 60%, so they just changed their goal to appease the streamers who want 3k or 4k almost every game.
-
@Hermit said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3665274#Comment_3665274
You have to realize, you and "many" others are just a small, miniscule part of their playerbase. Even all people on their forums together are negligable. BHVR has lost their "small indie dev team" status years ago.
They became a company like many others.
They look at revenue numbers. Are people still paying for their game, DLCs, skins and battle passes? Then everything is fine, no need to invest precious resources into things, that small a part of their customers complain about. Heck, the people distributing most of these resources aren't even the actual devs. Its the CEOs, investors, finance and marketing people.
This is the reason I won't spend any more money on this game unless devs balance it and go back to 50/50 kill rate or at least 55/45.
-
@Leachy_Jr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3665118#Comment_3665118
And how does that give her perma undetectable?
When SM drops a drone with addon she has 10 seconds of undetectable status. The cooldown for dropping another drone is 10 seconds. When I play her I drop drone after drone to remain perma undetectable when moving across the map.
-
@Leachy_Jr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3665097#Comment_3665097
???
They removed that add on 128 days ago. Have you played since then?
-
With an addon she has perma undetectable. I don't blame survivors for suiciding on hook when I play her, it must be miserable.
-
Extremely frustrating. Most games feel hopeless. It feels like you can only escape if the killer is really bad, afk, or lets you go. On the other hand playing killer feels too easy which makes it boring.
-
They want the game to be easy for killers and hardcore for survivors because most of the popular streamers are killer mains. BHVR listens to their every word, just look at how OTZ wanted them to release stats and they immediately replied to him and did it the next day. Those killer mains want 3 or 4k every game to make their streams more entertaining for viewers. Survivors are just supposed to be cannon fodder for killers' entertainment.
-
@Nebula said:
I absolutely hope not. Not every perk that's good needs or deserves to be nerfed.
Windows is the best perk in the game for new survivors and with how many maps + variations of maps there are, it is absolutely a necessity for new / newer players, nerfing this perk would lead to an even more miserable new player experience.
This new train of nerf every useful survivor perk needs to stop at some point, it's ridiculous at this point. Survivor escape rates are at an all-time low, at what point do we say stop to all these nerfs?
That's true but it means WOO is basically a crutch that many players rely on. BHVR have made it clear they don't want any perk to feel like players HAVE to take it to play the game.
-
@catnip18 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3653907#Comment_3653907
I literally stopped playing killer because if I put in literally any effort I had a 90% kill rate. I'd frequently play while watching tv in order to get it closer to 75%. Its braindead easy even after 4king 50 games in a row to try and boost my mmr. Maybe you're just bad?
That's another issue with making killer so strong. I think BHVR thinks that if killers can get 3 or 4k most matches it makes the game more fun for killers, but for me it's the opposite. It doesn't feel rewarding to win as killer because I know the game is "balanced" to make killers win and hold their hand. If killer had more challenge I would play it more.
-
@Snowbawlzzz said:
"With the consistent middle finger to survivors (removing MFT, stopping gen regression, mangled/haemorrhage changes etc)"
If you don't think MFT was a glaring problem, I don't know what to tell you dawg.
The other two things you said had flipside nerfs for killer that you conveniently ignored. Killers can no longer 3-gen, and thana got nerfed + sloppy butcher is on the roadmap for a nerf.
If these survivor perks were so overpowered then it would show in the stats right? Yet the data says the kill rate back then was around 50%, which by defintion is much more balanced than now. It seems like anything that could give a challenge to killers is seen as problematic by killer mains and the devs. Survivors are just supposed to flop over and be fodder for a killer's fun.
-
@TheNameIsGilgamesh said:
If the devs favor one side, who is going to play killer or survivor? None. This game will die quicker than Mayflies.
The reason survivors keep playing this game is because there's no viable alternative. DBD is like the World of Warcraft of asym survival games. Many tried to replace it but they all failed.
-
I don't think anything will change. It's been almost 2 years since the game shifted to killer sided and the devs say they're very happy with the 60% kill rate. I think in the devs' minds they think that survivors enjoy dying most games because it fulfills some horror fantasy, when the game is actually played like a competitive pvp game.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3663869#Comment_3663869
You're missing the point. It's literally the killer's job to kill survivors. They shouldn't grow stronger when the killer plays better. This doesn't really make sense. Believe me, I don't want the killer focussing 1 survivor and killing immediately either but this is not the way to go.
This would in no way balance anything. It would only create a huge imbalance and force killers to slug. I'm talking hardcore slugging here.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3663871#Comment_3663871
Then it'd solely help when there is only 1 gen left anyway. In which case, killers would double down on tunneling to avoid that situation. The earlier I can kill someone the less likely it is the remaining survivors will get to the last gen.
You say I'm missing the point but I think you're missing the point. You say "survivors shouldn't get stronger when the killer plays better". What happens now is that it's the killer who grows stronger with each survivor they kill. With each kill, it's easier to get the next kill because the killer has less survivors to deal with saving teammates and doing gens. It's a snowball effect. I think that's a problem with game design. The equivalent for survivors would be like for each gen they complete the next gen takes less time. The gen time debuff would be a way to slightly counter that snowball effect.
-
You're assuming I mean a huge speed buff like "completing a gen in a few seconds". No, even just a 10 second gen reduction for each dead survivor would help give survivors more of a chance. Do you really think it's op if one survivor is dead at 4-5 gens and those will take 80 seconds instead of 90? The game will still be hugely in the killer's favor.
-
@Xernoton said:
This would be impossible to balance. The repair speed boost would need to be huge to make up for a dead survivor. But when a killer does their job, then someone will die eventually. Let's say they kill someone at 1 gen left and now the others get the repair speed. How is that fair? It's pretty much guaranteed that the last gen will be done in a few seconds and then 2 survivors escape at the very least.
Meaning, killers would be punished for simply playing the game with the only way to work around this being to slug all survivors.
Make it weaker though and it doesn't help in the situations it should help but only in examples like the above, which would lead to even more tunneling.
Right now the killer gets more powereful with each dead survivor, meaning the chances of winning go up exponentially if they kill one survivor. Survivors don't get more powerful with each completed gen. This would balance it out and give survivors a chance when 1 or 2 survivors are dead. It would also give killers more of a challenge to win instead of just tunneling 1 person out fast and then the rest is ez mode, which is boring for killers.
-
This would only be true if killers were on average better players than survivors, which is highly doubtful. The problem is they're balancing the game for coordinated high MMR SWFs on coms and not taking into account low-mid mmr solo q which is where most their playerbase is.
-
@sizzlingmario4 said:
No, the blue beam and ring showing the turret radius is only visible to survivors.
Was it different before? Because I read comments from when Xeno came out and people were saying they didn't drop turret because it made them easier to spot.