thesuicidefox
thesuicidefox
About
- Username
- thesuicidefox
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
@Hag.is.Dtier said:
Bring back the old Freddy and improve that kit and playstyle.
To be honest after playing new Freddy a bunch I would have been fine with this. I could identify exactly what the problem was with old Freddy and give ideas how to make it better. Namely his biggest problem was that he couldn't do anything to you while you were awake. A simple solution to this would be to make the transition block interactions other than unhooking perhaps. Then he could force you off a gen or a totem and into a chase. I would also have kept the dream clocks that give you another way to wake up. Among some other small things, but these would be the big 2 that would make the biggest positive difference.
-
@Devil_hit11 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702362#Comment_1702362
This is not how you draw conclusion about stats. what you need to look for in stats is patterns. Do you see a pattern with stats? I certainly do. All the killers that have high killrate have powers that are all about slowing the game down or speeding them up(from instant downs). Freddy & Pig are both killers specifically designed to slow the game down with dream world and bear traps. Leatherface has instant down so his chases are half as long. Doctor has snap out and two killers after are ghostface & myers who also have instant downs.
Spirit is actually statistical outlier. She's a chase killer and yet if you look at where all other chase killers are at, they're at lower end of the graph where nurse,huntress are. My guess is that Spirit's power has something to do with how its perceived from survivor point of view.
Billy,Oni and legion statistically under perform. Billy and Oni are instant down killers and if you look at where all instant down are, they generally seem to have high killrate and Legion is killer all about injuring multiple survivor quickly and slowing the game down with heals, so he's suppose to be where pig/Freddy are but for some reason falls way behind.
In any case, these statistics are not really important unless your game balancer or something. The reason why killers that have instant downs or game-slow mechanics have high killrates is because these killers generally stomp bad survivors/newbie friendly killers(On average). The killers on right have a high mechanical skill-ceiling and therefore very low margin error, so on average, they lose more often from player error. I'm curious what average total hook count is for each killer. It might show a different story.
The pattern comes from the PREVIOUS data dump where Freddy also had the highest kill rate by a wide margin, both in all ranks AND red ranks (there were 2 charts). This coupled with my experience playing as and against him I can very easily point out the problems, as my experience is pretty consistent with the data dumps.
The straight up fact is that Freddy has too much in his basekit. @TAG and @Weck can say "don't draw conclusions" all they want, they fail to understand, somehow, that such a statement does NOT mean the data is useless. They are strawmaning nothing else, and unless they have a counter point to my actual arguments they are just being spiteful.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702652#Comment_1702652
But if the data is unreliable, then you SHOULDN'T use it. It's not good data. It's not WORTHLESS, but it by itself without the context of multiple factors is not useful.
The data isn't unreliable though. Unreliable data means the data itself was not clear.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702589#Comment_1702589
all I see from that data is that people play freedy and win more often than with other killers.
it doesn't say why, it doesn't say how.
I could easily use the same chart to say freddy has a very low skill floor and therefore more people are able to play him well, leading to more kills on average.
and I could use nurse to demonstrate the opposite. her kills are the lowest because she has the highest skill floor in the game and therefore less people are able to play her well, leading to less kills on average.
just because you say "this proves what I said" it doesn't mean it actually proves what you said. You are just looking for a way for it to fit the conclusion you already have
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/25/bd/24/25bd241e6a47dc7806eb6b34ba73dd68.png
not exactly the quote I was looking for, but it gets the idea across.
You already think freddy is op, so you are looking at things only in a way that shows he's op. instead of looking at what things actually are and adapting your conclusion accordingly.
Except I had data in form of experiences. Again you take a comment out of context. Holmes is saying don't just go on nothing. If you have SOMETHING, whatever that something is, you can consider that data. My personal experiences playing as and against the killer can be seen as data. While I didn't exactly record the details of every single game, the fact is I am most consistent with Freddy and most oppressive with Freddy (and feel the most oppressed consistently playing against Freddy) compared to every single other killer suggests something. That something is supported by not 1, but 2 data reveals by the developers, the first of which included more detail stats. When looked at as a whole, I was able to identify exactly what makes him so good and articulate that in the OP, then provide clear and simple solutions.
I mean, people that hate Spirit can't articulate their argument as well as I did in the OP. They say very vague things about it, don't have a clue what the solution could be (maybe because they have a hard time identifying the actual problem), and on top of that the data doesn't support it either. So it's faulty all around.
My OP is not that at all. I have a solid well formulated points about Freddy, and while I only posted the recent data dump I could go back and get the previous ones (and I probably should... and may).
You are intentionally strawmaning my argument so you don't have to admit Freddy is too strong and needs a change. I can and will use these charts to support my claims because that's how this ######### works.
Again "do not draw conclusions" =/= "data is meaningless".
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702607#Comment_1702607
I mean, I'm just gonna quote Peanits here (from an older post, to be fair):
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/866290#Comment_866290
So just to reiterate one last time, I really would not recommend drawing any conclusions from these stats. These are averages, not specific and incredibly detailed data that you should draw any conclusions from.
He explained in very clear words what you are doing, and then you do it again.
"Do not draw conclusions" =/= "data is completely meaningless"
-
@xenotimebong said:
You’re wasting your time. People here see “don’t use these stats and immediately draw conclusions” and think that’s the same as saying “these stats cannot be used for anything and are completely meaningless”. They don’t understand that stats require some context and a desire to ask questions instead of a black and white “high/low number bad”. I mean look at how many people are saying the stats are garbage because Pig has a high kill rate, completely ignoring that there are other factors that affect kill rate besides their personal tier list.
For what it’s worth I agree, Freddy’s kit is too bloated and he deserves some small changes. Having a strong, mechanically simple killer is not a bad thing but he just has a little bit too much going for him.
Okay thank you. Good to know I'm not crazy. Someone else sees it too!
-
@MusicNerd_TC said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702588#Comment_1702588
I remember when I used to main old Freddy I would use this disgusting build.
Black box, slowdown add-on, ivory mori, old Dying light, ruin and remember me.
Tunnel the obsession out of the game and the game drags on forever.
No Black Box gives it away. Against a good rank 1 SWF they will know what you are doing and body you. I had a group do this to me, they protected the guy all game while pounding gens.
The real build was Dying Light, Ruin, Haunted Grounds, PWYF, Class Photo, Z Block, and ivory. You use Class Photo to find the obsession quickly and get everyone asleep if possible. Z Block makes you look like base kit Freddy. Once you find the obsession, catch them. PWYF and Haunted will make it easier, Ruin buys you some time to do it. Once they are hook leave so they get saved, then tunnel and mori them. Once they are dead the game is over, everyone will always be asleep thanks to Class Photo and it will take a solid 4 minutes to solo a gen. Game. Over. I never lost a game with this build. Closest anyone ever got was one group go to 1 gen left, but it was a 3 gen. I didn't have a mori that game, but generally speaking you didn't even need it. As long as you got the hook early enough you could camp them.
-
@MusicNerd_TC said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702562#Comment_1702562
I suggested the teleport change so his skill cap can be increased, he would be able to use the teleport mid chase and mind game, which is actually fun.
Oh well then sure I guess.
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702525#Comment_1702525
I mean... did you read your argument?
You are still twisting their words. They don't want you to draw a conclusions SPECIFICALLY FROM CHARTS.
But if I have other evidence, including past stats...
they said to not draw conclusions using their stats, and your first evidence is other stats that they also told you not to use to draw conclusions?
face it mate, you created the discourse in this thread when you decided to use the charts the devs told you not to use(weakening your argument since it's at least partially based on faulty premises)
and putting a literal bait in the title. You use bait, you get fish... why are you acting surprised about that?
When the data is that consistent, and when we have that extra layer, YOU CAN BE DAMN SURE that conclusions can be drawn from it. And as I've said several times now, my conclusion is based on PLAYING THE KILLER AT RANK 1. If I can't use the only data available to me to confirm my conclusion then what else would you like me to do? I could play 100 games as Freddy but then you could sit there and pick that apart too. You have to accept some data at some point, or else you are just refusing to actually discuss the issue instead of refuting it.
Fact is you can use the data to make predictions. The devs cannot sit there and say "don't make conclusions from this data" if the data is consistent as it is. THAT suggests something is actually going on. If they want to give us more data I'd be happy to alter my statements but I'm working with what they are giving us. You can sit there all day and say it means nothing which is honestly complete and utter bullshit. You know that something is up here, why you refuse to admit it is beyond me.
-
@Kamizake12 said:
SuicideFox, why do you even post that here? I have noticed that this forum has a lot of biased people, and this is a echo chamber, so IMO u shouldn't waste your time, we all know survivors needs nerfs and killers too (for example freddy needs a nerf) but as I said there's a lot of biased killer mains here, so your post will either get a lot of hate or will be shutdown.
Honestly I cannot answer this. I wish I knew.
-
@MusicNerd_TC said:
I actually really like the changes you proposed, but I am only asking for 2 tiny QOL changes in return.
1: Make the dream world less dark for Freddy.
2: When he teleports to a gen, show him his aura so he knows which way to turn after he teleports and remove the blood sound for more mindgames.
Yea I'd be fine with that. I didn't propose any QOL changes because I honestly couldn't think of any, but yea less dark DW would be something I'd want.
IDK about the teleport thing not sure if that would actually help. I like the idea of making it better somehow though. I just don't imagine an aura helping to stop that really jarring teleport effect.
-
@PigMainClaudette said:
Having strong killers isn't actually a BAD thing. If all killers had kill rates equal to Blight and Nurse, then this game would lose all sense of horror. Even though I play more Survivor than Killer, I WANT killers to be stronger so I actually have to earn my escape.
Yes, there are a few tweaks that Freddy might need, like making his snares activate after 3 seconds, rather than 1 or whatever it is. But as he stands currently, I'm really happy with him.
I don't mind strong killers either, but Freddy just has too much and is too easy and forgiving against all but the absolute top tier survivor groups.
Freddy needs to be toned down and his affects move to his add-ons. It's just a bit ridiculous all the things he has in his base kit.
-
@Maperson said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702510#Comment_1702510
That works against survivors who aren't expirenced against him, that trick doesn't work on me or my friends, plus you should also take positioning into consideration
Ok then I would just start to actually teleport and I get the free hit.
I do this to all levels of survivors. Baby survivors are easy they will jump at the drop of a fedora. Good survivors take conditioning. I fake it a few times then actually teleport get some free hits AND my pop. Now I have 1 on a hook (because likely I saw you with BBQ), a few injured, and pressure on a gen clear across the map.
Not to mention the fact that even if you avoid him, if he has Ruin or Pop and forces you off a gen unless there was another survivor there with you that gen is regressing to 0. You avoided him but lost the gen. Good job.
So your choices are commit to the gen and get hit or lose the gen.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702354#Comment_1702354
I think they just don't want people on the forum to freak out tbh. You also clearly can't take results in a vacuum with Nurse being the obvious example of why; sometimes there are other factors that make the kill rate a poor representation of a killer's viability (e.g. learning curve, Rift challenges to push someone to use a killer they're less familiar with). I can't think of anything that would be artificially inflating Freddy's kill rate, though, unless people very frequently hook suicide against him because they hate playing him, or something.
Exactly! But dear jebus no don't show a chart as evidence of claims, even when you provide other evidence this single piece is inadmissible becauses the devs said so.
I can't believe people around here, thank you for being a reasonable person.
-
@redvelvetcake13 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702454#Comment_1702454
so I guess pig is op huh? by your logic at least.
No because I didn't draw this conclusion SPECIFICALLY FROM THE CHART.
You people should read a thread before commenting. This is like the 8th time I've said this now.
-
@Raccoon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702492#Comment_1702492
I hope you laugh as hard as I did :(
Yes let's pat each other on the back and laugh instead of presenting actual arguments. SMH
-
@Maperson said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702456#Comment_1702456
But you can hear when he is coming.
You can see his teleport from mile away
He is basic M1 killer who needs to hit you first, then chase you, try to put snares but if you change the loop he is at the beginning again. It's not like he gets faster in dream world.
You can't hear him until he is within 32m, and if you are awake you can't see him until he is within 32m. He can also fake the teleport to force you off a gen and come from a different angle. It is EXTREMELY easy to sneak up on survivors if you mix real and fake teleports.
-
@Crowman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702462#Comment_1702462
The rope add-ons are still one of Freddy's better add-ons, because Freddy has some pretty bad add-on options. It's really ropes or the drawing add-ons as far as non-iri add-ons go. The only other thing I would consider is the blindness add-on just because OoO exists.
Exactly. I use a Sheep Block for OOO, but otherwise it's ropes. There really is no other option, a passive action penalty is very strong at the end of the day.
-
@Maperson said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702448#Comment_1702448
You can see his teleport from mile away, it's not like he can insta teleport like Hag. People are using slowdown perks because gens go too fast. There is no proof you will 4k every game, its like saying if you play SWF you will escape every game. Untill he hits you, you have a lot of time to take from him, because he cannot do anything to you if you are awake.
I said "you will 4k almost every game" That's not saying EVERY GAME.
You can see the teleport but it doesn't change the fact he can come to your gen faster than any other killer, even Nurse or Billy. If he has Ruin or Pop your gen is toast.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702465#Comment_1702465
I never once tried to make any sort of claim in this thread over the validity of the belief that Freddy is too strong. I am saying that BHVR has repeatedly discouraged people from using these stats to make any arguments.
You are still twisting their words. They don't want you to draw a conclusions SPECIFICALLY FROM CHARTS.
But if I have other evidence, including past stats and experience on both ends, and valid arguments as to what exactly is the problem and how to fix it, that is literally how you are supposed to do things. OMG. Just stop. It is a very clear with what I present there is a problem.
-
@TheButcher said:
They know he is the strongest killer in the game. They do plan on looking at him later. Just they don't want to touch him because he was recently changed in a big way. In addition to that - the fact that the only reason he is so strong is because he has exactly the tools the killer needs to do well in this game. They need to use him as a mold to buff ALL the other killers to be on the same playing field as Freddy.
Probably gonna blow your mind that Freddy is actually balanced, and you're just bad at the game. All the killers in the game should be as strong as Freddy, and have the same utility he does. Gap closer, anti-looping, can quickly traverse the map, and force survivors to ignore primary objectives. These are all things Killers need as essentials.
Your cry for another m1 easy to loop killer is just going to be ignored by the devs.
"Probably gonna blow your mind that Freddy is actually balanced, and you're just bad at the game. "
Uhhh I guess you missed the part where I literally say I came to this conclusion by PLAYING HIM AT RANK 1. Not from playing against him.
-
@YaiPa said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702430#Comment_1702430
yes, without any informations about the realms, the map layouts, the perk loadouts, how rank is counted (if every player in the lobby have to be red rank, if ranking up after the game counts in this calculation), we can totally draw conclusions from this chart.
Why would realms matter? Like really, because when you average it out the killers at the top will just be the more consistent across the realms. If you want to find a problem with the REALMS then you look deeper. Using that same information to determine killer strength is the backwards approach.
Also you keep dodging the fact he was at the top of the chart last time when they ALSO showed just red ranks. I highly doubt that he would stay consistent with previous all rank performance but go down in red ranks much if at all.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702422#Comment_1702422
BHVR discourages people from using that data to go "Aha! This chart confirms XYZ!" because this data does not take a number of factors into account. They've said this time and time again whenever they put up stats like this and in fact have even questioned whether or not they should keep putting up these stats for this exact reason.
Again Freddy was on the top of the chart last time, AND they even gave a red rank chart which he was also on the top of by a wide margin.
There is tons of evidence to support what I'm saying. I'm not drawing this conclusion solely from this chart. Stop trying to dismiss it by taking what the devs said out of context. AND YES YOU ARE TAKING OUT OF CONTEXT because I have multiple sources to validate my claims, the chart is just 1 more in the pile.
-
@GodDamn_Angela said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702440#Comment_1702440
I'll be the first one to say that Freddy is way too strong for how easy he is too play. He has too many tools that are similar (and in some cases, better) than what other Killers have. I just don't like the use of the stats as literally the first thing you see in this thread. I have bad memories of all the internet fights I had with people trying to use the last set of stats to ask for nerfs or disregarding other's opinions because they didn't line up with said stats.
Do I think Freddy needs a nerf? Hell yes.
The title says "red flag" as in "please investigate this with more scrutiny". I'm not claiming it as definitive proof, but with the very detail breakdown I gave of why he is so strong PLUS the chart I have a good argument. You even agree he needs to be toned down, so why come into the thread to disagree with me? If it's true does it matter where it comes from?
-
@Maperson said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702383#Comment_1702383
Freddy is M1 killer that can be destroyed if you are not in the dream world. I'm not saying he is weak, but he isn't op either, difference between him and Clown is that Clown can slow you down anytime if you are in range of his bottles, Freddy can't, plus you can see when he is placing snares so you can change the loop, plus if you are awake he has no power over you.
I'm not saying he is OP, I put that in the title to get attention.
He is too strong. This I'm saying from experience AS and AGAINST him.
If you don't believe he can be super oppressive play with any gen tracking perk of choice, Ruin, Undying, Pop, Swing Chains, and Jump Rope. You will 4k almost every game. The only survivors that will actually be a challenge for you are 4 man SWF.
Being awake doesn't stop his gen teleport. It reduces the recharge but the difference is minimal. It also means that he can more easily sneak up on you are I point out with his built in stealth. All it takes is 1 hit to put you to sleep, and if he can get close enough either because of teleport or stealth he should easily be able to get that first hit on you, easily negating any effort you put in to stay awake.
-
@Alice_pbg said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702383#Comment_1702383
"People aren't agreeing with me. ECHO CHAMBER!!!!"
seriously dude?
Just look at the people replying. You literally ALL have the same opinions on the game. Anything that suggests a killer is too good every single one of you are the first to jump in and say no. I see it all the time. This place is 100% killer biased, you can't dare say a bad thing about killers here. Take a step back and read you will realize.
For the record, yes some places like reddit are heavily survivor biased.
Furthermore I even acknowledge that yes, survivors in a 4 man SWF are the strongest thing in the game. But no one cares for that, they see "Freddy OP" in the title and IMMEDIATELY take the bait.
Hook. Line. Sinker.
-
@YaiPa said:
there a written very large "ALL RANKS". this alone tells us how worthless are stats, especially considering, as already said, how nurse results as the worst killer in the game and one of the strongest, along with ######### doctor, like why are we even considering this again?
Yet for a previous stat release, where they gave both all ranks and red ranks, Freddy was STILL on the top for both.
This consistency suggests that yes, Freddy is indeed too strong.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702391#Comment_1702391
In both cases, you are using the chart to validate a claim being made, which is what BHVR is actively discouraging.
No I'm using the chart to support something I have other evidence. What they are saying is to not purely look at the chart and draw a conclusion. EG. don't sit there and say "Nurse needs a buff". However if there was precedent for that claim, then you would use this data to support your claim. That's literally what they are doing on the back end. Coming up with a hypothesis about something in the game, looking at what is going on, then using data to validate the hypothesis and then make a change. Don't tell me they don't, I worked in game UX for a time this is exactly what gets done.
Using data to validate a claim is not the same as using data to draw a conclusion.
-
@NursesBootie said:
You lost me as you said: "he's basically a wraith".
Because Wraith is invisible. Freddy is invisible to awake survivors outside his TR, so you can neither here or see him. On top of that, he disappears at random from 32-16m for awake survivors. This means in order to see him coming you need to be asleep. And in fact his stealth at that range is superior to Wraith because you can still kinda see Wraith. You can't see him at all until he gets within 32m, at which point you have much less time to react that for literally any other killer as you could see potentially them coming BEFORE they got within 32m.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1702362#Comment_1702362
It's not a conclusion, it's a confirmation.
What's the difference?
Conclusion: I look at the chart and go "Oh hey Freddy too good plz nerf".
Confirmation: I already came to the conclusion Freddy was too strong based on other evidence, the chart just further validates my claims.
-
Figures. This place is such an echo chamber. Why do I even bother.
@Maperson said:
Hmm, according to the stats we should buff Nurse a lot
Except I'm not purely looking at the chart and drawing that conclusions.
I ALREADY MADE THE CONCLUSIONS FROM EXPERIENCE. The chart merely confirms it.
But whatever you guys can put your thumb up each other's posts instead of engaging in a reasonable conversation.
-
@TAG said:
He very much is and the chart above confirms it.
Didn't BHVR say not to draw any conclusions based on the chart?
It's not a conclusion, it's a confirmation. I already knew he was too strong without any data, just by playing as/against him at rank 1. The chart merely confirms what I've been saying for a while now.
Hence I provide a detail breakdown of what exactly makes him strong. Unlike the usual "Spirit not counter play what can you do?" nonsense that is IMO is just theory crafting, what I present here is none of that. This information comes from experience, and while it is subjective, the fact I can articulate EXACTLY what it is about him that is too strong and I can identify very specific and simple solutions gives more weight to my argument.
-
"This means it's a perk that will probably be left as-is, unless some statistics appear otherwise to make them believe otherwise that there's a deep problem with it. The complaints from the forums are that OOO is overpowered whilst the stats say underpowered, so the team is inclined to believe that it's a perception issue, more than with the perk itself. (Ethan)"
A perception issue? Really??
Devs, just play a game against a rank1 SWF while one of them has OOO. You will very quickly see what the problem is.
The stats lie to you because 1) solo survivors can't exploit OOO to it's fullest, 2) killers will frequently tunnel the OOO user, and if they get a kill at all it will almost definitely be them, and 3) OOO is only broken for players that are good enough to break it. A rank 10 isn't good enough to exploit OOO, but a rank 1 probably will be, ESPECIALLY if they are in a SWF.
I honestly can't believe they don't see the issue with OOO. There is an easy fix, and that's putting some requirement to activate the aura read. EG. you must get chased for X amount of time before it activates. Then it can only read auras for Y amount of time before it deactivates and you need to "charge" it again. This would keep the perk as is, but remove the absolute broken nature of it for high rank SWF since the person needs to get chased and they only get a limited use out of it each time.
-
I'd like them to fix the game on console first, it is an absolute ######### show. Codes I couldn't give less of a ######### about.
-
This game is almost unplayable as killer now for Xbox. Every swing whiffs even, every notification and interaction causes frame drops, and some killers are straight busted in that the game looks like it is stop motion.
BHVR needs to fix this ASAP.
-
@Heartbound said:
I dunno about you guys but as soon as I can I'm gonna get the killer serum on Myers and act like I'm stalking someone but as soon as they notice me I'm gonna charge at them.
Get this man some Evil Within.
-
@gatsby said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688516#Comment_1688516
Because Behavior doesn't care about the concept of "fairness." You of all people should know that lol
That add-on has a restriction because its more work on the developers to maintain. They're setting limits on it probably because they can foresee it being like old Tinkerer where they have an extra thing to code and bugfix every chapter
There's also the little matter of the fact that the killer add-on is in effect all game while the survivor add-on is a one time thing for 20 seconds.
Killer is going to get FAR MORE USE out of their add-on than survivors will of theirs, on average. Like even if all 4 survivors brought the add-on that's 80 seconds versus an entire game (10 minutes or so?).
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688541#Comment_1688541
He. Caught. One. The proof that it is an eventuality is right there. So no that can't happen IF THEY ARE RUNNING AROUND IN YOUR FACE ALL THE TIME.
That's not proof that it is an eventuality. Otherwise, I could say that finding someone hiding is an eventuality because I eventually found someone after half an hour.
So then a game where a killer is legitimately trying to kill survivors but stalls a game 30 minutes on a 3 gen is holding the game hostage. Which is not true. This is where this lack of distinction leads, therefore that logic is flawed.
No, because the Killer is not refusing to complete their objective of killing Survivors.
"No, because the Killer is not refusing to complete their objective of killing Survivors."
But the end result is the same. You just said this...
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688499#Comment_1688499
No because killer will catch a survivor EVENTUALLY. There is proof in the video itself, he caught one and killed them. It took 30 minutes but he did it. You can't say the same for hiding. You can't say that on a long enough timeline the killer WILL find a survivor. They MIGHT find a survivor and that's different. If all the guy in the video did was follow one of them and broke pallets, he would have caught one eventually via bloodlust.
Again, not necessarily. Not if the Survivors are good enough to break chases and hide while the Killer is bad enough to consistently let that happen.
Saying a chase requires both players doesn't acknowledge the fact it is a back and forth, just like doing gens. Both have a back and forth. If there is no back, the forth can still win.
The chase is fundamentally back and forth. If the Survivor is not doing anything, there is no chase. Doing a gen is not fundamentally back and forth. It CAN be, but it is not necessary for the thing to happen.
Again to make clear, HIDING AND CHASE ARE NOT THE SAME THING. If you hide and do nothing that is a hostage situation because the killer literally has no opportunity to do anything (unless they have Whispers or are Doc or something). If you run around in the killers face but still do nothing, well there is plenty of opportunity for the killer to catch you. Do you see the distinction now? They are not the same thing. These little details matter.
They are not the same thing, but the end result is the same (the Killer is unable to leave the game which is going on and on and on because the Survivors refuse to do gens). THAT is the part that matters.
Suddenly that doesn't matter? That's why your definition of a hostage situation doesn't fly.
"No, because the Killer is not refusing to complete their objective of killing Survivors."
Then they have the opportunity to do gens. Just like the killer has the opportunity to kill them when they are running around in his face.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688499#Comment_1688499
No because killer will catch a survivor EVENTUALLY. There is proof in the video itself, he caught one and killed them. It took 30 minutes but he did it. You can't say the same for hiding. You can't say that on a long enough timeline the killer WILL find a survivor. They MIGHT find a survivor and that's different. If all the guy in the video did was follow one of them and broke pallets, he would have caught one eventually via bloodlust.
Again, not necessarily. Not if the Survivors are good enough to break chases and hide while the Killer is bad enough to consistently let that happen.
Saying a chase requires both players doesn't acknowledge the fact it is a back and forth, just like doing gens. Both have a back and forth. If there is no back, the forth can still win.
The chase is fundamentally back and forth. If the Survivor is not doing anything, there is no chase. Doing a gen is not fundamentally back and forth. It CAN be, but it is not necessary for the thing to happen.
Again to make clear, HIDING AND CHASE ARE NOT THE SAME THING. If you hide and do nothing that is a hostage situation because the killer literally has no opportunity to do anything (unless they have Whispers or are Doc or something). If you run around in the killers face but still do nothing, well there is plenty of opportunity for the killer to catch you. Do you see the distinction now? They are not the same thing. These little details matter.
They are not the same thing, but the end result is the same (the Killer is unable to leave the game which is going on and on and on because the Survivors refuse to do gens). THAT is the part that matters.
"Again, not necessarily. Not if the Survivors are good enough to break chases and hide while the Killer is bad enough to consistently let that happen."
He. Caught. One. The proof that it is an eventuality is right there. So no that can't happen IF THEY ARE RUNNING AROUND IN YOUR FACE ALL THE TIME.
"They are not the same thing, but the end result is the same (the Killer is unable to leave the game which is going on and on and on because the Survivors refuse to do gens). THAT is the part that matters."
So then a game where a killer is legitimately trying to kill survivors but stalls a game 30 minutes on a 3 gen is holding the game hostage. Which is not true. This is where this lack of distinction leads, therefore that ignoring it is bad logic.
-
"I will throw the game for people like this and face camp them until they die."
You can and should do this. That downed survivor means you're not losing Chaser emblems, and you effectively have 2 dead doing that. It's their own mistake for doing it.
-
@gatsby said:
One add-on messes with game mechanics. The other just grants a movement speed boost.
My guess is that the Devs just didn’t want to commit to constantly updating and bug fixing the Killer add-on forever, since it alters Killers powers. If they don’t want to maintain the coding to keep it working, they can just name the Halloween event something else and effectively retire it.
Stop using reason to explain things REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688484#Comment_1688484
"No, catching a survivor requires action only from the killer. AVOIDING the killer requires action from the survivor. The opposite of that generators require actions from survivors and STOPPING gens takes action from the killer."
Fair, let me rephrase myself. The act of chasing fundamentally requires input from both players whereas the act of working a gen does not necessarily require input from the Killer (though the Killer can attempt to disrupt the process).
No you can't. Because survivors can hide from your eyes and ears. They cannot hide from Whispers (though they can make it more difficult to find them, if you have Whispers you will 100% find a survivor at some point). They also cannot hide from Doc mostly but since you can get in a locker it's a bit more grey.
That's just the Survivors being more skilled at avoiding being detected than the Killer at successfully detecting them, no? Same thing as being more skilled at prolonging the chase than the Killer at ending it.
No the point was that there was no way the killer could actively end the game (again a survivor outside the map).
The Killer cannot actively end the game if they cannot catch a Survivor without DCing. If the Killer is to straight-up surrender to the Killers, what option do they have?
"Extended the game past a reasonable point" is very fishy and could be applied to a LOT of situations that were not actually hostage situations.
That's exactly how you gauge whether Survivors are hostage holding by hiding. You have to use your best judgement to decide if the amount of time spent doing this was reasonable or not. If they attempt to do it but are found after two minutes, you can't say that they held the game hostage. It's not an exact science.
f there are 4 survivors and the killer defends a 3 gen for 30 minutes but they eventually do the gen and escape, that's not a hostage situation. Unless we apply your logic.
That EXACT logic is what is used for hiding indefinitely. If the last two Survivors hide for 30 minutes, but the Killer eventually finds and kills one, allowing the hatch to come into play, that would not be a hostage situation by your logic.
"That's just the Survivors being more skilled at avoiding being detected than the Killer at successfully detecting them, no? Same thing as being more skilled at prolonging the chase than the Killer at ending it."
No because killer will catch a survivor EVENTUALLY. There is proof in the video itself, he caught one and killed them. It took 30 minutes but he did it. You can't say the same for hiding. You can't say that on a long enough timeline the killer WILL find a survivor. They MIGHT find a survivor and that's different. If all the guy in the video did was follow one of them and broke pallets, he would have caught one eventually via bloodlust.
"Fair, let me rephrase myself. The act of chasing fundamentally requires input from both players whereas the act of working a gen does not necessarily require input from the Killer (though the Killer can attempt to disrupt the process)."
Saying a chase requires both players doesn't acknowledge the fact it is a back and forth, just like doing gens. Both have a back and forth. If there is no back, the forth can still win.
"That's exactly how you gauge whether Survivors are hostage holding by hiding. You have to use your best judgement to decide if the amount of time spent doing this was reasonable or not. If they attempt to do it but are found after two minutes, you can't say that they held the game hostage. It's not an exact science."
Again to make clear, HIDING AND CHASE ARE NOT THE SAME THING. If you hide and do nothing that is a hostage situation because the killer literally has no opportunity to do anything (unless they have Whispers or are Doc or something). If you run around in the killers face but still do nothing, well there is plenty of opportunity for the killer to catch you. Do you see the distinction now? They are not the same thing. These little details matter.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688465#Comment_1688465
I was Nurse, when Demogorgon recently came out and the Underground complex was new (nearly 2 weeks old at that point).
Not only could Nurse back then have immense difficulties blinking around the map still, it was my first (or second? Can't remember) time on the map ever, so I didn't really know the layout of the map at all, or where I could/could not blink as Nurse.
I did not have Whisperers. Had BBQ, Nurses Calling, Shadowborn annnd something else (I think it was Sloppy Butcher).
Yea so this I agree with. You had nothing to find them and could not reasonably search the entire map such that you are GUARANTEED to find one (which someone else is saying could be done). There was literally nothing you could do, you could be Skynet programmed to play DBD and it wouldn't matter. What happened to you is a hostage situation.
If you had Whispers then I would say it wasn't a hostage situation. Could be griefing depending on how effective they were I guess, but not a hostage because you would have had some opportunity to actively find them. This is the point I'm trying to make. The availability of OPPORTUNITY to win is important. The OP had every opportunity to win, the fact they didn't doesn't mean this was a hostage game. Specifically that, nothing else.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688457#Comment_1688457
But then if the survivors have full opportunity to do the gens and don't, it's not a hostage situation. Just like if the killer has full opportunity to catch them (WHICH HE CAUGHT ONE, no one has acknowledged this yet still waiting), then it's not a hostage situation.
The difference is that doing gens only requires action from the Survivor whereas catching a Survivor requires action from both Survivor and Killer (the Killer has to catch while the Survivor has to avoid being caught). A Survivor either does the gen or does not; they don't try and fail (even if they miss EVERY skill check). A Killer either tries and succeeds in catching a Survivor, tries and fails in catching a Survivor, or simply does not try to catch the Survivor. If a Killer succeeds, obviously it is not hostage taking. The second one depends on whether the Survivors are progressing toward the end of the game, and the third one can be the Killer hostage holding depending on the circumstances. Also:
"(WHICH HE CAUGHT ONE, no one has acknowledged this yet still waiting)"
I did, with the response below:
Same reason why it doesn't matter when a Killer does eventually find one or more Survivors who have been hiding for a super long time. Regardless of whether or not it ended, the point is that they were forced to remain in the game past a reasonable point.
Except you can't. You physically can't, because survivors can move and because there are things to hide behind. Your statement would only be true if the map was a giant open plane with nothing to hide behind and survivors could not move if the killer was around or something.
Yes you can? You can fail at it because the Survivors are very good at hiding, but you can certainly attempt it.
"whereas catching a Survivor requires action from both Survivor and Killer"
No, catching a survivor requires action only from the killer. AVOIDING the killer requires action from the survivor. The opposite of that generators require actions from survivors and STOPPING gens takes action from the killer.
"Yes you can? You can fail at it because the Survivors are very good at hiding, but you can certainly attempt it."
No you can't. Because survivors can hide from your eyes and ears. They cannot hide from Whispers (though they can make it more difficult to find them, if you have Whispers you will 100% find a survivor at some point). They also cannot hide from Doc mostly but since you can get in a locker it's a bit more grey.
"Regardless of whether or not it ended, the point is that they were forced to remain in the game past a reasonable point."
No the point was that there was no way the killer could actively end the game (again a survivor outside the map). "Extended the game past a reasonable point" is very fishy and could be applied to a LOT of situations that were not actually hostage situations. Again take your 3 gen, the killer could be legitimately trying to kill a survivor but doing it in a way to position themselves to kill more than 1 survivor. If there are 4 survivors and the killer defends a 3 gen for 30 minutes but they eventually do the gen and escape, that's not a hostage situation. Unless we apply your logic.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688453#Comment_1688453
This was in direct response to a thread I made where I was held hostage in a game for over 60 minutes by a group of survivors who did nothing but hide the entire game, where I asked if this kind of behaviour was punishable or not, as the survivors refused to work on generators, and thus progress the game.
So while the word hostage was never mentioned, it was in direct response to a game in which I considered myself held hostage, as the only way I could leave the game after an hour was by disconnecting from it.
Well if you were following the thread I did specify that this exact situation is a hostage game and I've been explaining why.
What happened to the OP is not a hostage situation. Griefing though, yes.
Question, were you Doc or did you have Whispers or anything that you could have used to find the survivors besides your own eyes/ears?
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688444#Comment_1688444
The difference with a 3 gen is that there may be no opportunities for survivors to end the game. If there are 2 survivors and all 3 gens are in line of sight, then yes it is holding the game hostage because there is no opportunity. If there are 4 survivors then there is always an opportunity to do a gen, as all you need to do is split up and force the killer to commit to something. When they don't, EVENTUALLY you will do a gen and power the door.
Here's the question: Is the Killer meaningfully preventing the Survivor from completing their objective (while also being unwilling to finish their objective)? If yes, then hostage holding. If no, then not hostage holding.
You are equating opportunity with probability. There is no opportunity the killer finds a survivor, there is a probability they will. They can't act on anything to find the survivor. However, if the killer has Whispers or Spies or is a Doctor or maybe Demo or something, then there IS opportunity to find a survivor and thus hiding and not doing gens would not be holding the game hostage.
Disagree. They can use eyesight and thorough searching to eventually find a Survivor.
"Here's the question: Is the Killer meaningfully preventing the Survivor from completing their objective (while also being unwilling to finish their objective)? If yes, then hostage holding. If no, then not hostage holding."
But then if the survivors have full opportunity to do the gens and don't, it's not a hostage situation. Just like if the killer has full opportunity to catch them (WHICH HE CAUGHT ONE, no one has acknowledged this yet still waiting), then it's not a hostage situation.
"Disagree. They can use eyesight and thorough searching to eventually find a Survivor."
Except you can't. You physically can't, because survivors can move and because there are things to hide behind. Your statement would only be true if the map was a giant open plane with nothing to hide behind and survivors could not move if the killer was around or something.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
Officially, if survivors are not doing generators or progressing the game at all:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/8GD9F5WSPCHK/image.png
So by the rules, the survivors in this instance were holding the game hostage.
It doesn't matter if the killer can eventually catch them or not. The survivors were, by intent, delaying the game and refusing to close it out, for an extended period of time. They were not bugged, or stuck somewhere.
That's not true. He didn't say they will be he said they can be. And we don't know if these exact survivors were punished or not.
Also he never mentions the word hostage. He just says "punished" which I think they should be punished. But for griefing NOT for holding the game hostage.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688431#Comment_1688431
So if he just walks around, hits a survivor and kicks the gen, and then never do gens because they are so bad at the game this is all it takes to stop them, he is holding the game hostage?
If he is actively guarding gens and preventing them from being done but not ending the game himself, then yes. If he is just arbitrarily chasing people at random and other Survivors are just being laggy in doing gens, then no. I recall reading about Killers being banned for playing "get off mah lawn" with a 3-gen situation by protecting the gens at all costs but not bothering to down anyone. So it can happen if the situation lines up properly.
No you measure whether it is a hostage game based on the opportunities for one side to end the game. If there are zero opportunities (eg. a survivor is outside the normal map and cannot be caught) then it's a hostage situation. If the opportunity is still there then it's not a hostage situation. OP had the opportunities, which is the key distinction in whether or not it was a hostage situation.
Not true. Otherwise, it can very much be argued that the Killer has an opportunity to find the Survivors that are trying to hide indefinitely and that not being able to do so is just not succeeding in doing so.
The difference with a 3 gen is that there may be no opportunities for survivors to end the game. If there are 2 survivors and all 3 gens are in line of sight, then yes it is holding the game hostage because there is no opportunity. If there are 4 survivors then there is always an opportunity to do a gen, as all you need to do is split up and force the killer to commit to something. When they don't, EVENTUALLY you will do a gen and power the door.
"Not true. Otherwise, it can very much be argued that the Killer has an opportunity to find the Survivors that are trying to hide indefinitely and that not being able to do so is just not succeeding in doing so."
You are equating opportunity with probability. There is no opportunity the killer finds a survivor, there is a probability they will. They can't act on anything to find the survivor. However, if the killer has Whispers or Spies or is a Doctor or maybe Demo or something, then there IS opportunity to find a survivor and thus hiding and not doing gens would not be holding the game hostage.
And to be clear, I'm not saying this man wasn't griefed. HE WAS. I'm saying what happened to him is not a hostage situation.
-
Distance you can travel with Iron Grasp = 65.9m
Distance you can travel with Agitation = 69.44m.
So not only can you actually go further with Agi, you can get there faster too. It is the clear winner. Not to mention that hooks are everywhere, so without either you are pretty much guaranteed to reach a hook. Doing it faster will always be better.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688419#Comment_1688419
Look your logic doesn't work when applied equally to all situations. If what Scott was doing wasn't hostage but what these survivors were doing was that is hypocrisy. It is the exact same situation just with the roles reverse.
If Scott was actively guarding gens and keeping them from being done but not downing + hooking anyone himself, that would be hostage holding.
And he was preventing them from doing gens by chasing them. Is it now the killer's fault they were so bad that's all the pressure you need to put on them to make them not do gens?
See above.
Killers are not responsible for doing gens therefore you can't measure whether a game was hostage or not based solely on the survivor's inability or unwillingness to do a gen.
What? That's exactly how you measure whether Survivors are holding the game hostage.
Nothing you say will convince me this was a hostage situation, especially not flawed hypocritical logic.
Red crayon is still red no matter how much you are convinced it's blue.
"If Scott was actively guarding gens and keeping them from being done but not downing + hooking anyone himself, that would be hostage holding."
So if he just walks around, hits a survivor and kicks the gen, and then never do gens because they are so bad at the game this is all it takes to stop them, he is holding the game hostage? That makes zero sense. Being bad at the game does not make it a hostage situation. Survivors can do the gens, they just lack the skill to do it. The opportunity is there. Just like the opportunity was there for the OP to catch these survivors. Him being bad doesn't change what would be the normal flow of the game into a hostage situation.
"What? That's exactly how you measure whether Survivors are holding the game hostage."
No you measure whether it is a hostage game based on the opportunities for one side to end the game. If there are zero opportunities (eg. a survivor is outside the normal map and cannot be caught) then it's a hostage situation. If the opportunity is still there then it's not a hostage situation. OP had the opportunities, which is the key distinction in whether or not it was a hostage situation.
-
@TAG said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1688408#Comment_1688408
It doesn't matter if he was preventing them or not
It does matter. It is actually the key of the whole matter. One party is unwilling to bring the game to a close while preventing the other party from bringing the game to a close.
And now you're saying that a survivor has to let the killer catch them or it's holding the game hostage. Because by running you are preventing the killer from doing their objective.
Not by itself, no. It requires a combination of both actively and intentionally preventing one side from ending the game AND an unwillingness to bring the game to a close yourself. The end result is a deliberate act of dragging the game on way past a reasonable point.
Because the killer was bad and made a lot of mistakes, which is not a hostage situation.
Gens were not being done because the Killer was making a lot of mistakes?
Eventually, with killers being faster than survivors, and with bloodlust, the killer will catch up and get a hit.
Very good Survivors (using Blendettes, let's say) + very bad Killer = Survivor can escape a chase and prevent Bloodlust from triggering
Look your logic doesn't work when applied equally to all situations. If what Scott was doing wasn't hostage but what these survivors were doing was that is hypocrisy. It is the exact same situation just with the roles reverse.
And he was preventing them from doing gens by chasing them. Is it now the killer's fault they were so bad that's all the pressure you need to put on them to make them not do gens?
"Gens were not being done because the Killer was making a lot of mistakes?"
No survivors were not being killer because of killer mistakes. Killers are not responsible for doing gens therefore you can't measure whether a game was hostage or not based solely on the survivor's inability or unwillingness to do a gen.
Nothing you say will convince me this was a hostage situation, especially not flawed hypocritical logic.