twistedmonkey
twistedmonkey
About
- Username
- twistedmonkey
- Joined
- Visits
- 5,349
- Last Active
Comments
-
It has ben done twice in the past for survivor and each and every time it just made finding a match at high ranks take a silly mount of time.
It would be nice but in practice it just hurt the game.
-
Inexperience thinking they are caught and the killer is going to hook them or not realising they are making camping viable.
It could also be swf wanting the killer to camp so they can finish gens so they sont feel they have to stop and save and can also proc adrenaline.
It depends on the whole circumstances. 5 gens left it's kinda pointless if the survivor on hook will go into stage 2. 1 or 2 and all are still alive it could be beneficial.
-
It will be released on all platforms at the same time to keep it fair.
It's not the people who play on PS4's fault and they shouldn't have to feel left out because someone feels they can't wait a little longer.
-
It's risk v reward to save and also it's to entice people to save others rather than just do gens and get out and leave them.
It's a grind game and if the fastest way to earn points was to just do gens and get out people would complain it goes even faster than at times now.
-
It's being taking way out of context.
If you read what Peanits is saying its not that comms can't be strong or game breaking it's just the majority aren't the top hard-core genrushing sweaty players a people think.
He is saying comms don't make less skilled player suddenly good and they do have the side effect of wanting to get everyone out as they are a team while solos don't care either way as it doesn't affect them.
Comms don't break the game themselves if players go down like flies. The one thing that makes comms strong and game breaking is when they are being used by a highly coordinated team of good players who have the skill and knowledge to use them to the full potential.
Peanits is also just stating his feelings on it. Just because he works for BHVR doesn't mean he isn't allowed to post them or that they are representative of how the whole team feel.
I feel at times some people are just looking for things to complain about and take things way out of context just to try and stir things up. These are the same people who complain when BHVR go silent at times but who can blame them?
A prime example is this one post suddenly now negates the others more recently where Peanits has stated they are still looking to close the gap and is now being used to basically argue they are not. Go figure.
Peanits does a great job for the userbase and is the most vocal of them all sharing information and engaging with us. Don't bite the hand that feeds us.
-
@SpaceCoconut said:
Growth is stagnant.
The average player count over the last 30 days is only just over 20k. Which means after stranger things, the free weekend, the bloodhunt, the number of players peaked at 48k during that time and it can be assumed that the 28k players stopped playing dbd and moved on to something else.
The game isn't good at retaining players so players get tired of dbd for various reasons and after various amounts of playtime and leave.
New players come in and buy a dlc or two or leave due to the barrier to entry.
While the game isn't dying, it doesn't make itself easy to stick with.
Eventually, it's reputation will precede it and new players may not give the game a try. That's when the bleeding playerbase will become very noticeable.
But cheer up!
The devs are focusing on new monetization tactics to squeeze every last dime from players before they leave to play something else ;)
That's not entirely true.
While the peak is pretty stagnant on average (it's been hitting roughly 25k since last year) thats just a number the game sits at. Look at most game numbers the stagnant peaks don't shift much and those that arent brining in new players tend to drop rather than be stagnant.
Peaks can't be taken into account and while it may peak at 48k when a dlc or dbp event is on its highly unlikely the whole 28k players left, some will of course. The most logical reason is that people tend to simply play more for those periods so it artificially increases the peak numbers.
Games retaining players is actually an anomaly today and why the vast majority drop off so fast. Any game which stays with a viable playerbase even stagnant for a long time is going against that grain in reality in todays market so is actually doing extremely well.
-
I also always say GG or GGWP if they played particularly well imo.
For me it's a courtesy just to say thanks for playing the match regardless how anyone decided to play.
-
@S_Panda said:
Is that 80% disconnects a random number chosen an exaggeration or their actual percentage?...
Random number for exaggeration as the devs have never stated an exact percentage so people can't calculate when near to the threshold. They have srandomly thrown maybe numbers around and said what the percentage is has changed a few times.
-
@Elegant said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788915#Comment_788915
You don't really address any of my points. But I'll counter your awful arguments anyway. Your last point is that I exaggerate how many people are 4 man SWF then immediately say that adding comms will also turn every game into a 4 man SWF. You SEVERELY overestimate the number of people who have a mic, use that mic in game, and actively use that mic to relay important information to the other players. I have played tons of games with voice comms (both ranked and unranked) and very rarely will everyone in the lobby have a mic or use their mic. Even more rare is someone using their mic to give relevant information. At best you will have someone relay where the killer is which isn't that difficult to figure out anyway. Usually within the first 30 seconds of a game I know what killer i'm going vs because almost all of them have some tell that notifies people. Console is completely irrelevant to me and should never be considered when looking at overall balancing. They should have their own individual balancing patches or they shouldn't matter when looking at the balancing. The overall negative impacts it would have on the game are much smaller than the benefits it could have. Like every other game in existence with voice comms, someone can easily just mute the players mics if they don't want to talk. No one is forcing them to communicate. The personal attacks happened because everything you are saying is idiotic and very poorly thought out. It's not worth addressing because you don't understand virtually anything you are speaking on. To your "solid reasoning" point, I already explained this. Twice. It allows the devs to balance the game for both SWF and solo queue. Sure, SWF isn't happening every game. But it's still very prevalent or the devs would just get rid of it. The overall negative impact it would have on the game wouldn't be that significant. Especially if they did what I already suggested (if you weren't awful at argumentation and comprehension) is to balance the game around voice comms being a thing. It would solve a lot of the issues and wouldn't have that much of a negative impact. Your don't have a solid argument against it and you can't form a solid argument against it. Your only "argument" is that you don't like it and you keep throwing horrible premises to support your argument. It's just a really really bad argument.
Your arguments kinda contradict themselves.
Since a 4 man SWF is such a major issue (last stats were around 6% of survivors joined a lobby that way) how would balancing for voice chat for everyone then help if like you stated the amount of people who have a mic is much lower than people think and on top of that most solo won't chat anyway.
Doesnt that actually say more about why adding voice chat would be worse for the game overall than actually better since they effectively then shut out more options from the largest part of the player base solo and 2 man SWF (82%) from being able to do as well.
Right now the balance for the majority is SWF>killers>solo so would it not just make solo even weaker and players would then in theory have to use comms to be able to do as well as they can now.
What then happens to those that don't have a mic? Are in a region where multiple languages are present so they dont have the option to communicate as they don't understand each other? Bought the game on the pretence there was no voice chat due to a disability Etc.
-
@Rydog said:
Also @twistedmonkey -- it was on life support BECAUSE they dropped the ball so hard, so early, and so often. F13 had a FANTASTIC launch and a huge surge of interest, but the developers didn't maintain the momentum at all.
Sorry I get testy about this game -- I spent a LOT of time with it (I'm the guy who reverse engineered basically every mechanic in the game, and largely defined "the meta" such as it was). I wish it wasn't such a disaster.
I agree and that's where my statement stems from originally about these devs doing a lot more right than wrong as if they dropped the ball as much as some people always claim in theory it would have had the same fate 😉.
-
@Volfawott said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/789460#Comment_789460
You got to realise during the lawsuit the last thing the playbase was left with was an update that made playing the game a lot more frustrating and buggy.
Hyped content that a lot of people were excited for basically cancelled with a lot of progression still in there.
Absolutely no future content to look forward to.
I'm not saying Friday was perfect granted there's a reason I jumped ship for dead by daylight.
But you have to look at how well the game was doing prior to all this happening. It had been on life support since not long after release. Let's be honest the lawsuit didn't change much apart from give them an excuse to not add content to a game that couldn't hold a player base. The game was buggy and plagued with hacker long before that patch.
Some may have been excited for the future content but that wouldn't have saved the game. Many may try it out but a new Jason or map doesn't hold people in a game long if the mechanics aren't something they enjoy.
@Rydog said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/789460#Comment_789460
The Friday the 13th game developers used the ongoing litigation as cover to not address the overall health of the game (i.e. exploits and bug fixes), even though they later admitted that their hands were never tied in this regard. The only thing the lawsuit killed was their agency in creating and adding new content (characters, maps, etc.) to the game.
I believe they made their money, and then decided to bail when they saw that they had a convenient excuse to use as a scapegoat.
Exactly it was a convienent time for it to happen as it gave them an excuse. They even said they wouldn't add content even if it the lawsuit was over quickly.
They stopped long before they had to as the suit wasn't affecting them when it was first brought about. The puzzle game put out that statement and that only became affected by the lawsuit some time after Gun stopped.
-
They are working on just that.
The last update about dcing talked about the husk system which when a survivor dc's you can still hook them to get bbq and perk tokens.
-
It sounds nice in theory but it would punish new players too much or a killer camping someone on first hook with one other survivor left alive.
Then there is totem hunting, going for chests, saving and healing etc.
2 mins really isn't a very long time.
I think it's such a rare occurrence that it doesn't warrant punishing legit reasons to not be on a gen.
-
@Volfawott said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788326#Comment_788326
I mean technically most of them shot themselves in the foot rather than having an inability to compete
Friday is probably the best example of a game that literally got shot in the foot because of greed which completely shut down any hope of it growing
Shooting themselves in the foot means nothing if the game is good enough as people have shown time and time again they would play it regardless. According to most complaints they are on essense saying DBD does the dame with a buggy game and questionable changes.
Take Friday as that was made on a pretence that the lawsuit wouldn't affect the game but that was info from the owners of the rights at the time. That wasnt the issue the game had though and neither was the price. People will pay money for a good game. The game started well but lost most of its playerbase within 1-2 months. It's wasn't a case of shooting themselves in the foot but rather the game for what it was didn't hold many peoples attention.
-
@justarandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788722#Comment_788722
You can always alt tab to youtube, clean dishes or have another game open to play in the meanwhile. That's what I did as killer last year when the lobby time took 20+ minutes. I just took one whole day to derank by being afk. I was just watching youtube or played cod
I can see doing that for waiting to play but when you are within a game to do that seems like a wasteful choice instead of sitting on a gen waiting to be found earning something or hunting out the killers to be sacrificed.
-
@StevePerryPsychOut said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788428#Comment_788428
The same players playing solo would undoubtedly be a stronger team by simply putting on mics and communicating.
Yeah teams that practice together will be better than randoms, clearly. The point isn't to make them equal but close the gap. But part of that coordination is undoubtedly voice comms.
Comms are stronger than empathy, they work without requiring anybody to be injured and free up a perk slot.
I am this market, I don't generally like to mic up with randoms. But I will if the situation calls for it. I'm not the kind of guy who is going to gab with my team the whole time but i will make call outs when necessary. I don't see how an optional chat system will destroy the solo playerbase.
I would argue team based games with integrated chat are among the most successful titles in the multiplayer genre. If you mean asymmetric or asymmetric horror games, I would argue that they failed for different reasons such as being based around a strange battle royale mode or weird instant death / respawn mechanics.
That's still like 1 in 5 games, and even if you're not some try hard squad communication does give an undeniable edge. Simply being able to say, "ruin is here killer is chasing me," or " killer lost me he is heading toward this part of the map is quite the advantage and should be considered. But if you make it the norm that most of your playerbase can't do that, then you are allowing those that do communicate to effectively break your game.
This is the kind of thing they probably should have thought about before allowing swf in the first place.
Now this is actually a good point, even on american servers I play with a lot of Spanish speakers. I'm not saying open comms is an end all be all perfect solution. I would prefer a vermintide style ping system personally. My general intention though is that either solos need communication or swf needs nerfs/removal. I don't really care how it is achieved, I am just want a more balanced game.
I think that's one of DBD players issues as It's not inherently a team game as you can chose to help others or not. If you escape and the rest die they don't gain anything from that and you don't lose anything.
The only reason for a solo person to keep others alive in reality is to give to give themselves more of a fighting chance.
People working together in a team game need a common goal and shared points. People save for the extra points but those point at a theirs alone.
It's very hard to try and make it so the game doesnt become something different for those who bought and played it as it was always intended.
A ping system woukd be the middle ground but it may change the game too much. It has already became a lot easier with all the icons and notifications of every actions and has removed a lot of the fun of not knowing.
Knowing too much info personally for myself breaks the game and makes it about going through motions rather the feeling like I need to be aware of what's happening.
SWF will never be nerfed that's a given as they stated they don't want to punish people for playing with friends.
-
@justarandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788664#Comment_788664
If one survivor is afk the whole game and the killer decides to ignore him all time it's still a bad game. A very bad game. It's a 3v1 on 5 gens while it was designed for a 4v1 scenario.
Yes but that can happen with out without any system. I think it's a bit of a reach to say they would just go afk and be ignored foe the game.
If someone wants out the game when dc punishments come then going afk and being ignored loses them even more time than playing, trying to do at least something and giving up when found or purposefully finding the killer to be hooked.
-
@NMCKE said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/787941#Comment_787941
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788113#Comment_788113
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788677#Comment_788677
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788218#Comment_788218
@twistedmonkey, I updated the thread to reflect your suggestions — please take a look if you don't mind! 🤗
Also, I don't think a system like this would be necessary for survivors because unlike the killer role, basing player skill on their primary goal doesn't exactly represent how well you do in a Trial.
For example: A sacrificed survivor could've did a lot more than a survivor who escaped.
Everyone else I tagged, I updated the thread! :P
Thank you for considering some of my suggestions 😁
It looks great I would love to see something like this implemented as it rewards good players and ranks them away quicker frim this less skilled.
Yeah survivors don't necessarily need a similar system. I just remembered all the complaints when the victory cube came out so I always think about keeping them as equal as possible lol.
I would like something so survivors get rewarded more for punishing camping but that's another discussion 😉.
-
Dc's are being changed to a time out system so they will get better.
It's best never to message people after a match like that. They probably saw it and realised them dcing got to you.
Slow report could also be about themselves. They are expecting you to report them for dcing.
-
@justarandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788632#Comment_788632
Well, the next step would be going afk. How you wanna punish that? Even if you find a solution to AFKing, people will just Starr running towards the killer everytime after unhook. You just simply can't punish those who want to go OUT OF THIS MATCH because they will always find a way out evading the ban.
Yes but that all wastes time along with a suiciding solution and awards points for the remaining ones making it less obnoxious over all.
The point is its not a punishment as I said it's a qol improvement for both sides as they can each still get the points and it allows survivor to punish the camping strat.
It doesnt fix it all but it would still be a lot better than how it is now for both sides and as it wastes more time than simply pressing a button.
-
It depends on the situation to have a clear yes or no answer and of course how I am feeling at that particular moment.
If there is one or two gens left and they are far enough apart I will struggle in the hopes they try to save.
If they do find the hatch and they crouch on top of it while far away I will give them it.
If they haven't been active much that I saw all game and pretty to close to the hook and the killer goes the opposite direction from them and they don't even try I will probably stay on that hook till the end.
-
It's latency as stated and it works both ways. Sometimes a survivor can be half way through the jumping animation and a killer closes it before it finishes.
Both having the exact same ping at the exact moment would mean it would in theory close first but that would take the stars to align just right as pings in game fluctuate constantly.
-
@justarandy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/788550#Comment_788550
People already suicide on hook when they see its spirit. But hey, if you think this is just a bad excuse go ahead and keep pushing for punishments and just come back with a surprised pikachu face when everyone who DCed previously just suicides instead to evade a ban.
You never punish for an in game mechanic but you can rework it.
Right now you can try to kobe and then choose to not struggle and die.
Couple of solutions.
Stage 1 you still get the same attempts at a kobe but it only removes 30s so doesn't take you to stage 2. When in stage 2 it auto struggles for 30s and then you can press a key/button to suicide.
Or kobe attempts don't waste anytime and you cannot suicide in stage 2 at all.
The reasoning is not only to stop suiciders but to allow the other to have saves.
To make more strats it could also only be different when more than 2 survivors are alive. They can still suicide on the hook to give a hatch for example.
It's not hard to make a system that could give others more time in a match to punish camping or make saves for points as it's not a punishment keeping someone in a game for a small amount of time they actively chose to play.
-
@StevePerryPsychOut said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/787261#Comment_787261
If the gap between the experience of solo and swf isn't closed you will doom killers to forever be dunked on by swf. The point of giving solo survivor communication options is so that killers can be balanced in a way that they have the tools to truly challenge swf.
It doesnt work that way as a good team of solo can still be far better than a team of swf players.
Swf aren't strong due to just being able to communicate. The top SWF being strong are due to them playing with a set group who know they are good players and have spent the time learning to coordinate well.
Empathy is a perk where you can see when the killer is in a chase and know you are safe doing gens without comms.
If you also balanced the game around chat then SWF will become the norm and I could guarantee queue times for killers would increase. If it affects Solo players which are over 50% of the playerbase then you risk losing that market.
Take other games with voice chat balance. They don't last long and the playerbase dwindles as without actual friends online it's never the same game if you try to play alone.
4 man and 3 man SWF are the only groups that are considered strong and they make up around 18% of the userbase according to the last stats and out of that not all are "tryhard" squads or even good players. The problem with this is so many think it's SWF when they lose when it's generally not.
This means what people are asking for here effectively changes the game people bought for 82% of the playerbase as they will be disadvantaged if they don't use a feature which wasn't part of it.
And again those that live in a region like Europe who can be matched with around 30 different countries all speaking different languages. And that's only one example you also have south America, Asia etc.
-
@BasementBubba said:
The problem is that there's no competition for them to strive to be better. If there was a competing company in the same genre as them they'd probably get their ######### together, but this is the only game of its kind still kicking. So they can kick back and make as many mistakes as they'd like without worrying about other horror games sweeping them under their feet.
Well that statement says more about what the devs have been doing right than wrong.
Every game so far thats came out in the genre has been the one that will destroy DBD and not one has been able to actually compete with this game.
WOW is a classic example in the MMO genre as the same thing happens. People constantly complain about the devs are and how bad the patches are but it still wears the crown 15 years after release.
-
I like this idea a lot. I think it would need expanded though as right now it kinda promotes tunnelling which is something they actively want to try and reduce.
So say you get 2.5 points for a hook that could be doubled by hooking a different survivor.
Sacrifice points could also be increased depending on how many hooks so camping isn't rewarded as much. 25 for a sacrifice and 5 points less each hook on the unhooked survivor within a set time frame or condition as to not punish the killer for finding them by pure luck.
If the survivor dc's or kills themselves on the hook they get the full 25 so it does not punish the killer for the survivors act and gives survivor more of an incentive to stay on the hook longer to not reward it.
I also think a similar system to reward survivors with points would work. For one example if a killer is camping and no one is around then a person doing gens gets rewarded with the altruism/benevolent points of a save/heal as you are helping the others get out. If the killer leaves the area or is in a chase with another survivor those points stop being rewarded for 15s even after the chase ends.
Over all it could work out very well with some tweaks and could make the game much better for skill based and fair play on both sides.
-
Well tunnelling is named due to tunnel vision on a survivor and as you are actively trying to down the one hooked it does fall under the definition. Doesn't matter if you are close or not it's the action.
Not that there is anything wrong with it. Its a legit strat.
-
Baby Meg on sheltered woods. I walked about and hising at times trying to configure my mouse sensitivity.
I had watched a few streamers play so I knew the basics of the game but nothing prepared me for hearing the heartbeat in my headphones for the first time. Instant oh ######### moment and when I saw it was the trapper.
Back then when caught by him it was normally game over as they could trap under the hook. I ran straight into a wall and took a hit. Tried to run and went straight into a trend downed.
That was my first experience and I was literally hooked. It was so different from the normal PVP games I was used too which were for the most part fps games and since call of duty 2 or left 4 dead series with Wow for a time I never found anything I played for more than a couple of weeks before getting bored until I found this game.
-
@StupidPallets said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/786770#Comment_786770
Everything that you just said is absolutely negated by having the option to not join voice chat, while others want to. And if they do, they can still mute. Your argument is objectively invalid by a feature that almost all games with a voice chat has.
Not when it affects the balance of the game those people purchased if they don't or cant use it.
If this ever happened killers would be buffed to compensate.
-
@StarMoral said:
I find it odd most people are saying no because they dont wanna be yelled at by 12 year olds (who shouldn't be playing the game in the first place) rather than focusing on a balance perspective.
The one thing that gives SFW an advantage, regardless of how many players are in the group, is the ability to use 3rd party communication, a mechanic purposefully left out of the game to instill a sense of loneliness. How many people replying to this post thinks this game is scary? Like, really. I do think it's about time we got this mechanic in.
And if you're afraid of being yelled at by children, actual or adult, grow a spine and tell them to shut up.
Voice chat doesn't mean people play like an SWF.
SWF aren't strong just because of voice chat it's becasue they are a group of friends who know how each other play and coordinate well together.
This rarely happens in pug groups.
Voice chat hinders the game more than adds to it. It becomes more elitist and anyone not on their level becomes a target for ridicule.
Then there is those who will question why peoole do x instead of y questioning how they wish to play the game.
Then There are regions where people speak multiple languages. People tend to only think of their own country when it comes to this idea.
People screaming down the mic is just one aspect of why it's a bad idea. To say people have to grow a spine is quite frankly rude and highly inconsiderate as some may have trauma from life experiences. People use games as an escape as well as fun. Everyone's mind is different and that should always be respected.
DBD has been bought by many on the pretence it has no in game voice chat like others games in the genre. If you buy a product you should always be informed of what you are purchasing and accept it for how it is.
-
@HP150 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/786461#Comment_786461
Why stifle the modernization and growth of the game to cater to toxic players? If someone uses opting out as an excuse to grief or verbally abuse someone through post-game chat, that is IN THEORY a reportable and punishable offense, no (assuming BHVR someday revisits how efficiently reports are handled...)?
Because by singling them out they would be providing direct information to those who are toxic.
It's not about stiffling it's about not wanting your consumers to have a bad experience by means of a system you implement. Not all toxicity is bannable just extreme cases and not everyone can handle it.
Adding voice chat is not modernisation and there is no indication that it would also cause growth that's quite a stretch to claim that. Infact it may hinder the growth as the games which have added this option in the genre havent done too well and had numerous complaints since that were released about toxicity due to it being part if the game.
-
@HP150 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/786364#Comment_786364
You can easily solve this problem by making an indicator above the survivor's name that tells you who on your team has opted out of voice chat? It takes like 3 seconds to think up this solution, c'mon now...
Most people against voice chat simply want to keep the immersion they have along with not wanting the toxic nature of some random people to annoy them in game.
Showing an icon is like singling someone out for using that choice.
Telling those who are toxic in nature a person isn't using voice chat could lead to them blaming those who opt out for why lost and attacking them.
-
This can happen with any online game due to many factors.
Servers, internet (Stable provider or not any internet can still drop for a period or have latency spikes and dc you), platform you are playing on having a glitch.
While the servers on PC atm aren't perfect I always look for other issues just in case before pushing any blame.
-
That looks like swf as they will join a lobby with a high rank team mate which it matches them off. You are within 6 ranks of the highest ranked player and the lower ranked ones could be playing with the rank 4 or 7.
That match looks to be one of the cases the matchmaking isn't working as intended. I'd personally report that matchmaking issue for the devs to look at 😉.
-
It's a common mistake to think that ones personal playtime and knowledge should lead to being good at any game.
That's like someone saying they have played LOL for 2k hours so they should be in the top rank bracket even if they aren't skillful enough at playing. It's a term used to justify most loses as personal skill is a major factor in all games and there will always be someone better or just as skilled as yourself.
Thats not to say some thing's aren't unbalanced and need worked on but I think the I lost due to the game being unbalanced argument is way over used.
-
Protection hits have been inconsistent for a while now and why MoM is also never used.
It is something that needs fixed asap or change WGLF to also work off some other objectives in the game.
-
It's always possible.
Will it happen? It may but from what's been said it's not something they are working on and I would say probably not for licensed DLC as thats not just down to BHVR but the licensee and a deal would have to be made for each one.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/782916#Comment_782916
I'm rank 7 killer. They were all rank 2 survivors, 3 of them with items and strong add-ons. My Trapper didn't stand a chance, not like the devs care.
They do care or they wouldn't have implemented the new system at all.
With the matchmaking change it will over time look up to 6 ranks either side of yours if no one at your rank is available. This is to save people waiting for a prolonged period for a match. It widens over time so you can at least play.
There are some issues where it goes further than 6 ranks and if you see that happening report it so they can figure out what's wrong.
-
I am rocking the same Claudette skin with a black skirt and bloody face.
Bringing out my Trapper Deathgarden mask/blight skin and Billy blight skins for the killer mayhem along with the Huntress hound mask.
I also might use the donkey jacket on David and the Feng dress.
Thinking about breaking out all my past event skins for this one.
I don't have mains as I'm and altaholic! Just when I think I have one I change to another 😛.
-
NOED is a counter for doing gens too fast. It also has a counter of being made a useless perk slot by doing 5 totems.
This perk creates a second objective within the game which is totems.
NOED was originally a perk which was always active once the gates were powered which was insane for camping at that point but we lived with it.
It was then changed to 2 mins use after the gates were powered but it still meant camping guaranteed a kill so a change was always on the cards.
Next it became a hex perk so it brought in the counter play we needed and recently the QOL change of it having the Insta down on everyone at all tiers.
I think NOED is in a place where it sets out the second objective quite well and makes just doing gens a risky choice. You should really do every totem you walk by if you fear NOED activating. I've lost count how many times I have found another survivor doing a gen with a totem in plain sight of it. The funny thing is you can almost guarantee that person will be the one to complain about the killer using NOED in the end game chat.
-
@Rydog said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/779970#Comment_779970
If you take time off work to schedule around a video game, you need to reevaluate your priorities.
What in the actual hell.
And why I have never taken time off work to play any game and have completed all events so far while working 8-9 hours a day 😉.
I don't personally see the need to take time off for a game but that's just my opinion. Others may feel it's the best use of their time and It's not my place to say otherwise as we all think differently.
I see time as the one thing we can never get truly back so I keep my time off to spend with family and friends or exploring the world making amazing memories.
-
@StarMoral said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/782591#Comment_782591
If you get injured in the locker, wouldn't Inner Strength negate that since it would take longer to heal than to be injured?
Also, Exposed status effect is coming for healing's wig
That all depends on the conditions of the perk as it may stop your healing altogether or it would negate iron maiden.
It still doesn't help with the likes of head on since that perk is designed to use lockers for jukes.
Then there is the BBQ scenario which lockers are designed to block to aura of.
Exposed at least has a timer so many may play safer for a while but being injured puts does put you at greater risk not only as you are a one hit down but because you amake more noise and leave blood trials.
I don't see it being a good mechanic to injure someone for using something which is designed to help lose a killer.
-
The idea was so they could implement a system where you received your items back instead of it happening once the game has started and lose them.
I agree offerings should be hidden apart from blood point ones but id say only after they can fix the dc epidemic 😉.
-
@StarMoral said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/782017#Comment_782017
But doesn't Stridor completely negate Iron Will?
Stake Out negates Ruin
Hangman's negates Breakdown
I'm All Ears negates Quick and Quiet AND Dance With Me.
It's not a rare thing for perks to counter other perks.
Removing some effectiveness of a perk is quite different from losing a health state 😉.
-
We already saw what happened when they nerfed healing overall. Out came the phrase "non heal " meta as people adapted and now gens go faster.
Removing self care will compound that issue even more. It has been stated many times but healing overall is less efficient no matter how it happens
Self care at base is 32s and allows another to have that time doing a gen. Finding someone means you are not on a gen for that period and then you remove another for 16s so factoring that time to look and then get healed up which is then two off a gen which still equates to more than 32s overall.
Efficiency wise self care is still actually better if you want to heal in a match if no one is immediately close by or has a perk to help like we'll make it.
The perk has its place in the game but it is a lot more useful with botany or a medkit for maximum use imo.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
My understanding is that PC has a player base of about 20,000 players per month while PS4 has a player base of closer to 540,000 players per month.
So... Darwin + bleach + gene pool. Come back to PS4 where we actually know how to play the game, or switch to Spirit till you have enough blood points to max out your favorite killer. ... Who on PC will end up being Spirit.
Those figures aren't actually comparable.
While PS4 had 540k players that's the amount that logged in over the time period while the PC 20k figure is the amount online at any one time.
Take the largest playerbase on PC stated of over 1miliion players in the 2018 hallowed blight event it still only peaked at 75k users online at one time.
-
It happens with both sides. What they deem as strongest gets complained about and once that is changed they move onto the next thing that they blame for making them lose.
For survivors it's killers add-ons, powers and perks and for killers it's clothing, perks and items with add-ons.
-
It's a good concept but there is a reason most slasher films use masks. It's a way to disengage us from it being just a normal human which causes more fear within us.
In the case of Jack torence he is just the face of the killer. The spirits in the overlook are actually the ones pulling the strings turning him insane and convincing him to kill his family.
It's a great concept and one which works as in a sense it's like he is possessed so it allows the audience to disengage much like the masked killers do.
Could it work? Quite possibly but I would say it is more difficult to make a normal human seem scary than a hulking masked killer.
-
It comes down to what people want out of it.
The fact that you can please the entity by killing for example does lend to it being competative as it has win conditions set within the game. The emblems also force conditions to rank up which go against the casual 2 die 2 escape balance.
The other side though is it has so many variables which don't let the normal game play out and that a win can be given a lot easier rather than earned which a truly competative game shouldn't have.
For me it's a casual game which has competative elements but it's not to be taken too seriously.
-
I haven't had anyone say they would report me for a long time.
I do remember one time I was carrying someone to the hook and saw an injured Jake running in the distance. I went over in the direction afterwards and saw some blood which led me to hearing them behind a wall. I quickly downed then and they died on hook. After the match they acused me of using a wall hack and I was going to be reported.
I explained how I found them and we chatted for a bit and it came to light that they didn't play with a headset and didn't realise how good it was. They went on to say they were going to order one that day.