xEa
xEa
About
- Username
- xEa
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
We have 2 RE chapters, thats 1 more then we have with any other licence.Dont missunderstand me, i dont dislike RE at all, but there are other licences we already have in the game that i would much prefere to see an expansion. For exampleFreddy Krueger OriginalStranger Things (Eddie, Vecna, Hopper)Scream (Woodsboro, Sidney Prescot, Randy)
Just to name a few.I missread, i for some reason thought its about chapters.
Skins: Yes, give us more of that :)
-
Such an nice idea, i like it! It might be a little bit like Singularity, but since the drones would not be stationary and could actually effect survivors, its a good enough concept i would be interested in seeing in the game.
-
@Fairgame89 said:
The perk is strong doesn't need changing
In fact, the perk is indeed still strong, but clearly not strong enough that killers have to fear they might loose the game when they keep tunneling. That is why many people want 5sec DS back - to shake up the proxy camping / tunneling meta.
-
Happy New Year!
-
I just had this happening yesterday, but only on a single survivor. I ran this person for a good minute on shack counter glockwise just to see if entity would block the window. Nope.
So i am not sure if its a bug or a cheat, because it was only on this one survivor somehow.
@twinsforlife099 said:
I’ve recently just experienced this with hag, I think it may be a hack because I specifically couldn’t start chase against this certain Meg. Everyone else was fine.
Jop, same here.
-
@bjorksnas said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618957#Comment_3618957
Ah yes the most fun form of balancing buff perks till people use them all the time to reduce the playstyles we don't like instead of just buffing other playstyles and or nerfing the problematic one
I am not a fan of bandaid ballance either, but what else are they supposed to do at this point? Come up with a better idea how to reduce tunneling outside of DS buff please.
-
@Raptorrotas said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618918#Comment_3618918
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618931#Comment_3618931
Well some people might argue that a draw is still a loss for the killer. I mean the killer "didnt win" afterall.
The 2k = draw could only exist once the game actually starts treating/judging survivors as a team, which as you said, isnt the current reality of the game.
But with the current scoring 2 survivors won the other two and the killer lost.
( its also funny to see an actual kill distribution for a 60% killrate compared to the average math formula i keep using lol)
A draw is a draw and not a loss.
If someone for whatever reason thinks the game is lost because of a 2k, then it's a personal thing and has nothing to do with reality how the system works. It is even clarified in the discription of MMR that a 2K is a draw outcome. It is not up for debate. Its a fact.
The killer is in a 4v1 situation, and it is not relevant at all that the survivors are in a 1v1 situation. Not for the killer. Those are 2 completly, unconnected different things and have nothing to do with the outcome for the killer. Not even for MMR points (not relevant but i am pointing it out anyway), since every survivor looses the same amount in a game since the lobby has an average MMR.
-
@Krazzik said:
I'll preface this by saying I fully support buffing DS back to a 5sec stun.
Following on from a mini-discussion in my other recent thread, I wonder if buffing DS back to 5 seconds would actually reduce tunneling that much.
I don't think anyone is saying it would 'fix' tunneling, many killers would simply eat the DS as they do now and continue the tunnel. The question though is would it even reduce it a significant amount? Even back before the nerf tunneling was still commonplace and I feel like most killers have gotten even more used to it since then that an extra 2 seconds of stun wouldn't really put many off.
I think a 5 second DS would still help, but I think many are overestimating how much of an impact it would have. I think tunneling needs basekit solutions if anything is gonna change.
It would for sure reduce the tunneling.
A 5 second DS will bring this perk back to the meta table. Killer would have to expect everybody running DS, which would eventually lead to less tunneling. Some might still tunnel and go for the slug instad of the insta pickup, but because of that they would not be able to kill of one person quickly - which will make them loose the game.
About 5sec DS: I think it should be rather 4 second, but adding another 4 second on top of that no beeing able to use the power. So Nurse and Blight, the 2 stronges killer, will get hit the hardest if they tunnel.
-
@pseudechis said:
I agree with the points you bring up here.
I'm cautious about terms like "power role" because people have different perceptions of what the power role looks like. A clearer or at least more tangible definable concept would be "killer bias in outcome" as that's measurable.
- Do killers get more kills than survivors get escapes?
- If yes, is it ok that they do?
- How much bias is too much that it undermines the game experience?
You've posed the million dollar question. Lets try and answer it.
Its a balancing act between a team of survivors being able to outplay a killer without a solo survivor being the equivalent of a killer.
To clarify people have different conditions on what they define as a "win" but in terms of measurable game outcome you could safely consider death/escape as a binary measure of outcome and hence "win" condition.
With that in mind there is solo killer with one measurable outcome or "win" condition... did you kill more survivors than escaped?
Survivor gets a lil greyer because considering death/escape as the measure for outcome, a survivor has two win conditions.
- Did I escape/die
- Did more of my team escape/die... even if I died.
To the argument of why bias for one player over four... because we bias the four players already by providing two win conditions vs one.
For example... if you die but the rest of the team escapes who won?
In the most simple terms, you lost because dead, killer lost because more escape than dead, and the other 3 survivors won. I died but that loss is somewhat attenuated because my team won. So I can still win as survivor even though I lost/died.
That's the inherent bias that survivor outcome enjoys, Its a team game I can lose but still win. Its counter matched in solo killer by the inherent bias killer has vs a survivor 1v1.
So when survivors play as a team they can beat the killer, when they play solo they likely die.
We see this manifest in a killer bias in overall death/escape outcome, as you'd expect even a positive survivor team outcome, or win, likely to include at least 1 death. Also not every survivor is playing as a team member. Many are playing for their own selfish success which is if I escape I've won nothing less, which we see manifest as the disparity between survival rate when comparing SWF vs solo survivor.
Killer kills survivor 1v1, loses to survivor 4v1 and needs to be equivalent of at least 3v1 (if not 4) in power to be a tangible game threat. That's balance, but its balance that will likely measurably manifest itself in a killer bias in kill rate.
So is a killer bias in outcome acceptable? Well if a killer is the equivalent of 3-4x survivor and as such "balanced" then we'd expect to see a killer bias in outcome. So the game is actually more balanced than people give it credit for when we consider the measured outcome. Is it acceptable, that's subjective. I'm ok with it because it adequately represents the horror survival theme that the game is built around.
Which leads to the all important question how much killer bias is too much? I think anything that results in a median between 2D-2E and 3D-1E as outcome would be a sweet spot, given that survivor has two win conditions both team and personal vs the killer's one.
Which is pretty well close to a 60-40 spread in kill rate. Somewhere between 50-50 and 75-25 given the asymmetry of the game design and the disparity between the 1 and 2 win/loss conditions for either side. This is mechanically sound even when ignoring the thematic aspects of the game and considering competitive outcome alone.
So a 60-40 killer bias in D/E outcome is both competitively appropriate and thematically appropriate. Making it an acceptable average game outcome.
Tying it back to the OP, I guess this would make killer the "power role" if one was inclined to define it in such a way.
Did I escape/die
Did more of my team escape/die... even if I died.
- Wins can be defined in many ways: Some may think a pip is a win, some may think a lot of bloodpoints is enough to qualify for a win. And others may think winning is by escaping or 3/4king = Gaining MMR.
- The only two times "Did more of my team escape/die... even if I died." is a win condition is true when playingin a comp match or by making this rule for themself.
Point 1 is ingame reality. You gained something. Pip, MMR, Bloodpoints.
Point 2 is imaginative. You gain nothing by telling yourself you won the game because 3 of your teammates escaped.
So besides from playing comp and own ego boosting, "Did more of my team escape/die... even if I died." is not really a true win condition. UNLESS bhvr changes MMR to a Group-MMR. Which would make a lot of sense, but so far it is not reality.
-
@RpTheHotrod said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618421#Comment_3618421
A 50% kill rate would be pretty terrible. That would mean on average, killers aren't ever winning considering they need a 3K+ to win (75%+ in the match).
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618022#Comment_3618022
Bear in mind 60% is a target kill rate. A 60% kill rate is roughly 2.2 kills per match on average. Considering killers need 3K+ to win, this means that over a period of time, killers with a 60% kill rate should win "roughly" have of their matches (slightly under 50%). 60% kill rate is often misunderstood as a 60% win rate. There's definitely a difference. A 75% kill rate in a match is a win, but we clearly don't want a 75% kill rate in general since that'd just be killers on average always winning. For a true 50% win rate for killers, the kill rate would need to be 62.5%. If we really want a 60% win rate, then the kill rate would probably need to be more like the upper 60's.
Oh no, not this again😥
Its because we have a draw outcome. And a 0k is a relevant variable. So is a draw neither a win or a loss. There we go:
Myers is at roughly 60% killrate. This means, as we can see, the killer wins 51% and only looses 33% of the time. 0 kills is an outcome in DBD, and you have to put this into account. In fact, winrate with a 60% killer is compared to looserate actually even much higher then lossrate.
Another example:
60% killrate on plague translates into 54% winrate and only 34% lossrate. 0 kill is a loss, and 2k is a draw. You win significantly more games with her then you would loose.
No discussion needed, i only wanted to show some proof.
-
@HerInfernalMajesty said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618418#Comment_3618418
I see where you are coming from. Everyone wins, Survivors escape, and Killers get at least 7 hooks.
I just have a really hard time believing that the Killer player base will accept a 7 hook 4E as a win. And I honestly can’t blame them for feeling that way.
For sure, at the current state of the game, this would not feel very satisfying for killer, but i am talking about what i would like to have. In no way do i have an idea how this could be a possibility. A start would be that hook stages, especially fresh hooks count way more then they do now. Then at least you dont get the "entity hungers" while you actually hooked a fair amount of people.
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618400#Comment_3618400
Could you point me towards that showcase? I haven't seen that and would definitely like to be educated on it. Though, it kind of leaves the question: "Why are these limitations in place to begin with?" At least against Nurses and Blights. Could be for consistency reasons but other than that, I don't know.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the order of 4) and 5). The difference isn't huge but I think that the communication and consistency that a full SWF provide ultimately still give them an advantage over the killer. Of course we would assume that everyone plays well and the survivors communicate effectively (otherwise I'd consider them an example for category 6)). But I respect your opinion on that matter.
The matchmaking in DBD is still not a perfect science (which is a good thing imo). How many content creators have you seen loop a killer for minutes? There are tons of these videos and that should not happen when the killer plays just as well as the survivors. Also, many of these bully squads focus more on making the killer miserable than actually winning, so the MMR will put them against killers below their own skill quite often.
The problem with perfect balance (in the sense of a 50% kill rate) in my opinion is that it would make the game less fun for everyone, that doesn't play quite as serious. I personally do not like the idea of my matches all becoming super hard but somehow manageable (close to how it was shortly after MMR was introduced) because it would lead to matches becoming more predictable, any chance of variety disappearing (worse than DBD's always narrow meta) and ultimately a more stressful experience. If this is what a majority of players want (so many players, that BHVR would actually be willing to follow that route), then I'd have to deal with it but my interest in the game would lessen.
I know this opinion is not very popular but I am fine with MMR as it is. To me, it feels similar to the old rank system and I have a lot of fun knowing that I cannot predict, if I will win or lose and how even the match will be.
I am sorry, but i can not find it anymore. It was a series of multible sets and i believe it was on Hens stream. Not 100% sure tho.
EDIT: Nevermind, i found this best of. Its not exactly what i was looking for, but its something. Enjoy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8Z8lP_gBJEIts fine, we can disagree on that. For sure the gap is not very wide, so its nitpicking anyway.
It depends on which killer they run into. My opinion on that matter is that this is more a matchmaking issue. Often times i run a killer for 5 gens aswell, just had a match a few hours ago where a pig (the first pig i saw in ages 😥) wanted it really to know. But they are usually not on my level - the pig for example had like 1.500 hours and was prestige 4. No idea why a player like this is in my lobby. The same is for those killers who get looped by streamers. If you ask me if this should be possible: Yes an no. Yes in terms of if a survivor is so much better then the killer and No because they should not play the same match in the first place.
Mmh i think it would be still fun for both sides. Actually, if i am allowed to speak for myself here: I would have a ton more fun playing killer when it would be 50/50. This sounds very arrogant, but it is true that most games playing killer feel just like a slauter fest. Its to easy nowadays, more often then not. Of course you get those more sweaty games in between, but realisticly it is really not that hard. Thats a me thing probably, because i am more of a competetive type player and i dont get a kick out of destroying the "weaker" side.
Completly fine to think the MMR is good.
Oh and before i forget: If i remember right, you are a billy main so this is also for you. 😊
-
@GeneralV said:
There have been some discussions recently regarding the horror aspect (or lack of one) in Dead by Daylight. And whenever one of those discussions pops up, the maps are also mentioned.
And for good reason! The maps are the very heart of the horror atmosphere. And when that heart stops beating well... we look at you, reworked Coldwind Farm.
With the Realm Beyond close to claiming its final victim, I believe it is time we discuss the possibility of the old maps coming back to the game. And I'll make something very clear for those of you who enjoy the map reworks:
I am not asking for them to be removed.
Remember that I lost my favorite killer. I am heavily against taking away the things people cherish.
But I don't think the situation is okay for players like me, who loved those old maps. Or perhaps new players who wished they could play on those maps. Right now you click on an Old DBD video, you immediately feel saudade (translated from Portuguese, "saudade" refers to an emotional state of melancholic or profoundly nostalgic longing for a beloved yet absent something or someone), but when you go play DBD your favorite map isn't there anymore.
And I want to change that.
There are many ways to bring the old maps back, some easier than others. I haven't thought of a definitive solution yet, but I did think of some options: perhaps BHVR can add a "classic mode", since we've recently saw their ideas for alternate game modes. It could go as far as to add old powers / perks and add-ons, but that is just a suggestion.
Or perhaps a "classic pack". We know for a fact the game supports people playing on the same map with different lighting, as modders literally did that. They could add the option for us to choose between old and new maps, just making it clear you might put yourself in a disadvantage by doing so. I certainly wouldn't mind.
Or just say "screw it" and add them into the regular rotation. That also works, I suppose.
As long as we don't take away anything that people enjoy, I see no harm in giving us the game we loved back.
We just need to find a way of doing so.
Sigh. I would love to get them back, i really do, but unfortunatly i fear the chance is extremly low. Well, you have my support for that request and for sure from many others aswell.
-
@HerInfernalMajesty said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618400#Comment_3618400
In your opinion, is a 2K a win for the Killer or a draw? Is there a way of judging what winning is for a Killer apart from a 4K?
Speaking objectivly: 0-1K is a loss, 2k is a draw, 3-4k is a win.
Personally i would say a great game is a win and a bad game is a loss - no matter the outcome.
BUT if i had to decide what a win/draw/loss for me and everybody else should be, then i would be leaning towards hook stages. Because then, we most of the time always have many if not everybody winning.
For killer 0-5 hook stages is a loss (have not happend to me a single time since i am back), 6 is a draw and above is a win. For survivor, if they personally escape, its always a win, but if they die, they can still rely on their teammates. If more then 2 gets out, its still a win for them. 😁
Often, we have many winners!😉
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3618314#Comment_3618314
I have yet to see any comp group play without limitations. They aren't allowed to use the best items, they aren't allowed to use any item twice or more, certain perks are banned (although I am not sure, if this is still common), every perk is only allowed twice, maps in tournaments are always favorable for the killer etc.
Forgive me, if I doubt that there is no reason for these limitations.
The point about you and your brother playing in a SWF and not being able to beat a top tier Nurse is noted but honestly, that doesn't say much. It only shows that playing in a SWF is not an automatic win, which is a good thing. If your opponent plays better than you (you implied that by saying: "top tier Nurse"), then they should win. This is what balance means.
If you want me to make this ranking more accurate, then here you go:
0) Comp SWFs without any limitations (pretty much unbeatable but never happens)
1) Comp Nurses and Blights with normal comp rules
2) Comp SWFs with normal comp rules
3) Comp killers in general
4) Normal public SWFs, that play to win
5) Normal public killers playing to win
6) Casual 4 people SWFs
7) Casual killers
8) SWF / solo hybrid (2 SWFs)
9) SWF / solo hybrid (3 SWF, 1 solo)
10) SWF / solo hybrid (2 SWF, 2 solo)
11) Casual solos
12) Meming SWFs
13) Meming killers
14) Meming solos
In this case however, I would need to go into more detail because a 3 people SWF can carry their 1 solo team mate pretty far, if they are that good. 2 SWFs can also be extremely good and coordinate with each other and surpass a casual killer. It all gets muddled when you go that deep. That is the main reason I only listed "SWF" (which I mainly considered 3 or 4 people in a SWF). You are correct though, that I used the term a bit too broadly.
The reason I brought up the point with bullies in DBD is because bully squads were a real issue in the past (now not so much). Bullying can be everything from exploits, certain perk combinations, flashlight macros (patched), excessive tbagging from multiple survivors (imagine how you'd feel when you struggle and then get ridiculed by multiple people at every turn - not great I presume), to people that solely focus on making it impossible for you to progress (ineffective against experienced killers but the worst thing for beginners). I get that killers can be very annoying too (although, I can't think of many more options than animation spamming and excessive slugging from the top of my head, feel free to list a few more though). The main difference between survivors and killers is that survivors can always force the match to end. The killer can't.
If a killer is facing a bully squad, that can just toy around with them, then the killer will not be able to end the match at will. A group of survivors however can. It's not great but when the killer is a jerk that refuses to end the match, you can force them to down you, which will result in you dying eventually. The struggling killer from earlier, that can barely get a down (much less a hook), is unable to do that. I mean, what are they going to do? Suddenly repair these gens themself? Unlikely.
To be clear, I do not condone bullying in any form and I am all for removing it from the game. However, the normal gameplay loop will always be impacted by any changes made to tackle this issue, so it's hard to fix without creating new problems that could potentially be worse for the game overall.
They did a series of showmatches with no restriction and killer came out on top (comp players vs comp players). So i do think some killers are stronger then best survivor comp teams, mainly Nurse Spirt and Blight. But it is okay to think otherwise since we dont have much footage of that.
Switch 4 and 5 for obvious reason and i would fully agree with your updated list.
Sure thing, Bully squads were at a time where survivors had strong tools, more powerful perks and especially when better maps were a thing. But those Bully squads often ran in less experienced killers at that time due to more or less random matchmaking. I never saw a bully squad in 2018 "bullying" for example a good mega blink nurse. In that case, the Bully was the killer.
That is also why i believe ballance is important. When killer are to strong, they become the bully. We see this very often now in currenct matchmaking. So i stick with that statement - ballance and solid matchmaking is actually a great way to elliminate bully squads/bullying killers.
I am not saying, turn the tides and make survivor huge favourite, i am saying make it even. And improve the matchmaking system.
-
We already have this survey(s). Here is one.
So right now it would be:
#1: Skull Merchant
#2: Trickster
#3: Clown
#4: Hag
#5: Knight
My personal:
#1: Skull Merchant
#2: Twins
#3: Nurse (if they are good, what is 90% the time)
-
@Xernoton said:
The second question can't be answered quite that easy.
If you are playing perkless and addonless Wraith, then you're definitely not the power role. Same thing for most killers (maybe except Nurse?). If you use everything at your disposal and you play against a very capable group of survivors (SWF or solo doesn't matter at that point), that also use the strongest stuff, then you will mostly be the power role in so far, that you will be very oppressive, have a small room for mistakes and have a decent chance to win, if you play relentless. Playing nice more often than not results in a loss, though because you limit your own efficiency to the point where the survivors will outpace you.
This however varies from killer to killer. No matter how good you are as a Trapper, you will not outperform a somewhat decent Blight.
I personally would rank killers and survivors like this:
0) Comp SWFs without any limitations (pretty much unbeatable but never happens)
1) Comp Nurses and Blights with normal comp rules
2) Comp SWFs with normal comp rules
3) Comp killers in general
4) Normal public SWFs, that play to win
5) Normal public killers playing to win
6) Casual SWFs
7) Casual killers
8) Casual solos
9) Meming SWFs
10) Meming killers
Sometimes the lower half can switch around a bit depending on the map.
I think that killers should be the power role overall. In a 1v1 game there doesn't need to be a power role but in a 1v4, you have a group that finds strength in numbers against 1 more or less isolated player. That can lead to easy bullying and takes a lot of the fun away from one side, which in turn leads to longer queue times and possibly less fun for the other as well, when the game is in perfect 50/50 balance. With the killer being a bit stronger (significantly enough to make a noticeable difference but not so much, that playing survivor feels like an automatic loss) the game is in a pretty good state for the most part.
A lot of how DBD feels depends on how you approach the game and your mind set. If you go into it expecting to win every match with no trouble at all, then you're in for a rough time. If you go in and just try your best, knowing that a lot of it still comes down to rng and factors outside of your control, then you'll have a much better time and the game becomes "you-sided".
Comp Nurse and comp Blight are expected to 4K every single game in comp, it is only a matter on how many gens survivor can finish. No limitation does not change anything by the way. Even with best perks and best items, Blight for example is still on top. So what makes you think comp SWF is more powerful then Nurse/Blight?
Normal SWF, as we already have proven in a different thread, can not win as much as killer. SWF has not a better outcome on average then killer. Especially not when you take top tier killer into account. A strong pub SWF never ever has a higher winrate then a strong pub Nurse. Just simply not.
You are also using the word SWF incorrect. Just because my brother (who has like 200 hours in this game and does not give a damn) and i group up for some silly game, we are expected to beat top tier nurse? I dont know about that logic.
About your bullying argument: True, survivors can try to be annoying and rude in endgame chat, but so can killer. Right now, the killer is the Bully, if they want to, because you know... they have the power. Does it matter if Survoirs are 4 people when they get their ass kicked? I get what you are saying, taking the heat from 4 different people can be annoying - but hear is the problem: What are they supposed to do? Survivors, technically cant do ######### besides repairing generators, which does not hurt the killer. Mean words in endgame chat can be ignored and the chat can be closed. Tbabig is just a survivor moving up and down.
-
I will never understand why survivors act that way. Seriously, whats the point in making noises there? Juhuu you found the hatch, awesome!! What a One in a million scenario! Thanks for sharing this insanly rare opportunity with me. A great story to tell your grand children!
I would understand if they give a last free hit, but they do it to rub it under your nose or what (??).
Again, i mean it, i dont get it. What else could it be?
-
@GeneralV said:
Yes, the killer should be the power role.
And that doesn't mean it should be impossible to escape. Remember the quote from No One Left Behind?
"Yeah, no #########.
But I believe we can outsmart and overthrow him if we work together.
Don't be predictable and selfish!"
Thats it, actually. The survivors should feel like they are in a dangerous situation, from which they can escape only if they work together.
And the killer, well:
"This is my world. And you can't ever leave." — Freddy Krueger
"He stops at nothing."
"Shining in the darkest dark, his eyes pierce the night and sting your soul."
"If you do not stop and catch your breath... she will."
"The night assists me and it's endless here." — The Ghost Face
The killer is the danger, the monster lurking in the fog. It is a role which has to feel threatening. And some people will say this feeling will disappear at some point, some will never feel it, but the game should make an effort to provide it to you.
And that goes beyond the killers themselves, obviously. The scenario and overall atmosphere of the game is also extremely important, something current DBD severely lacks. @Atsuka_Anarchy had a good discussion about this topic recently.
Give me Legion on reworked Coldwind and it is nothing special.
Give me Myers on Old Shelter Woods with a lot of fog and now we're talking!
You have a good point, which i completly agree on. The atmosphere of the game has changed, but not for the better.
I dont think high winrate is much off a reason why killer radiate menace. It is more the lack of atmosphere these days. When i look at old McMillian maps for example, with fog and grim light, that was something! But now, we get some strange jungle map or somewhat dull outer space maps with Nostromo. Also the reworked maps are in the atmosphere department no where near as good as they used to be, pretty much every map.
I miss the creepy settings to be honest. I am aware that this wont be like in the first days of course, but it would add some stuff to the game that no powerful killer, no matter how powerful this killer might be, bring (back) to the game.
-
@HerInfernalMajesty said:
There has been a lot of discussion surrounding the role of Killer and whether or not it should or shouldn’t be the power role. On one hand you have these supposed Killer win streaks that frustrate people. On the other hand this game is a Killer power fantasy so a Killer bias is absolutely to be expected.
Therein lies the conundrum. How much power should the Killer have? Should the Killer be a threat, but not enough of a threat to lock one or more Survivors out of a game? Should the game go to a scoreboard type of game without eliminations? Wouldn’t that destroy what the game is about?
What about when Survivors are the power role? It does happen; is this an allowable prejudice? If the Killer is stronger then surely the Survivors should enjoy the spoils of their victory, sore winning and all.
However, the difficult truth is that Killers do not want Survivors to escape, and Survivors do not want Killers to kill. In a game that contains a Killer bias should it instead be a Survivor power fantasy with a Survivor bias? After all, (I say this sarcastically) why put the fun of one person above the fun of four?
The Survivors if playing correctly can beat the Killer. There exists a pathway to victory. This tells me that ultimately teamwork itself is the power role. The problem is that it is difficult to manifest the discipline required to achieve this teamwork. Impatience, selfishness, lack of awareness etc. get in the way of Survivor victory.
If the Killer bias of 60% kill rate were to go away, say down to 50% or lower, would DBD still be DBD? Personally I am of the mind that no it will not be. In my opinion the reward feedback loop of this game thrives on difficult escapes. There is an element of challenge in escape since it does not come easy. It keeps players coming back for more. When escape is achieved it feels highly rewarding. If escaping became easier I believe this whole game would unravel and deteriorate.
I get it, losing doesn’t feel good. When you as a Survivor know that you are better than the Killer as an individual it feels awful to lose to someone you know is below you in skill. It feels awful leveraging all of your skill for your team only for them to let you down and get you killed. But again, that is the nature of this asymmetrical team game. Anything different than this would change the game so drastically that it would be unrecognizable.
Should the Killer feel like the power role? Should the Survivor feel like the power role? If there should be no power role what would that look like? 50% escape rate? Would increasing escape rates cheapen the joy of escaping? Can this game survive if escaping felt blasé?
PS: This isn’t even getting into the idea of retaining the horror theme of the Killer being the main threat, which some individuals believe can be sustained even if Killers were to lose their 60% kill rate. Again I personally do not believe it can.
There has been a lot of discussion surrounding the role of Killer and whether or not it should or shouldn’t be the power role. On one hand you have these supposed Killer win streaks that frustrate people. On the other hand this game is a Killer power fantasy so a Killer bias is absolutely to be expected.
Every data we have shows the killer is the power role, not only winstreaks. From comp where it is expected for some killer to 4K 2 gen left to lower tier killer where 6 hook stages are a decent outcome. 6 hookstages is still basically a draw. Also the general winrate shows 60%, which is huge favour for killer.
However, the difficult truth is that Killers do not want Survivors to escape, and Survivors do not want Killers to kill. In a game that contains a Killer bias should it instead be a Survivor power fantasy with a Survivor bias? After all, (I say this sarcastically) why put the fun of one person above the fun of four?
No sarcasm needed, its the truth. Puting the fun of one above the fun of 4 is what we have right now. At least when you the type of player who wants to win.
Is this justifyable that killer have a much better outcome then survivor? Maybe yes, playing killer feels a lot more stressful and sweaty for some reason then playing survivor. Some killer mains dont feel rewarded when they dont get 4 kills most of their games. Many survivors dont take a loss as hard as the killer. I think this is the only argument that i would accept.
Objectivly speaking tho, it is completly nonsense to let the game as it is right now or make it even more killer sided.
For me personally, every loss feels the same tho. As long as i had a great game, i dont mind loosing on either side. But that is just my opinion.
Should the Killer feel like the power role? Should the Survivor feel like the power role? If there should be no power role what would that look like? 50% escape rate? Would increasing escape rates cheapen the joy of escaping? Can this game survive if escaping felt blasé?
That depends on what power role means. Everybody has its own idea off that. For me personally, the optimal way for this game can only be 50/50 - for ALL skill levels. Which is close to impossible. But while it is impossible, i wont eccept just a braindead 60/40, you know, just because.
The problem with DBD is that it does not know what it wants to be. First it was a "party game", then it shiftet into ballancing more. Then they listend to the crying killer mains (no offens, but that is what happend) and made the game killer friendly. Then they went to ballance the game for a more competetive inviroment while half of the stuff we have is still crazy inballanced.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617900#Comment_3617900
But if you are only looking at the top % of win streaks its cherry picking the most convenient piece of data to make the most convenient of points.
That is a very weak way to make a point.
So to sum up again as simply as possible.. we see a killer bias in general game outcome and that's not necessarily a bad thing given what the game is based upon.
We are comparing the top % winstreaks on both sides. We are not cherry picking,because we compare. If i can use this as an arugment that killers are the "power role", sure it can, but only in combinition with all the other data we have. And every information we have is pointing in the same direction, anless you have an ace in the hole we dont know yet.
We know for a fact, that survivors can not pull that off, but killers can. Would it change your opinion if we presentate hundreds of killer winstreaks above the 200 win streak on survivor? Because they exist.
I know your argument about why its fine that killers should have the advantage tho. I think there is no way anybody can convince you since it is your opinion on the game, and it is true, nobody unless a really strong argument comes up will convince me, that fairness is more important than the horror aspect.
It has already been said a few times: Tension has nothing to do with more powerful killers. You think it has, because you believe in that, i think it does not because the game was at its peak of its player base when the game was ballanced the most. Of course you will say "but that has nothing to do with the playerbase" - and completly forgeting that it was you making an arugment that fairness would ruin the game. We had that already. We had fairness. Was the game ruined? No, it was at its peak!
The problem is that a debate is hard at this point, at least for me. Its facts and numbers vs feelings. And since i believe in facts and numbers more then in feelings, we can only agree to disagree. Which is completly fine, every opinion counts no matter if we are on the same boat this time or not.
-
Ultimate weapon + Dead man's switch in combination is a discustingly strong combo. I suppose they have to make a change that these 2 perks wont work together that well. Why it takes so long is a good question. I suppose so we have something to rant about?
-
@Rulebreaker said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617900#Comment_3617900
We do want to point that yes survivors do have just as many tools as the killer, but there being 4 survivors, they need to be watered down so that its equal to or better than the killer's only when working together.
Explain what "fair play" is please.
With Fair play i ment playing in a friendly way. Like you would play with 4 of your friends. So fair play = no proxccamp and then hard tunnel off the hook.
Sure, when survivor work perfectly together, they can perform miracle plays. So did the best survivor team in the world with their insane 200 (3 man+) escapes.
Wanna talk about the 1600 on Blight or 800 (ongoing) 4Ks no addons aswell? And those win streaks are 4Ks, not 3 escapes. The best coordination did not help survivors to reach a winstream that would come even close to win streaks from killers.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
Not really. Main building is getting 2 god-pallets but that's all. Survivors can't loop those pallets, they are drop and run type pallets. And once they gone, there is nothing left for main. And this main has no good vault, which makes sense to have 2 good pallets.
Rest of map is pretty much playable.
Garden of Joy, Haddonfield are worse maps.
How is haddonfield worse then springwood? It has 2 very strong windows, thats about it. If they remove just one of them, this map might become killer sided. Garden of Joy is somewhat understandable, but i am pretty sure they have nerfed it very recently. It spawns with less pallets, middle got nerfed, less filler pallets.
On the other hand Springwood: Main building has a god pallet, 2nd and 3rd spawn are also very strong. Both houses are very safe and often spawn very strong windows. Houses are on multible versions next to killershack, you can almost always make it there. In between there are decent / good filler pallets.
V1 might not be very survivor sided, i even think this version is somewhat ballanced, but the other versions are usually unpleasent for killers. Dont get me wrong, there are also super strong killer maps, but the argument, Springwood is the most survivor sided map has some truth in it.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617745#Comment_3617745
What you call unfairly balanced I call appropriately balanced. Survivors beat killers if they work as a team, you talk like its impossible to beat a killer. Survivors have all the tools they need to beat a killer, but one on one they are in trouble because big scary monster. It works and it works well.
Plenty of competitive players still play DBD and the player numbers are pretty stable so we aren't seeing this mass exodus of players due to "poor balance" people keep touting. I'd say DBD is at greater risk of alienating horror fans by making the game too tame than they are alienating PvP fans who want the horror to just be a veneer rather than a tangible threat.
Again I enjoy DBD that's reason enough, I'll keep playing while I enjoy it and I'll enjoy it as long as the temper tantrum folk don't ruin the gameplay with terrible suggestions in the name of "balance".
I never said you can't have good horror with balance just that I've never seen people make good suggestions with respect to the topic of balance for DBD. Because most balance suggestions are made by players who want this game to be played one way and one way only. They hate any kind of loss of agency or early elimination and their idea of balance is removing those aspects so they can remain in game longer which isn't "balance" at all.
Balance in of itself isn't a bad thing, but often what people define as "balance" on this forum is. Because they want the balance to bypass or ignore the tangible core threats of the game.
"Twiddle their thumbs" in there lies the problem. That loss of agency that you despise, that makes you twiddle your thumbs... that's the threat you are trying to avoid as survivor. There are two primary threats in DBD as survivor loss of agency and elimination.
If you remove loss of agency the only threat is elimination which means you are safe until last hook. Basically gutting all threat from the primary mechanic of fleeing from chases until elimination. That doesn't sound "balanced" to me, but most "balance" suggestions made for DBD often revolve around removing the primary threats to survivor till essentially game end.
There is another thread right now with suggestions about fixing "tunneling" by making survivors immune to being hooked or hit till another player is downed. Just bad suggestions that remove tangible threat in the name of balance.
So yeah I comment when I see bad suggestions to water down the tangible threat that makes playing DBD interesting.
Its debateable if it is appropriate that killers can win thousends of games in a row, while solo survivors dream of a 50 escape streak. All you write is "i am a big scary monster, so the ballance is secondary priority".
And sure, survivors have the tools to win, but clearly not as much as killer. And when we look at the winstreaks, it becomes even more apparent which side the better tools has, especially when one side is willing to poop on fair play.
-
I get your frustration, but it cant work the way you want it. If we had the choice to DC without any consiquences, people would do it constantly for the dumbest reasons. And this would ruin the whole game.
To be perfectly honest, the game is way to generous compared to others. A few days ago we had a strom here and power went out for a few seconds. After rejoining like 3 minutes later, the penalty was already over. In other games, penalty would usually be much longer.
-
@DrDucky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617791#Comment_3617791
Just look at it as Carlson going against random people in bars. He would easily hit a 100 win streak, and that is basically the same as dbd pubs (granted you cannot bring strong perks or maps or items in chess which do influence wins on both sides).
Thats a bad example, since random people are at probably 800 elo, and in high MMR, there are no complete beginners but rather vetherans and other strong players.
More acordingly would be if he would go against other GMs of various strenght. He would, as he does, draw many games and probably loose a handful.
But in no way we would win all 100 wins without drawing or loosing. Not even against "bad" Grandmasters. The game is to ballanced for that.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617335#Comment_3617335
That's a good 1 year and 8 months ago. But for the sake of this argument, I'll consider it as 'recent'. It is true that Blight is one of the most beloved killers in DBD (always ranked highly and a pick rate that reflects that, even though he is a dlc character) but the same can hardly be said in good faith when it comes to Hillbilly. He is one of the original killers, that everyone has access to and yet his pick rate is still abysmal. If he was such a great killer to play, then his pick rate would reflect that. That isn't controversial but a fact.
Also, number 11 (especially back then with only 27 killers) is in the better half but nowhere near the golden standard. If half a million people consider him fun to play, then it's a bit weird that we don't see him nearly as often as most of the lower ranked killers on this list. I follow the stats on Nightlight pretty closely and though they are not the most reliable source, it is notable that his pick rate is always less than 2% and barely changing.
I think i made my point about that already, so lets step back from more or less offtopic that one killer (Billy) is debateable or not, and go back to the actual topic.
Wouldnt't you agree that my statement killers went downhill compared to the past is in general true?
There is a thread about which killers survivor like and which not. Killer wale (?) made a big survey about that. And even there you can see that there are more hated killers from the post Blight era i am talking about then the entire rest combined. Sure, pre Blight has also some stinkers like Hag or Clown, yet not as many in comparison as the new era.
Now, since you made the argument that popularity is a strong indicator if a killer is liked: Which killers are popular? If we ignore Chucky and Alien since they are new, what are the popular killers? From the new era, Trickster (probably because of rework) is at 2,6% the most popular one, the rest falls off.
From the 10 least played killers, 6 are from the "new ara". Half of them. Twins, Artist, Singularity, Knight, Cenobite, Skull Merchant (thank god).
Personally, everybody can think of that what he wants. Its fine to like Skull Merchant. But the statement is, according to the people very true.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617365#Comment_3617365
Yeah, though the reward isn't all that high for the most part. Especially now that most survivors know common totem spawns. So you are left with a very high risk and the potential for a decent but not very high reward.
They can still work but most of the time you'd be better off using something else (not even meta perks, necessarily).
Well, you said it, it is a lot of RNG. Are they all worth a slot? I dont think so.
But to be fair, some are actually better then many make say. The reason most wont run Hex perks anymore (beside Devour and Penti) is more that they get overshadowed by other, more powerful and more consistent perks.
-
@Xernoton said:
They can be good on the right maps and the right killers but mostly they are very unreliable.
One match, you stomp because of them and the next all your totems are gone in the first 60 seconds.
Isnt't that the point of hex perks? High risk, high reward?
-
@Orthane said:
We receive the removal of For the People and Buckle Up working together, and you receive the removal of Dead Man's Switch and Pain Resonance working together.
Do you accept?
Absolutly. Both combos are dumb and overpowered, so we should get rid of them.
-
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617299#Comment_3617299
Show me the votes you are referring to, please. The only recent votes I found were the ones rating killers by how fun they are to play against. Billy has always been considered great to play against but playing as him is a different experience. And that is coming from someone who has mained this killer for 2 years.
I don't think a lot of people would rate Billy as that fun to play. At least not for more than one game at a time. After all, that would imply that his pick rate would be quite decent. But it isn't. He is always one the of the least played killers because he is extremely frustrating, which cannot be the golden standard.
Excuse me? Go on google or youtube, it takes 10 seconds to multile rankings where poeple voted for most fun killer, older and new ones. Here is a random one that poped out instantly, apparently with half a million votes. The killers i named are more or less (suprise!) exactly where i placed them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1Dw3F9led0#11 Hillbilly
#4 Demogorgon
#3 Oni
#2 Huntress
#1 Blight
Not every vote is the same of course, but it all comes down that the named killers are placed very high. And they are also placed VERY high for survivors.
That is why, i call them the golden standard. And no suprise, they share similar design philosophys.
It is perfectly fine to have controversal opinions, but please stop questioning if it is true that Hillbilly, Blight or Demogorgon are the most beloved killers in DBD.
-
Overall they are survivor sided, but it depends a lot on which version you get. V1 is much more ballanced then the others.
The reason you struggle is probably the way of the layout. There are 2 houses usually close to each other, in between killer shack. And they are also close to the main building, which is survivor sided.
House to the left, shack, hous to the right. Close to the right main building.
-
@jesterkind said:
You seem to be basing a lot of these examples on popularity, rather than the quality of their design. Twins, for example, have a pretty good design with a ton of potential, and all you mention is that they're not popular, not even that their implementation was flawed and that they're buggy as hell.
Similarly, there are killers on this list where you hyper-focus on one specific flaw rather than the quality of their design. Artist and, I assume, Knight are examples of this: Artist has one of the best designed powers in the game, and also, an annoying flaw with the "drop bird at loop and force them to leave" tactic. It doesn't seem fair to throw out the entirety of her design, a very good and interesting design, because there's one annoying aspect to it.
The bigger problem is how much weight you're putting on popularity, though. If your point is just that modern killers tend to be less popular, that'd be one thing (probably not correct, Trickster's pretty popular for example), but the idea that a killer's design is bad because you can see some people disliking the killer as a whole just doesn't hold water.
So what does hold water then? If a killer like Twins is very unpopular and disliked by the majority on both sides but not over or underpowered, something might be problematic with the design. They might be creative, but that does not make the design good.
I am putting everything into account, and i hoped the devs are too. Ballance, popularity and how people feel about them. Unfortunatly, i have a strong feeling they lost track on what is good for the game in many ways. Killer and Map design are two major problems these days.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
I don't know about you but most of killers we got last 2 years was amazing.
Trickster and Twins are garbage killers, boring play-styles.
Nemesis is amazing, he just needs some better add-ons.
Artist is strong but boring? Not my style but i can see why someone likes her.
Pinhead boring to go against, especially for solo survivors. But his design is not bad. He is fine.
Sadako and Dredge are very fun teleport / stealth type killers. They are not maybe so strong but they are fine. Not all killers need to be on Blight's level.
Wesker - Even you agree'd he is good killer lol.
SM & Knight - Mistakes. They should never happen again.
Singularity - Best M1 killer in game. That's tell good enough about him. Also only people who is bad with his power thinking he is not getting value. When you master him, he is real monster.
Xeno - This killer is not lose / lose for survivors. Use turrets smarter and he is fine. Xeno is amazing killer we got.
Chucky - Shorter Wesker. He is fine. His cooldown is long but it's not the only power he got. His pov and size also good powers. He is best mind-game killer in game. And he has fairly strong anti-loop as well.
Most killers are amazing? You personaly dislike half of them and even calling them mistakes #########. How low is your standard?
@[Deleted User] said:
I absoluteley love Pinhead, Dredge and Nemisis.
and i really hate Nurse, Blight, Billy, Wesker.
Cool.
@Xernoton said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617260#Comment_3617260
That isn't true. Because @radiantHero23 didn't disagree that Billy is great to play against. He stated, that he is not in a good spot because he is horrible to play, which is correct.
The golden standard should be killers that are great for both sides and that is just not true for Hillbilly. Not anymore. He has about 3 realms where his power is actually good and even then he is extremely addon and perk reliant. All of this leads to a lot of frustration when playing as him.
Check out any relevant vote with many participants about which killers are fun to play. Billy is almost always top 10 or at least very close to that. If you personally agree or not is your thing of course and i respect that opinion. How i see it is that a killer who is in the top 1/3 to play as and against is extremly rare, so i think it is safe to say we can considere Billy still one of the best killers we have.
I agree tho, he is not as amazing as he used to be. But that is just my opinion.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617056#Comment_3617056
Then I'm sorry for you. I think everyone's opinion is important and valid to grasp the whole picture.
I never said anything else? Your opinion is in the pool of opinions and not excluded. But just because you scream the loudest does not make it more important then the others. Like i said, the majority disagrees with what you say about Billy.
-
@bjorksnas said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617061#Comment_3617061
I mean record shows interesting movement killers are usually the ones people like more than a half ranged attack or area denial spam. Id like a few more takes on blight / oni than another take on knight
Exactly. And thats why i complain. Instead of getting the killer type you discribed, we get Artist, Knight, Skill Merchant, Dredge. Four within eight killers that throws random stuff at a loop to get a free hit. Imagine pumping out the most disliked form of killer half of the time. And then some come and defend that stuff.
Before they killswitched The Knight, i played him all the time to get used to his power more and learn him. I want to be decent with every killer, so also Crap like Knight has to be played. After many games, my conclusion is the same: An extremly bad designed killer, completly braindead on both sides.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617029#Comment_3617029
If you do t care about opinions of a smaller amount of people the why did you make this post.
If you dont care about my opinion, that's fine with me. But maybe don't ask for it them by making a post in the DISCUSSION section. Maybe put the post into feedback next time.
If Billy is your and a lot of people's golden standart my friend, I have bad news for you.
HE'S AWFUL!
True, it would rather belong into the feedback section.
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617034#Comment_3617034
I think he is actually talking about Old Billy, my friend.
For a very, very long time Hillbilly was widely praised as DBD's golden standart of killer balance. Older players like OP, myself and many others like to refer to that version of Billy, before overheat was even a thing.
And trust me, he was magnificent.
I think Billy is still a great killer. No where near as great as he used to be, sure, but still much better then any of those killers i mentioned.
It is also important to say that a great killer is not only great because he plays good. It has to be the whole package.
Twins for example is probably the worst killer in DBD because almost nobody likes to play them and almost nobody likes to play against them. When we look at Billy, he is top 5 for survivors and still in the top 10 / top 15 for killer players, which is why i think he still belongs into the "golden standard" category.
On some maps, he might have its issues, but on the majority, Billy feels fine to me, especially running Doom Engravins. The overheat never bothered me. In fact, i think i overheated a handful of times so far. I am not a master with Billy tho, only Prestige 9 so my personal argument is not to important.
-
@bjorksnas said:
I think its mostly because of the difficulty of creating something new, in a game where what you do is chase survivor hit survivor hit gens there isn't a ton of space for character design after having 20 of them under your belt much less 30. Its hard to create something new without making it something complex and its hard to make it something simple that ends up being complex enough to be its own character that isn't just the same as something else. Id still rather have 10 more blights than anything else we have gotten besides wesker recently but yeah the well is tapped pretty dry for how simple the base game is.
That is completly true in my opinion. It is hard to create something new, sure i give you that. Because of that, they failed. So i say, rather create good killers that have a formular instead of creating one fail of a killer design after another. They actually created a top killer with Wesker, in 3 years. Instead of making more of that, we get Knight, Skullmerchant, Trickster and other failed designed killer.
It is perfectly fine to have different type of killers, but why do they have to make the worst and copy them over and over again instead of the fun ones? And again, in that case it is also my opinion, but i share it with the overwhelming majority, that Oni, Blight or Billy are WAY better designed then the garbage (sorry) they released since years.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617037#Comment_3617037
But criticizing the majority is good!
We should search for an objective truth. Not follow blindly what others say.
If there is no objective truth, the opinion of the masses isnt automatically made the objective truth. It's still just an opinion. An opinion, that, as you say correctly, can be wrong.
It is true in many ways. Politics would be a great example. But fun or pleasure is hard to critcize, right? We can argue that an album of this and that rockband is bad, and we may be on the same page, but if millions disagree with our opinion, and only a few agree, its rather pointless apart from finding a person that agrees and have a nice talk about that. Thats at least how i see it.
-
@OwlWithMustache said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3617037#Comment_3617037
I'm not criticizing the list, I'm saying that your entire argument doesn't even exist, that's how bad it is. Clearly you wanted people to share their opinions, kinda seems like you're getting defensive rather than discussing now that you realize your thread didn't turn into the circlejerk you wanted
What is there to discuss? Its a call to the devs to please stop releasing stupid stuff. If stupid stuff is fine for you, good for you. I mean i doubt you disagree the recent killers are well designed, but if you really think that way, great! You might be the one.
-
@OwlWithMustache said:
What an asinine post.
You even point out that there were well designed killers that came out after blight, which shows that there isn't any point in this discussion even existing, but you then make huge generalizations about incredibly subjective things. You can't just say "Well Designed" and slap that title on only the killers you like when there really isn't any way to say if a killer is "well designed"
I honestly am half wondering if this is heavy bait since you also say that demo, the OG king of zoning is well designed.
On top of that you say "Stop pumping out more and more of those and find your way back to the roots."
#########, their roots were legion, deathslinger, nurse, clown, freddy, and pyramid head.
BHVR makes characters; sometimes they're stinkers, other times their praised as the best thing that has ever been introduced to dbd in the history of forever until I play against them more than 5 times and then I find them annoying. There are no trends or "Go back to" they just make stuff
You even say it, that this is not neccessay my opinion. I agree with most killers beeing bad designed, but i also added that i have no problem with a few of them, where many others actually have. If you criticise this list is not really important, you criticise the opinion of the majority of people. Thats fine tho, but it does not make it less true.
-
@radiantHero23 said:
The golden standart....
Is this a joke?
Have you played Billy???
I main Demo besides Pig and he's in o e word: Awful.
He's extremely predictable. His shred doesn't work at most tiles and serves more as a pallet breaking tool.
Billy is literally unplayable on a ton of maps.
Killers like Sadako (original Sadako) gave the player another form of gameplay. Strategic over mechanical skill. That's not liked by some but liked by others.
Calling some killers failures just because YOU don't like their design, doesn't make them objectively bad.
There will always be peoe that enjoy some killer designs over others.
I love playing the pig and dislike playing Wesker (literally only had two games with him. Ptb and adept). There is no objective truth.
And that includes (even if it hurts to say this) Skull merchant.
In regards to the predrop shift w, I say this:
IT'S DONE AGAINST EVERY KILLER.
I play Pig. That's an m1 killer with a power you can literally walk away from. What do I see every game multiple times? Pre dropping pallets. Players do that against every killer. There are just some that encourage doing it more and some that encourage it less.
Dont exclusively blame certain killer designs for a boring playstyle that many players love to embrace.
To be perfectly honest, i dont care what your personal opinion on that matter or those killers is. Its totally irrelevant. I trust more in votes, done by thousends of people. And they say those killers ARE the golden standard, if you like it or not. Add Oni and it is almost certaint that they will be overall be in the top 10/top 15 at least. They are never near the bottom, completly in contast to the "modern killers" i named.
-
@fussy said:
I have been on this forum for more than two years and have never seen a post like "Artist is op", "Nerf Artist". All i see is Blight this, Blight that, Blight, Wesker, Blight, Blight...
While I understand that she is a very rare character in games, and Blight is one of the most popular, that's why this happens, I don't understand why people don't complain about her at all? Are there so few good Artist mains?
I know it's a hot take, but in my tierlist Artist is third strongest killer and probably will be second after Blight will get his addons nerf. No, it doesn't mean she needs any nerfs, she is literally perfect imo, but...
CAN SOMEONE COMPLAIN ABOUT ARTIST HERE PLEASE?
She is not op, but she is one of the dumbest, most boring killer to face. The reason not many complain about her is that she is not common at all. On top of that, most Artist players are just bad and only play her occasionally. If everybody would play Artist and would play on high level, she would be the most hated killer right after Dull merchant.
You welcome.
-
Is it just me or are Bloody Party Streamer compared to the past really rare? When i prestige one level, i get maybe one or two of those.
-
@Hunkulese said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616414#Comment_3616414
Your devotion level is meaningless. You don't know how Skull Merchant works or how to play against her if you think she's anywhere close to the most miserable killers to go against. Wait until you go against a good Pyramid Head, or a face camping Bubba, or a box camping Pig. Current Skull Merchant is middle of the pack when it comes to how much fun a killer is to play against. She has nothing in her kit can ruin a game for a survivor.
I also never said nearly all. I said most.
Mark those words and just wait HugTechLover, you little wanna be! On your road to devotion 100 or by playing a few more years in comp, you will run into this good Pyramid Head! He will make you regret your silly words about Skull Merchant and you will realise what true power is! Or god forbid running into a pig or even into a bubba. I heared rumores about hiding in the basement and do a thing called camping. I will never know, because i make myself a bush the whole game tho.
No but seriously, this is just a little warm up troll for 2024, right? Please say yes.
-
@MikaelaWantsYourBoon said:
And that's good thing. Because Wesker is also amazing killer. Now Chucky is also so popular like him.
I really hope we get more killers like them which is fun for both sides.
Mistakes like Dull Merchant should never happen again.
I disagree he is like my boy Wesker. Rather a mini wesker that can pop out of tall grass right next to your feet. Scamper is in my opinion to easy to use and has no real downside - in contrast to Wesker.
Chucky MAY become a fun killer like Wesker is, i can see the potential, but they have to do some changes to achieve that.
-
@Hunkulese said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616166#Comment_3616166
I don't think you understand how her drones work now. There are a bunch of ways to avoid detection including standing still. It's really hard to get a claw tap on a survivor who isn't a potato.
Is she fun to play against? Not really. Is she awful to play against? Not really. Is she strong and oppressive? Not at all.
So, you stand still in a chase. 200 IQ thanks for teaching us.
It makes me always wonder and crack up sometimes what people think about others here. Especially about people who are around since many years, have X thousends of hours and play in competetive matches. I mean, isnt that a little bit crinch? Like telling Christino Ronaldo how to kick a ball.
-
@HugTechLover said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616164#Comment_3616164
1) A decent amount? Skull merchant, knight, and artist. What “decent amount” are you talking about? Holding W is a universal tactic, yes, but it IS skull merchant’s most encouraged counterplay, and that is so unhealthy and boring.
2) Even if you make it to the window, or back to the pallet, her drone will still take effect. That is my point. You will still get injured even if you make the loop.
3) I’ve got a fantastic headset. But not everybody can afford quality headsets or even a headset at all. She’s much quieter than any other stealth killer.
4) Hag requires a significant more input than SM does. I heavily dislike artist as well because of the counterplay she encourages.
5) Regardless, his mechanical skill level is leagues higher than SM, and his hinder is much less significant than SM. That’s my point.
Last: Did I say at the same time? No. I asked, can her kit cause all of those status effects? Many of them can absolutely be caused simultaneously. It’s undeniable. Her kit does way too much for too little effort with too little counterplay. The vast majority of players share that same view.
I foresee changes in her future again. Especially with her sky high kill rate.
@Xendritch said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616166#Comment_3616166
- SM, Artist, Knight, Hag, Clown, Executioner I would say are all killers your best off holding W against. I'm just asking if you think they should all be reworked.
- I mean I get that but I have no idea what that has to do with the hinder effect? You also have to get scanned 3 times before that happens. I will admit though as far as that goes I do think the lock on should have decay timer even if it's slow. I think the fact that it never decays kinda punishes people that are good at avoiding the drones for the most part.
- Sure and there are people that think Spirit should be changed for similar reasons, I personally have no strong feelings here.
- Hag isn't that different if you have double trap setting speed, they just have to leave the loop or they get hit. Fair on Artist, I have a friend who's a very good Artist player so I also don't think Artist is quite as bad people make her out to be either but I understand that takes a lot of practice to learn how to play against Artist and at least you're being logically consistent.
- I mean I will never suggest SM takes high mechanical skill she's bottom 5 or even bottom 3 as far as that's concerned. As far as Wesker's hinder goes I think the annoying thing is you have to let Wesker know where you are if you want to get rid of it so there's no real outplaying it unless you can do it while he's hooking someone and that's frustrating when he already has a strong main power but that's probably a different conversation.
- You keep repeating this and idk where it's going cuz like again it largely doesn't matter. There was a discussion going around quite some time ago where people were trying to figure out who could apply the most amount of statuses at the same time and it was killers like Wraith, Dredge, Nemesis and these are not exactly high tier killers. Just mass hitting survivors with status effects doesn't matter if they're not in the right context or attached to a strong main power.
This entire discussion feels VERY familiar. We had the exact same with old Legion. And when you think about it, they also do almost the same, in a slighty different way, but the outcome is the same. The only difference is that you have to "Hold W" to avoid her power in situations where you should defnitly NOT hold W and you get hit while old Legion had to wait for power. The experience overall feels exactly the same. The more i think about it, the more obvious it gets. Even the Legion = DC deja vu's are coming back with Dull Merchant.
Oh and i almost forgot: Why are you even discussing about this killer? Does anybody seriously think she wont get nerfed like crazy? Defending her is a little bit ridicilous and counter argumenting is beating a dead horse.
-
@Sava18 said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/5XYND8YT66W7/image.png
*have not played against chucky enough*
I just realised we have almost the exact same list
here is mine
