xEa
xEa
About
- Username
- xEa
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- —
Comments
-
No, it should not.
Why? Because i want to replace my traps. Because i want my speedboost in specific situations while i dont want that trap to stay there forever. Because the addon is overall to powerful for basekiting.
If any addon has to be added basekit for some reason (and i dont think it is really needed, Trapper is not as weak as some claim) then it should be Trapper Gloves.
-
@Xendritch said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3616067#Comment_3616067
In comparison to what a lot of killers can do SM is far from broken it's just that nobody bothers to learn the match up.
Plague basically blanks every healing perks and keeps people one shot far better than SM does and Wesker does the free info plus hindered better. There really isn't anything she's the best at she's just a jack of all trades master of none killer.
So, what to do against Skull Merchant? You have an ace in the hole you want to share with us?
-
@GeneralV said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615852#Comment_3615852
Exactly, that is the main problem I'm seeing.
I recently played against one on Sanctum of Wrath, and I thought it was going to be an easy game because she played her first chases very poorly. Took a long time to catch up, even with her anti-loop kit.
But my team just gave up, they didn't even try! What I think was going to be an easy escape for us turned into an easy 4k.
I fear this killer might need another change. This situation isn't good.
I hate when people DC, but in her case i can at least understand why.
She feels very similar to the old Legion. No real interactive play, no reactive play, no real counter. You just get hit and downed in the dumbest way possible.
There is no doubt in my mind that Skull Merchant needs another rework. I have enough faith in the Developers that they have already realised that.
-
-
How the heck should i know if she is good at 3gen? Before we even get close to a 3gen, my entire team has already dc'd or is dead.
-
Personaly, the most powerful way Distortion works is actually in a SWF. Deliverance and Distortion paired together is obviously a extremly strong combo and the info the Distortion player can give to his other teammates through voice is very helpful.
Other then that, i agree. Its a good perk - finally! Used to be terrible, now it helps players who want to play the game in a more stealthy way.
-
It does feel aweful and every killer functioning that way (Nemsis, new Trickster, old Deathslinger ect) should not even exist. Which makes me wonder what BHVR was thinking. Aren't they aware that most survivors hate those type of loose/loose scenario killers? Why realese so many of them?
Alien is the pinnacle of that sort of killer tho. 115%, no windup basically, super quick excecution.
-
@NomiNomad said:
Huntress is most definitely still leagues better than Trickster.
Huntress = fun
Trickster = womit
Getting good with huntress: 1000 hours
Getting good with Trickster: 25 minutes
-
@UnusedAccount said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614884#Comment_3614884
Actually, it doesn't count DC/Suicides/Given Up/AFK if people put them in. Everything is manual.
You mean reports?
If that is the case, how would they deal with false reports?
-
Against the Trapper? Survivors win.
Against Nurse or Blight? 3 gens is the best surivivors can hope for.
-
I dont know how you define a good nurse (probably not the same as i do), but good Nurse are basically unstopable in chase. I had the "plesure" to play against very good Nurses in 1v1, and no, you dont beat them. RNG is your best hope. So no, i dont feel a lot when i beat a good nurse, because that does not happen.
Well, it counterproves that ballanced is bad for the playerbase. Because it was at its peak when the game was ballanced the most. At least on Pub.
I dont choose either. I personally think that fairness is more important. If i would be forced to pick one side for the health of the game i would pick survivor, since they are way more players. But again, either side beein oppressive is bad for the game. Can remember the old threads, when killer were using this term all the time. Now its a bad thing when it is the way around. Interesting philosophy. Power role fantasy 4tw i guess.
You are asuming again things with the intention of this thread. The answer to that is actually in the original post. Read the two questions.
-
@DrDucky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614424#Comment_3614424
I think we could both agree, that Carlson could probably hit say a 100 win streak, but there is simply not enough world comp chess tournaments for him to reach that. If carlson played against random people at bars for example (which is basically dbd pubs) then he could easily hit say 100 or 1000 wins. Thought I doubt he would have the sanity
I do not think it is fair to compare comp wins in a board game vs pub wins in a video game. Comp and pubs are so different from each other.
No, Carlson can not reach 100 wins in a row, nor will ever be there a human in history to accomplish that. Even the strongest engine is not able to 100:0. Unless we let Calsen play vs bad players, then of course he would. But not against other strong players.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3615013#Comment_3615013
No a game against Trapper can be just as intense as a game against Nurse, this is an over simplification of the point but to validate my so called invalid point, to your nurse example...
Strong nurse is one of the most difficult and exciting things to play against. She can't be looped in the same way as most other killers, requires guesswork and prediction for when to juke her blinks. Best of all... the most bland of plays, AKA loop around the same rock 4 times doesn't work well against her, neither does hold W to a great extent.
If players don't enjoy loop simulator and hold W, which according to these forums many don't, then Nurse is one of the best designed killers in the game because she counters both.
As I've said when people say "balance" they usually struggle to define what they mean. Often what they are asking for is simplification. "I want it to be easier to do the same thing against all killers"..." er that doesn't sound like balance to me. The rationale for this "its annoying if I can't". None of this invalidates my point about game tension. Your, or rather "their", annoyance is part of that tension.
Does it feel good to outplay a good nurse? Yeah... Why do you think that is? Think about it.
As for twisting your words on steam charts, lets quote them instead...
"Then why not go back to 2019, 2020 or 2021 where survivors had more the upper hand but the game was at least more ballanced then it is now? We also had crazy stuff for both sides, so there was always some strange inballanced of gameplay. I can back up that argument relativly easy by just pointing to Steam Charts. Compare playerbase then and now. Even tho we just had the most popular license DBD ever had (Alien), it does not look like the players are super happy with the game overall. Isnt it likely that ballance experience is more important for fun then unballanced horror fantasy? The numbers would match with that."
What does this paragraph actually say? Its a lil disjointed.
You point to steam charts as a back up to a point about the old game style being unbalanced and new killer's being un-liked? Compare the player base now and then? Sure the numbers a pretty stable with peaks and troughs around new content releases as you'd expect.
You tie this point together by assuming that players are only leaving due to lack of balance? A complete assumption that just happens to conveniently fit your own opinion. I love it when imagined facts just magically align with our opinions don't you?
If we are talking invalid points then its hard validate a claim of "twisting someone's words" when said person isn't making a clear point in the first place. Twist your words... you don't need any help from me sir you are doing just fine on your own.
Oh and don't twist my words... I never said "ballanced gameplay is overall bad for the game.", remember people aren't really asking for "balance" they are asking for simplicity, which is bad. My point with respect to balance is still as its always been... that a killer bias in outcome is anticipated and not entirely unacceptable given the game's horror survival theme.
Remember the topic is killer win streaks and why?
What do people mean with ballance? There are many forms of ballancing and one cruicial form you brought on the table yourself. Ballance is when there is tension without being oppessive. And that is why Nurse is never ballance, in no regard, because almost no tension exists. Sure, against a mediocre or bad Nurse, it can be. Against a good one, holy moly of course not. I would even say that a god nurse is not even opressive anymore because she suprassed that stage. She is just... pointless.
Does it feel good to outplay a good nurse? Yeah... Why do you think that is? Think about it.
You always seem to draw conclusions from yourself to others. No, I am not having fun playing against the nurse. ^
What does this paragraph actually say? Its a lil disjointed.
"... but mark my words the "imbalance" is what makes DBD playable." "If we are leaning into the theme of the game and the excitement of playing survivor then that imbalance has to favour the killer somewhat, otherwise we have Scooby Doo not DBD."
So, in 2019 we had then this Scooby Doo scenario, at least more Scooby as we have now, right? Somehow, nobody had a problem with that. And those numbers prove my point. And no, the game is not "stable", the game lost a good 3rd of the playerbase. I am not saying that this is only the reason (please quote me on that, since you are accusing me) why there were so many more players. BUT and thats the thing, you argue that if the game would be like that, it would be not playable. Time already has disproven the argument. It was very very much playable and had more people attracted to it. Unless we find out those numbers are all fake, there is nothing to discuss really.
"Remember people arent really asking for balance they are asking for simplicity, which is bad"
Where did anyone asked for simplicity? You got some source or is this your interpretation?
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614788#Comment_3614788
Trying to refute my point by associating it with "biased killer mains" doesn't address the point it just tries to undermine it associating it with potentially biased players. That's called a strawman and its a weak position to have. (I know the phrase strawman gets used a lot as a I win buzzword but here we have a great example of one so I feel its warranted). It only holds true if I am a killer main and I'm not as I said don't assume my playstyle and I won't assume anything about you, that includes maintaining an argument that needs to assume it to have basis, which is what you've done.
Now for the topic at hand. I never said fear you don't have to be scared of the game in fact most people aren't. We aren't talking about fear we are talking about tension. What makes a chase so intense in a game of DBD? The consequences, and the consequences can be high if you fail to do well and that creates Tension also known as excitement. When the horror is gone the excitement is what remains.
What you are proposing is to dumb down the excitement in the name of mechanical balance. My counterpoint is that's a crap idea because mechanically DBD is pretty bland and I really don't want DBD to become a bland mechanical experience that lacks tension. There are enough games out there like that.
There is a lot of stuff from old DBD that I would like to see back again not all change is good change. Its generally improved but its definitely lost some of its more threatening and exciting mechanics. Old Moris for instance. I understand why they were changed but I miss the atmosphere they used to create and the threat they used to represent, I hope they never dumb them down further and actually bring in that proposed special mori ending that would be really crap.
Steam charts are actually pretty stable across the long term charts and making assumptions about why players quit is just as bad as making assumptions about why players play or have the opinions they do. Circle back to the first point about assuming things.
I'm not refuting that killer wins more than survivor you would expect that given the need for teamwork on the survivor side, the point I've always made is that's not necessarily a bad thing when you consider the theme of the game. (Before any schmuck quips back with "people won't want to play a game where they always lose," I'm not saying they should but a killer bias is to be expected and its what we see in outcome and its completely appropriate if people want a thrilling game as survivor).
Tension: Call it horror, call it tension - or maybe a mix between both. A god nurse is according to your argument supposed to be high tension then? Much higher then Trapper for example? Somehow its the opposite. Your argument, powerful killer create tension is not valid at all. But they cause a lot of frustration, thats for sure. If frustration is important for the game might actually be a decent topic tho.
Steam chart: Please dont twist my words for the sake of your argument. You said i may mark your words, that ballanced gameplay is overall bad for the game. I disagree because we had a time where it was more ballanced and at that time the playerbase was at an all time high. So clearly no, people would not run away or get bored by the game if it would be more ballanced, the opposite is the case.
-
@GeneralV said:
That one proposal where the map would get darker with a lot of fog actually sounds extremely fun.
This and the one with random perks, which could just simply get included in the original gamemode.
The rest is for my taste to offside the actual game and will only cause a lot of conflict within the playerbase, including queue time. On top of that, ballancing those gamemodes would become extremly time consuming, and we run this high risk for something we might actually wont like in the long run anyway.
-
@mecca said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614834#Comment_3614834
Nightlight is a bad statistic to follow because it is biased. Only people upload matches they want included in the stats.
The only real stats we have is devs and it was like 60% but they admitted they don't count dcs or suicides. Many survivors suicide when the match is already lost or against busted killers with broken add-ons or when they abusing a mechanic. This means the stats are incredibly higher than that.
If you watch twitch, killer mains are always winning and survivors are usually losing. Most people experiences say survivors lose a lot and killers usually win.
We should stop thinking killers are only winning 50-60%. It's waaaay higher than that.
Well, that is certainly true and you already mentioned it: We dont know how high actual killrates are if we would include DC's. If it would be 60% or much more is speculation.
I doubt they would not count suicides tho. How would they be able to filter that?
Personally i dont have to watch killer streams because i play killer on my own, and i can confirm that loosing is very rare, especially compared to survivor. So yes, there is no room for dabate that killer win more then survivor, nobody with a sane mind would question that - especially with all the data we have.
-
@JoeyDonuts said:
And, oddly enough, Spirit again.
I dont think that is what the op is refering to. He means spawning directly next to the killer, within weapon range.
What the killer has in your example is called a "god spawn". Typically surviovors spawn on the opposite side, but sometimes also 1 or 2 survivors close to the killer. This happens mainly on killer with a smaller Terror radius. Spirit is one of them.
-
@Firellius said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614818#Comment_3614818
Killer winrates range from 40-50% I think, mostly. Barring a few exceptions like chess merchant.
But just flatly going by 'winrate' is a bit of a misleading stat, since DBD also has what can be classified as 'draws' eating into the pie. Most important to know is whether killers are winning more or losing more, and across the board, they're almost all winning more than they're losing. I checked Nightlight the other day, and I found only three killers that lose more than they win: Nemesis (4.3 percentage points more losses than wins), Hillbilly (2.7 percentage points) and Singularity (1.1 percentage points).
The rest all won more than they lost.
https://nightlight.gg/killers/viewer
This is a good indicator. Real killrate are usually about 5% higher then on Nightlight. So the average would be slightly above 60%. Winrate is, as you already mentioned at about 40-50%. The funniest thing someone can come across are people who claim 2K is actually a loss, so they argue winrate is "only" 40-50%. Which would completly ignore the 0K or draw outcome.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614810#Comment_3614810
I only every heard of a tournament years back where they did that, and the results were not much different than with restrictions, because both sides had super busted stuff, but that was with omega-blink-nurse and what not.
What you might be reffering to is a showcase Otz and Hens did a while back, but I think that was a comp Nurse against non comp but really good players?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wemWwE-0TLI
Are you referring to this? Because I think the surivors were streamer with many many hours, but no comp player. If it is not that I would appreciate a source.
5-12 killers is more than a handfull ^^ But still only like 1/3 of the killer roster...
What statistic are you reffering to here? Because BHVR didn't really give us one for complete beginners or something like that?
It is hard to have an argument when I cannot check the data you are reffering to ^^
There was a series of matches they had with that format. Unfortunatly, all i found was a "best of"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8Z8lP_gBJEThere are also PoVs from killer and survivor side.
My math is done by myself. Simply counting kills and deviding by player during a period of time. Time peroid was ~1,5 seasons.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614701#Comment_3614701
The question is in what skill range is the game killer or survivor sided? I think if for example in comp there were no perk or item regulations the game would most likely be rather survivor sided (maybe unless going against Blight with his most busted addons), besides like 5-10 killers in comp the rest is not really able to perform somewhat well against the survivor side and is basically expected to get like 3-6 hooks or something like that... I think you could call it rather survivor sided in this setting because 2/3 of the killers are not viable in this setting.
I think the lower you go the stronger killer becomes in comparison, because it becomes easier to tunnel and camp as the survivor don't necessarily know what to do against it... And if they do know and are beyond a certain point in skill, give you are of equal skill, less and less killers become viable from that point onwards... But in matchmaking, since it is what it is all killers are somewhat viable.
They actually tried out (hens if i am not mistaken) no restriction on several killers. Killer performed very well with positive results. On some killer even crushing.
It is not really true that besides a handful of killer they all perform bad. In fact watch DBD league, you might be in for a suprise. I did some simple math, and on average, killers had ~2.4 kills. But it is debateable of course, because of restrictions for both sides.
From a statistic standpoint, high MMR killers have same or higher killrate then on mid or low. They win on every skilllevel. On average of course.
-
It happend to me once in like 2018. So for me not likely.
The interesting part with this bug (?!) is that it seems to only work on killer with a smaller terror Radius. Huntress, Myers, old Deathslinger for exmaple.
-
@zarr said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613986#Comment_3613986
I'm not sure asking the community what an acceptable wait time for a match is is the way to go, but regardless, the more extreme wait times expected under a stricter matchmaking would mostly only apply at the extreme ranges, and affect relatively few players as a result. And like I said, they could even stricten the matchmaking only at the upper brackets, with it getting more and more strict the higher the MMR is. Certainly people that have won hundreds of matches in a row are few and far between, and deserve to have a matchmaker that first searches for strict matches for 10 or so minutes before it decides to feed them their next victims that will end up just another number on their streak counter.
Nurse and Blight absolutely are OP, they win consistently even in the tournament setting where you have teams of survivors that practice together constantly, have call-out systems and coordinated strategies and so on. Survivors have restrictions, but as do killers, comparable in severity. Blight has a whole arsenal of busted add-ons that he doesn't have access to, and yet for good tournament Blights the expectation is still a 4k, the deciding factor of who wins usually being how many gens are left standing at that point. And the base balance that we measure these killers by (and that is also the infinitely more common scenario in the game's actual mode) is one where survivors don't even have communication, let alone being a coordinated team. It's actually insane that these killers can beat the best players unified within the best teams, with years of competitive experience and honed coordination and communication. No wonder they then go beat up hundreds and thousands of random groups in a row without it often even being a challenge.
It is true that they can go on long streaks or have ridiculously high winrates with just about any killer. And although I expect they would struggle to get 1600+ with any killer but Blight or 500+ perk/add-onless with any but Nurse - because these killers are still far and away above the rest, apart from maybe Spirit -, that is precisely why the other major issue is matchmaking. Any sufficiently competent killer player in this game (so not only some of the best that compete in tournaments like Knightlight or V1, but really any experienced killer player that is at least decently skilled) can get winrates that even some of the best players in a game like Starcraft can only dream of (on the game's own matchmaking), and those players are worlds better at SC than even the best DbD players are at DbD.
Like I said, the crossplay off scene when it was active had enough players for fast queues and matches filled with skill and experience. Maybe you overestimate how many players it takes at this level to match them among one another. And if they don't get matchmaked away to the next random 500-hour Meg in the first minute of their queue, they will also find each other more quickly. Plus, the streamers that actually go for ridiculous streaks like that aren't all too common, and they aren't all too popular or integral to the game's popularity either, at all. The game could absolutely survive (on twitch and otherwise) if someone that sets out to win hundreds of times in a row had to wait a relatively long time in matchmaking after a certain number of wins. And it's not like they couldn't alternate matchmaking specifics either, such as loosening things for players if they have had strict matches for the last 5 queues, or whatever. There's absolutely room and possibility to stricten matchmaking to a point where streaks like this aren't as feasible, without affecting things too much outside of the relatively small pools of high MMR players (talking about players well above the "soft" cap of course - that cap is precisely one of the major issues with the matchmaking).
Hello zarr
I never felt the need to write a comment under all your posts, because there is nothing to debate about. I think you are with most of what you say completly spot on. Just wanted to mention that. Thank you.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614466#Comment_3614466
Don't assume my game role just because I may not agree with your point and I promise not to make any assumptions about how you might play, all that does is cloud judgment and undermine objectivity.
For clarity I happen to enjoy survivor most when the killer is a tangible threat I need to flee from rather than a weakling that I can run circles around. Gen and loop simulator gets very dull very quick. What makes survivor engaging to play? the threat of elimination. Without it its just gen and loop simulator, chases and escaping become meaningless.
The horror is only gone forever for players that don't appreciate the tangible threat that the killer represents. The mechanics of DBD are incredibly dull outside of fleeing for your life from the monster.
The threat of it is a necessity for DBD to be playable in the first place. Its that threat that the whole game premise is built on and what the game is promoted as. People often say "they need to balance the game" but what do they mean by that, its becoming another buzz term that no one can really define but in the most general of ways.
We can both have different takes on what we want from the game that's fine, its to be expected... but mark my words the "imbalance" is what makes DBD playable. Its not about whether that imbalance should exist or not, but rather how much of that imbalance is too much?
If we are leaning into the theme of the game and the excitement of playing survivor then that imbalance has to favour the killer somewhat, otherwise we have Scooby Doo not DBD.
Now I love Scooby Doo, its a cornerstone of my childhood, but I don't play DBD for a Scooby Doo experience, I play Scooby Doo betrayal at mystery mansion for that. I play DBD for the survival horror experience and the more brutal that is the more engaging and thrilling it is.
I'll do what I can to see attempts to water that horror experience down in the name of ill-defined balance are minimal and hopefully change a few game perspectives along the way.
I do not assume your prefered role, but the statement stays. It is what killer mains use to justify numbers these days, because its the only thing left. The game shifted towards killer, and it is hard to debate for killer mains outside the killer fantasy argument.
I am always for ballanced experience, said by someone who is, believe it or not, playing more killer then survivor. Especially now, i would even call myself more a killer main then a 50/50 as i used to be. So that we have this out of the way as you did aswell, lets get back on track for a moment.
The horror is gone for most people, thats the nature of how we work. Watching a horror movie as a child is a completly different experience then rewathing it the 5th time or so as an adult. If you call them "those" people, this is your point of few. In my years of playing, survivors only complained about oppressive killer. And they quit because of that, not because it was to boring or to less horror. Most survivors, from my experience, dont give a poop about anything else then gameplay. And on the other side, i also dont know any killer beside like a handful of people that even care about being scary, or getting the next big license. In fact for example Cucky became the main of a friend recently, and horror is the last thing that comes to mind why the person plays that character.
EDIT: I want to add another thing to your horror argument. The Dredge: Dredge is without a doubt the most horror we ever hadin this game. The nightphase is scary (?) as hell, jumping out of lockers the ultimate jumpscare next to Mirror Myers, the appearence of this killer could be right out of a nightmare. Overall, the ultimate horror formular. And still, where does The Dredge stand? Not played much, not liked by survivors. Reason? Gamelay.
Now to the most important part of your post: The imbalance makes DBD playable.
Then why not go back to 2019, 2020 or 2021 where survivors had more the upper hand but the game was at least more ballanced then it is now? We also had crazy stuff for both sides, so there was always some strange inballanced of gameplay. I can back up that argument relativly easy by just pointing to Steam Charts. Compare playerbase then and now. Even tho we just had the most popular license DBD ever had (Alien), it does not look like the players are super happy with the game overall. Isnt it likely that ballance experience is more important for fun then unballanced horror fantasy? The numbers would match with that.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614446#Comment_3614446
Ok great so when you pit the upper echelons of DBD against each other there is a killer bias in outcome. Which is good because for survivor play to be even the remotely bit interesting the team has to face off against a tangible antagonist.
Weak antagonists make bad horror. When looking at the very tip of the (assumed) bell curve for "player skill" we get an expected bias that's appropriate for the theme.
But we are still only looking at the very tip of the bell curve which is a poor representation for basic game balance.
For the second time - "You can't use the extremes as a comparable example to the baseline." Why would you go to that as your counter point?"
In fact I'm sure if you took a large enough sample of games you probably wouldn't get a bell curve you'd get humps and dips at the points where people place up and down in MMR skewing their outcome.
If the point being made is look at the top tier player win streaks on killer - I say yeah I'd expect top tear players to be able to pull off win streaks compared to the average gamer and a lot of those games are against teams of average gamers.
The you say well compare it to the win streaks for the top tiered survivor teams and yeah they do well, really well. But there is enough of a thematically appropriate killer bias that even a top tier team can struggle with team dynamics and create an interesting and exciting survivor experience.
What's the issue here? "It's not fair" ? well boo hoo its not meant to be fair and that's a good thing, its why there are 4 survivors and 1 killer that's not fair either but the killer is threatening enough to create an engaging game for the survivors as it should be.
That is the regular argument from killers i hear nowadays. Its okay killer is dominiating because they are the "power role". I dont think that is a good thing at all, when i see people leave the game because of that killer fantasy fullfillment.
Its also not about horror. During the first 20-50 hours of ingame time, survivor experience the antagonist horror. After that, this is gone forever and no OP killer, no matter how OP it is will change that. What is in front of the road should be a game that has great gameplay and good ballancing. And not some (your quote) "its not ment to be fair" nonsense that 4 out of 5 players should have to burden with.
-
@pseudechis said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3614414#Comment_3614414
They won't, how do you know? If your whole premise is based on that being fact then it better be fact.
Even so, I already stated that "You can't use the extremes as a comparable example to the baseline." Why would you go to that as your counter point?
I know because of records. The world record in "modern DBD time" is at slightly above 200, done by Oracle if i am not mistaken. And their restriction were not nealy as harsh as the killer restrictions (for example it as okay if one survivor died per round in their streak).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFI9i0qS4OA -
@DrDucky said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613179#Comment_3613179
You are correct about a lot of these streaks boiling down to the average survivor players are just not so good but playing a blight streak for example and getting this high undeniably requires a lot of skill to pull off, even if you bring strong stuff. I have seen these blights play and they are undoubtedly extremely good. You do not get 1600 wins in a row without at least being good at the killer.
Of course those people are good. But good players will face other good players. Maybe not every match, but countless times in 1600 games.
Magnus Carlsen, the best chess player right now and often called one if not the best of all time has a personal record of 6 won competetive games in a row. Six.
Or starcraft, even the very best are still loosing games against players in the top 5% range. It is totally normal to loose even as the best player. Unless the game is wildly unballanced.
-
@pseudechis said:
This has more to do with player than the game itself and if balancing around people whom basically make a living playing games then that's not a great idea.
You can't use the extremes as a comparable example to the baseline.
The average gamer isn't doing 30 win streak videos. (also its an online world I can claim a 30 win streak too I just don't record the losses). (Grain of salt all round for a lot of this).
For the record yes it will be easier to get a win streak as killer than as survivor, not because its unbalanced but rather success as survivor relies on the most variable factor known to online gaming... OTHER PEOPLE. (add dramatic reverb for effect!).
These other people all have varying levels of the following important traits that can factor directly into team and personal survival:
- motivation to play
- expectations from the game
- skill levels - I know MMR is supposed to account for this but does it really?
- levels of altruism and selfishness
- emotional state and resilience - influencing likelihood to keep playing or rage quit, gaming attitude and spitefulness
- levels of intoxication
- A myriad of other outside game things that BHVR has no real fix for because they are innate aspects of human behaviour and interaction rather than game mechanics
Killer relies on themselves and can take advantage of any of these particular human traits that might undermine a survivor team. So its not a revelation to say win streaks are easier on killer. Because even if perfectly balanced that would still be true.
There is one big flaw with your argument. Top teams that all have the same goal and very high skill also go for survivor win streaks. But they wont reach those insane numbers like killer mains, by a long shot.
-
@Raptorrotas said:
Damn i remember when Marth did his depid squad vids and won big times, many people dismissed that.
A killer does a streak and suddenly it's the irrefuteable evidence of killer sidedness in the game.
Anyone else ever notice the survivor bias of this community?
That was at 2018-19.
Megablink Nurse was at 10.000 wins in a row, is this also relevant?
-
@Tsulan said:
Fun fact: in a previous video, Otz explained that he won´t do any more win streaks. In fact, most streamers stopped doing win streaks.
Now take a guess why.
I dont need to guess, he explained why he is not doing it anymore. Cheaters. Wasting time on hundreds of wins in a row and then get robed by a cheater can be very daunting.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613437#Comment_3613437
So, "its fine when survivors do it" sounds pretty biased to me.
I did not say that.
Personally, i dont care if someone goes for a winstreak or not. The irritating part is that the ballance issue in public DBD is so wild that killer can go for thousend wins in a row while survivor struggle to get to two hundred. Isnt that a little bit to much? Imagine you have a 80% winchance when playing white in chess. That would not be fun at all. I know, not a 1 to 1 translateable example, but you get the idea.
On top of this, the conditions they had on those streaks makes it even more astonishing. 1600 wins on Blight ez pz 4K, while Oracle could reach the 200 with the condition that 1 person was allowed to die. 3 escpaes was enough.
I would be suprised if a strong and tunneling mid/low tier killer like Myers could not reach 1000+ wins in a row with condition like the survivors (3k is good enough)
-
@GravelordNito99 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613144#Comment_3613144
Pointing to Nurse or Blight as examples to try and prove that killer in general is not too difficult with new MMR is like pointing to a lottery winner as evidence that everyone has a good chance of winning the lottery.
You misunderstand the difference between generalisations and exceptions. You just forefeit your right to any kind of intelligent discussion. Try again.
Did you even watch the video? As if Nurse and Blight are the only killers that cant do that. 😂
Whatever, you have proven in every possible way to all here your obvious lack of understanding and common sense. On top of that, your ridiculous emotional reaction to basically everybody not agreeing with you might be entertaining, but definitly not releavant.
Lets agree we disagree. Good luck with your further games.
-
@Reinami said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/400736/killer-winstreaks
Here's a question for you.
Is it a problem with someone does it as a survivor team as well? You know the same kinds of teams that otz plays with when he plays with hens and ayrun and they do these "hardcore survivor" challenges? And they go on big win streaks?
I am not sure what you mean with "problem", but if you mean the difficulty, yes it is. Like said times before survivor go on streaks but those streaks are compared to the killer streaks laughable.
-
@Archol123 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/400736/killer-winstreaks
It mostly shows how bad the matchmaking is and that it is basically impossible to get "top mmr" matches for players like Knightlight, he didn't lose a single game in over 500 matches and the survivors are still nowhere near his level... Guess the reason why it works is highly skilled killer players where the matchmaking cannot find somewhat equally skilled opponents is the reason for this.
Also the 200 for Swf is not true, there has been a 500 escape streak on survivor some years ago, Otz also made a video about that, it was something about madlads in DBD...
The 500 streak was years ago, at a time where the game was so much different.
-
@Thusly_Boned said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613201#Comment_3613201
The caveat should be that four good survs will usually beat a good killer. But three good survs and a weak link? That's a different story. And it usually is. You could run into the anointed golden god of all survs, but if their teammates are mid, most of that skill and experience loses its value.
And the it's also assumed that in the case of the extreme streaks, the killer player utilizes high efficiency and utterly ruthless tactics (i.e. hard tunneling).
The fact that these streaks haven't been ended by a SWF death squad also serves as evidence that there really aren't many of these out there, despite what many killers like to believe.
Sure, no doubt about that a bad survivor can ruin a good team. But here is the kicker: In such a streak, i say there is a 0% chance of not running into multible groups without any form of weak player. And like i said before, many hear claim that every 2nd lobby is full of SWF sweats.
To go even further, many strong SWF and even "pro" teams are also trying winstreaks, by mission or simply by default. How come they are not even close to such a high numbers? They are miles behind the counterpart. This becomes especially strange since according to woundcowboy they should even have the advantage. Where is the advantage?
-
@woundcowboy said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613192#Comment_3613192
Nope, most killers are also bad. The reason kill rates are near 60 is that when a bad killer faces bad survivors, the killer usually wins. When a good killer goes against good survivors, the game is massively survivor sided. It also goes without saying that the people achieving these streaks are the top 1% of the playerbase.
Acording to your argument, good surivors beat good killers. Are you trying to say that in hundreds/thousend games, they never came across good survivors? That is extremly unlikely, especially when you believe people here claiming that every second game is against an unbeatable force.
-
@woundcowboy said:
These streaks only prove that most survivors are bad at the game.
Aha. So killer players are more skilled, gotcha.
-
@GeneralV said:
As survivor, if I escape then I've won.
As killer:
0k or 1k - defeat
2k - tie
3k or 4k - victory
^This + if i get many hook stages like 8 or 9 but only 1 kill, i would not personally count it as a loss either. If i go for winstreak, hooks do not matter tho.
-
@HugTechLover said:
The “win streaks” don’t carry much weight to me, after seeing the winstreak style of gameplay.
Congratulations, you hard tunneled and slugged at 5 gens using all slowdown in pub matches. More than half the games have people just immediately give up and go next.
Not impressed. Without that style of gameplay, regardless of the killer, the streaks would be nowhere near as high.
I am not saying this is always super impressive (some are, some are not so much) but the question stands: Should this be possible that a game is so extremly unballanced that you can win hundreds if not thousend times in a row? While the other side, at least right now, can not.
-
@Rulebreaker said:
Our only question is this: If you have the drive to do it and put in the effort and are good enough to actually pull it off, why shouldn't it be a thing to have a win streak?
Apparently, this is not possible on survivor, no matter how hard they grind and no matter how much they try. Not even close.
-
To funny, Otz has just released a video about those "dishonest numbers".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5PKg4HPjnEThe game is so unfair, Survivors are so powerful.
lol
-
@Tsulan said:
But they are both on the same page. 2 survivors hiding and not doing anything is a situation where the killer can´t progress the game.
Do you know how many lockers exist on a map? The survivors could constantly switch lockers and even if the killer checks every single locker, the survivors could just hide in one he already checked. Thats keeping the game hostage and is bannable.
3 genning isn´t holding the game hostage. As both the survivors and the killer can progress the match one way or another.
First of all, i am against holding the game hostage or playing in a way that increases the length of a match unnecessary.
But are your examples, objectivly speaking of course called holding hostage if one of those scenarios is holding hostage and the other is not?
You can argue that defending gens is a valid strategy but it is not going for the objective - which would be killing the survivors.
On the other hand, hiding in a locker is the exact same for the other side. They are not going for the objective either. What is the difference?
I always thought, holding the game hostage is for example bodyblocking a survivor in a corner and just waiting. Or the infamous hole bug, where killer droped on a survivor and could not move anymore.
-
@GravelordNito99 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3613005#Comment_3613005
Your numbers are extremely dishonest. You seem to have forgotten that survivors are a team of 4. Winning on survivor means having 3+ members of your team escape, because you are a TEAM. If you run the Killer for 5 gens and get facecamped, you didn't lose. You played like a beast and got your 3 mates out. You won.
Your own personal escape is irrelevant. Therefore, you're comparing apples to oranges when comparing escape streaks with killer winstreaks. This one crux makes everything you just said completely redundant. Try again.
https://nightlight.gg/killers/viewer?sort=pick&shown=pick%7Ckill%7Cdist&start_days=28
You can add 5% to actually have the realistic number we are right now. It got already confirmed by the devs and people who can calcublate 2+2 that the winrate according to killrate matches. I am sure you can do the math aswell.
I mean it does not really matter if we go for personal escape streaks or not. The record of 3/4 man out is 200, done by one of the best teams in the world, while on the other hand, random non-comp players delete survivors on Ghostface or Pig 200+ times. You know, killer you probably have yourself on your personal tier list under the letter F.
-
@GravelordNito99 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3612569#Comment_3612569
No. You missed the point. This game is asymmetrical. Unbalanced. It's a party game. If you win often on Killer, that's how it should be, because losing feels 4x worse. Please for the love of everything actually read my post before responding.
It seems you're incapable of basic reading skills, which makes discussion with you very difficult. I said I won 80-80% of my games "until recently", however NOW, I lose 70% of the time due to the new MMR making it much more likely to match vs comp survivors every single game if you're unlucky. I'm at MMR cap, so I get P100 swfs in most of my games, and it simply isn't fun in what's supposed to be a casual party asym game.
They're ridiculously skilled at the game, and I'm thrown in with them after I come home from a 12 hour work shift and just want to play some lucky dip games. But dbd is no longer a lucky dip due to MMR. It's exciting not knowing when you'll be put against a god squad or some absolute cutie pie newbie survivors. Having the god squads every once in a while makes it less frustrating and more impressive and inspiring. But having the god squad every single game? Soul-destroying. It really isn't complicated.
I implore you to go back and read my post more carefully this time.
A killer should not automatically win the majority of his games because he is the killer. This is a game played by 5 people each round, so not only one person is entiteled to have fun. The better player / the better side should win.
As many have mentioned, when you loose now 70% of your games and draw 20%, then you a) might not be good enough or b) you have a loosing streak.
Lets hope MMR brings you to the level you belong, which i doubt because the system is not the greatest tbh.
After all criticizing MMR would be the only valid point you could make.
-
@GravelordNito99 said:
Title. I have almost 2k hours in this game and my experience over the past couple of weeks has driven me very close to quitting.
I'm a killer main, and until recently won around 80-90% of my games, despite the fact the game (and devs) naturally favors survivors.
However as of recent, I'm running into EXTREMELY sweaty matches every single game. The survivors I'm going up against are P100 squads almost every single time I load into a lobby, and they play like literal gods every match. I'm talking the best of the best survivors who are ridiculously good at the game, all have exactly the perks they need when they need them, guess correctly on every single mindgame, make the correct macro decisions depending upon what my killer can do, etc.
It's just very frustrating to go from winning a nice amount of games and sometimes going up against a sweaty squad to going against a sweaty squad every single game. Either I get a 2-3k after a long slog of a match or I can't even hook anyone. That is the variety I get now as a killer.
The reasons this is not fair are obvious. For one, the game is extremely survivor sided. Nobody would dare argue against something as obvious as that. However, more importantly, and perhaps less obviously, it feels MUCH worse to lose as killer than it does as survivor. As survivor you only share 1/4 of the blame for losing, and so can easily deflect and mentally relax. Just go next. On top of this, survivor gameplay is much more relaxed and less skill-oriented. 3/4 of the game will usually be spent holding m1 or w. Meanwhile killers have to mindgame and macro to perfection from the start of the game to the end of the game at high MMR. If you lose, you have to watch 4 people gang up on you, so the pressure is higher. You were more involved in the gameplay from the start, and only have yourself to blame for losing, so it feels much worse. However, this isn't logical. The game is to blame for a large amount of losses in high MMR, since it's mathematically impossible for killers to win vs perfect survivors. It's, as they say, asymmetrical.
MMR is punishing Killers much harder than it is survivors. If you're unlucky like me, you're going to find sweat lords every match because the cap has been raised, meaning you won't be matched vs casuals any more.
I can no longer run my fun anti-heal loadouts because the survivors just bash gens and don't heal, running early with w as soon as they hear my TR. I can't run my fun chase builds because gens are so fast that no gen defense means a loss.
This is the worst experience I've had in DBD for years, and it's sadenning to see that BHVR plans only to make killers have an even harder time in future when we're already the underdogs.
Please, for the love of everything, save this game for me. Just let it be a party game and put me vs every kind of player. I want to mess around with newbies sometimes; I want to have some tough battles sometimes; I want to get stomped by perfect survivors sometimes. I don't want to get stomped 70% of the time, and struggle to barely draw the match the other 30%.
Whenever I play survivor I run the killer ungodly amounts of time with ease and escape pretty much whenever I want to if I try. Survivor is pathetically easy anyway, and you somehow made it even easier. Killer is the harder role, so if anything they should have a natural advantage.
Fix your game before you lose all your killer mains and survivors have nobody left to tbag.
The reasons this is not fair are obvious. For one, the game is extremely survivor sided. Nobody would dare argue against something as obvious as that.
I dare, and instead of you, i back it up with facts.
- Survivors loose in 60% of their games, while killer win 60% of their games. Its a fact and undenyable tho to sheer numbers and simple math.
- Survivor win streaks are super low compared to killer. We are talking here about 38 escapes in a row on survivor vs 1000+ wins on certaint killers. Dont even try to deny it, i swear i won't shy away posting the pig winstreak video again 😘
- Even in comp, killer come out on top with a higher average on killrates. I know i know, this is a very hot topic and this is debateable since both sides have restrictions, but nevertheless it is true.
-
@bjorksnas said:
I just don't like the idea of a perk that allows trading hook stages no matter what downside
Why is that? Isn't any form of anti-tunneling good for the game as long as the perk is not overpowered?
@UndeddJester said:
Oh, I didn't catch that there was a limit on people had received the transfer as well, am I missing it somewhere in your description? Read 3 times and I can't catch it... there is the safeguard that the person who used it can't get the hook state back though, as you have the healing condition, but the same unhooked player could be transferred a state by 3 players? Ofc 3 players with all those status' would be nuts, but it COULD be done... is that intended? ^^
However if you add the condition of the player receiving a ToS as well cannot be granted another state in combination with the conditions is pretty huge as downside...
I hope i understand you right, but no i have not set a limit to that. So in theory a single survivor could have 3 extra hook stages. How ballanced that is, is questionable tho.
If it would be unfair it should be a condition so only +1 stage is allowed on a single survivor. But on that matter, i would probably remove the hindred status effect then.
I Edited that into the Original Post.
-
@UndeddJester said:
Did you mean 5/4/3 seconds? The status' are a hefty downside, kudos to that... it's actually a pretty nastypenalty to make it so someone only uses it for anti-tunnel... however you do basically condemn yourself to being the one to get tunneled and die instead. This feels like a variation of the perk that would teeter on useless or busted easily. 🤔
I rather liked the suggestion from @Seraphor in the below thread
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3590064#Comment_3590064
I like the notion of being a purely anti-tunnel perk, but you need VERY strong conditions for this perk, otherwise it becomes very abusable. My list would be: -
- Survivor has neither used or received a Transmigration of Souls.
- Can only be used on a struggling survivor.
- Can only be used when the user has 0 hook stages.
- Disables once gates are powered.
Though I might steal from your suggestion and add: -
- The user is permanently exhausted.
This is a sufficient number of limitations to make it a perk that is only usable vs. hard tunneling killer, and between Camradarie and Reassurance, could punish a tunneler/camper quite hard. The main difference between the 2 is, I could see myself using the second version, but the OP version sounds... a little too altruisitic to my tastes...
I am altruisitic, but broken, exhausted and hindered the rest of the trial? VS. a proven tunneler? Yikes...
Thanks for the correction, it is 5/4/3. My mistake.
The idea of Seraphor is way to powerful and would make SWF almost unbeatable. They could just simply force the killer to a 10-12 hook game if they play it smart. They just trade hook stages so nobody is on deathhook until the very end.
Your first condition matches with mine. Survivor has neither used or received a Transmigration of Souls is a condition, since it only works when being health and no exhausted. Once using ToS, the survivor is broken and exhausted so there is no way to do it twice.
I like the idea that the unhooker has to be on 0 hook stages.
The problem i see is that this perk is very powerful, and overall your conditions (exhausted) is simply not enough for an effect like this. Maybe i have overdone it with hindred aswell, but broken is the absolute minimum so the perk is not completly busted.
-
Nostromo of course, its such a flawed map.
- Remove half of the useless garbage walls and random objects all over the place. I know, its a crash site but gameplay is more important then that.
- Add a window to the useless shuttle.
- Spread out gens a little bit more. The entire back end is always nearly dead, while all the other gens are stacked on each other.
- Last but not least, PLEASE connect the map. Dead ends on both side of the ship is aweful map design.
-
LOL why the need of creating multible accounts? Thats clearly you 😂
@twentyonesixtyeight said:
I played nearly 20 hours in dead by daylight. How can someone have fun in this game? You just sit on a generator and press 1 button to hit some boring skillcheck. You get tunneled. You get gen rushed. For the first time in my life, I fell asleep on my chair. I never felt so bored in my life. It's like a babysitting simulator, with loading screens and errors. The game is terribly balanced, there are bugs and the graphics are bad. I had killers who used hex pentimento and NOED and I never could see the hex totems auras. How this game is still going on for more than 7 years is unbelievable to me. Don't people have self respect and taste in video games? I honestly feel bad for y'all.
I'm glad I had this for free on Epic Games because I would have felt extremely bad for myself if I'd spent my money on this video game. I don't recommend this game to my friends, colleagues or my family for that matter.
I'm not trying to convince anyone to stop, I just never felt like this. It's depressing.
I am honestly curious what's going on with you. You waste your time for a game you dont like, come to the forum to tell us you get bored by it, then repeate it and wast even more time creating a second account - and nobody cares both times. Whats the benefit?
When you come back again with your next account, be a little bit more creative. Challange yourself by being at least a little bit funny.
-
@CountOfTheFog said:
I want to preface this by saying Kindred is mandatory for me so all builds listed include it.
Generator Repair Build:
- Deja Vu
- Resilience
- Prove Thyself
Altruism Build:
- We'll Make It
- Botany
- Desperate Measures
Self-Care Build
- Self-Care
- Botany
- Desperate Measures
Your Generator Repair Build:
I would go with Deja Vu, Prove Thyself and Sprint Burst. It helps to have an exhaustion perk, and since you focus with this build on breaking the 3 gen as quickly as possible, SB will help you out greatly when the killer approaches.
Your Alturism Build:
Alturism is not only healing but also unhooking and in some case protecting. I would change your build.
We'll Make It (healing after unhooking),
Deliverance (unhook yourself), For the people + Buckle Up (pick up downed people and protect them)Your Self Care Build
Dont overkill that one. Self-Care and Botany Knowledge are good enough. Add another 3rd perk that helps you in a different aspect of the game. I would add Lithe/Sprint Burst/DH or even Overcome. If you dont want an exhaution perk, use something like Prove Thyself.
-
Really? I could not even sleep at night after my first 20 hours in DBD because i was so full of adrenaline. How you find this boring is definitly a "you" problem. I am sorry for you.
Random suggestion: Try Hunt Showdown.