zarr
zarr
About
- Username
- zarr
- Joined
- Visits
- 5,381
- Last Active
Comments
-
Wesker is a really well-designed killer IMO, fun to play as and against, no blatantly busted add-ons, strong enough to be viable in most matches you'll encounter and still balanced enough against equal opponents. Depends on map and loadouts too of course, but given the base balance scenario of a group of 4 solo survivors (so no build coordination or out-of-game communication) of equal skill and experience compared to the killer, I think Wesker will do well in most configurations.
The high pick and kill rates do go to show that he is easy to pick up and perform well with, however it has to be kept in mind that the stats are from September, just after his release, so it's partially probably a case of him being easier to pick up and play as than play against, and that the MMR cap means the "top 5%" of Weskers will be facing players from the "top 50%" of MMR (MMR range is apparently 0-3000MMR, cap 1600; in reality it's probably more around 25% of players captured by the cap, at least when you ignore all players below like 50 hours total playtime). I think something that makes him a bit unique is that he has both a really good chase ability and an innate slowdown element (people have to go to boxes, retrieve spray cans and spray themselves). This proves problematic for a lot of players.
If Wesker's pick-to-kill-rate ratio will keep being this much of an outlier though, I do suspect BHVR will nerf him a bit, because while he is not OP from a base balance perspective, the stats would show that he is overperforming in the live environment. They'll then probably make him a little harder to play by decreasing the bound hitbox, and/or a little easier to face by reducing or even taking away altogether the Hindered affliction on his infection. Removing infection from hooked survivors would be a reasonable alternative.
-
High MMR duos/trios getting lower MMR teammates is something I've been noticing for quite a while myself, I do believe there has to be something in place where the matchmaker is trying to "even out the odds". Obviously I don't know for sure, but it's baffling how consistently it happens.
But in general, the MMR cap is really the culprit ruining matchmaking at the more extreme ends. It's like old red ranks, there's a pooling of players at the cap with significant disparities in skill and experience and performances. I don't believe that with how low the cap is (1600MMR, when the high MMR bracket spans 2000-3000MMR) that really only ~5% of the playerbase are at that cap. But even if that is the case, it only goes to show that even among those 5% the differences are still huge and the cap needs to be changed. I think experienced and skilled players wouldn't mind waiting a minute or two longer for a chance to get more competitive matches. I mean, maybe I am wrong and even of the advanced players most just want to play and win all the time, but there's obviously also players on the receiving end of that, so even in terms of player retention I'm not sure it's the right route even if it were the case that players rather want to win against worse opponents than compete against equals. Either way, I don't get why they don't make it so that the matchmaker looks for matches as close in rating as possible and gradually expands that range, rather than have a cap. If there really are so few players at the extreme MMR ends, just make the range expand faster the longer you wait.
Backfill does seem to also still be an issue, although I don't think the matchmaker entirely ignores MMR on backfills anymore.
-
Most people don't appreciate just how massive these data sets are. They talk about anecdotal stuff and their experience of the game to try and argue against stats failing to realize how astronomical the differences in representativeness are. On Steam alone, some 30 million hours of DbD are being clocked in a month. Even if we subtract an entire third of that for idle and queue time and whatnot, that still leaves 20 million hours, which at an average match duration of around 10 minutes come out to 120.000.000 / 5 players = 24 million matches. And again, this is ignoring all other platforms, which are bound to at least double that number. To further put this point into perspective: Even if you are veteran of the game, your entire playtime spanning years and years is matched on a global scale within a mere handful of minutes. And the stats capture results from all of it.
Stats absolutely mean something, to dismiss them is ludicrous, and there's a reason BHVR looks at and shares them and has for years. People just often confuse "base game balance" with "live game balance" - these stats do not mean for instance that Wesker is the strongest killer in the game, just that he is currently killing the most survivors in the actual matches people are playing. The difference between that is easy to understand: base game balance would be looking at a hypothetical controlled environment where every player is equally experienced, skilled and trying equally hard to win, and then also accounting for maps and loadouts on top of that; live game balance is looking at the actual playing environment of the game in its public matchmaking mode, where there are great and ever-changing disparities in skill, experience, "sweatiness" and maps/loadouts - no two pub matches are ever the same even among billions of trials. And there are a sheer infinite number of possible conditions and things that can happen in a match, which cannot and do not have to be accounted for for live balance because the live game itself does not account for them: matchmaking does not look at maps or loadouts, and given the low MMR cap, it doesn't look at performance much either. Whatever can happen and does happen comes out in the wash of these large numbers of matches, and the resulting stats show trends with massive reliability.
Again, that doesn't mean they show us base game balance facts, they show us the reality of how the game balance unfolds in its live environment. If you were to for example change the matchmaking, such as by removing the MMR cap, the stats would change, despite the base game obviously not having changed. But they are designing and developing for the live environment, because the latter is what actually happens and what represents the real playing experiences real players are really having. Strong add-ons and items, Moris, map X and Y, SWFs with voice comms, survivors that hide all match or kill themselves on hook, killers that let survivors go, endgame suicide parties, and on and on - all of that is included in these stats, and that does not make the stats mean anything less about live balance, on the contrary, since all of these things actually exist and actually happen and actually affect the playing experience of actual players, they have to be included among all the other things, otherwise the stats would not tell us about live balance. Sure more specific stats to get more insights and trends for the realities of more specific subsets of that live game reality would be neat to have and can help inform game design decisions much more precisely, but the global kill rate is sufficient to generally get an idea for the live balance state of the game, i. e. how people are doing in their actual matches on average. And to that end, players playing killer are performing well, including in top MMR brackets.
I don't think 60% kill rate is too much, it may well be the sweet spot, but I do think solo survivor is being left behind too much (one example where specific stats would be neat), and that the MMR cap is allowing for top players to win decidedly too much (particular problems being certain killers/add-ons/camping/tunnelling/SWF, but changing the MMR cap would already go a long way to alleviate these problems).
-
Absolutely awful mechanic that will hopefully one day finally be removed and end up only one more of those things where people look back and go "How the hell did that BS stay in the game for so long, how did people tolerate it?!"
An extra mechanic to reward hard camping is really the last thing the game needs.
-
These stats show the live balance, not base balance. And they mean everything about live balance, they literally show us what the killing/survival experience is like on average in public matchmaking, which is the live game environment. Doesn't mean the stats wouldn't change if players of equal skill, experience, etc. faced off all the time, but the fact of the game reality simply is that they don't. The MMR cap also does not render the stats meaningless, because that MMR cap exists in reality and leads to matches happening in reality as they do. For that reality you can say that a player playing killer X at MMR Y is on average performing well. Doesn't mean they would necessarily still be performing as well on average if they played against hand-picked opponents or if the MMR cap were to be removed, but that's just not the reality of this game, the reality is in the matches that the live game actually yields, and that live balance reality is documented by these stats. That the game is killer-sided statistically in its live balance is simply a fact, and while that doesn't mean it is necessarily killer-sided in the same way from a base balance perspective (i. e. in a controlled environment where you actually pit equal players against each other), it does mean that players playing killer in pubs are on average killing more survivors than they have escape, even if they are a top MMR player.
-
Cool, although it would be even cooler to see (per-killer) kill rates represented as a curve through the entire MMR range, not just the "top 5%" bracket. That would highlight a lot of things, including which of the killers can even reach the highest MMR realms.
It would also be neat to see kill rates separated by solo, duo, trio and quad groups.
-
@forthelulz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3220703#Comment_3220703
OMG! Thanks for reminding me about mouse smoothing!
I had meant to mention to @Rizzo about them using mouse smoothing by default & hiding it and how it effects a ton of users and is one thing that you can't change without editing ini files. I made a video months ago about it, I had meant to go into more detail but it got lost in my pile of "things I'm going to do tomorrow" lol
Edit: To also add to the above, this is why a decent amount of users found FPS issues "improved" when they lowered their mouse polling rate to 500Mhz or below, while it's a bandaid fix it does help quite a bit although if you fling your mouse around you can still it still starts to cut into FPS just only a small fraction of the impact of 1000Mhz and up. So anyone that has had to lower their poiling rate should look into turning off mouse smoothing + making sure that in Windows Mouse Setting "Enhance Mouse Pointer Precision" is UNCHECKED at all time.
This game is completely unplayable with my mouse because of the 8k polling rate, if I leave mouse smoothing enabled anytime my mouse is moving my FPS tanks and if I move it around quickly for 4-5s or frantically click mouse buttons (this is because changing the mouse polling rate does not effect mouse buttons they always run at the max polling rate regardless if the setting in software which has been verified but other with the equpiment to actually verify it) the game will actually crash because my FPS drops to literally 0.
I can make another video demonstrating that 4-5 seconds of fast mouse movement will 100% crash the game every time if @Rizzo would like.
Makes sense that smoothing issues get worse the more frequently mouse data comes in, more points to process. I'm on 1kHz poll rate and smoothing effects are definitely most noticable on faster mouse movements. Feels like negative acceleration, which would make sense if framerates collapse momentarily. They should indeed just disable this by default, nobody needs count smoothing in this day and age anyway.
Also pretty sure that Windows' Pointer Precision was disabled by default on Win 10 Edu, yet on Home it was enabled by default. Also a shame that people still need to be told to disable that.
@forthelulz said:
The last version of Reshade, basically all the 5.0's have had issues with this game. It's best to go back to 4.9's if you want to use it.
I used to always use Reshade but because of the issues I just stopped using it completely.
Edit: Oh and Windows 11 22H2 has competely screwed DBD up. I am going to see if G-Sync works with it but otherwise I've tried everything I could think of but nothing makes it run normally so I'm reverting back and pausing updates for 5 weeks. Hopefully by then either Windows or DBD will patch it, although I'm honestly afraid that so many are used to this game running so badly that they won't even notice.
Before I do though I'm going to make a few videos showing the night & day difference between 11 21H2 & 11 22H2 with identical settings after 100% completely fresh install of both 22H2 + GPU drivers + Steam & EGS + DBD. It's so awful everything stutters all the time and FPS and frametimes are garbage "out of the box" and with every tweak that I've used for 5 years that always makes this game run amazingly, which can always be seen in any of my videos because I always have at least Frameview monitoring on screen if not others.
Yeah, it seems to be the new Reshade version. I played DX11 without Reshade for around an hour, no crashes. Did a fresh install of Reshade and manually applied settings and adjusted filters, rather than replace the files. Still got two random crashes in a session of two to three hours. Weirdly the crashes tend to happen on loading into a trial or exiting the post-trial screen. Now I'm back on DX12 and again no crashes even over multiple hours. I will definitely try DX11 + an older version of Reshade.
I hope 22H2 won't be that catastrophic once it hits Win 10, ha, or that we'll figure out some remedy.
-
@forthelulz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3212148#Comment_3212148
I'd guess that something is wrong somewhere if you're getting crashes and using dx12 is a workaround.
I would, if it were me, do what I call the nuclear option lol which is pretty much doing everything possible all in one big single sequence that I know makes everything work perfectly. I just installed 22H2 and it's made DBD run terribly as well as it has added Windowed optimizations now which wasn't previously active or even availabel via registry changes.
If interested in the changes: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/optimizations-for-windowed-games-in-windows-11-3f006843-2c7e-4ed0-9a5e-f9389e535952
This very much directly effects DBD players since almost everyone IS playing in windowed mode (even though I'm sure 3/4 of them actually think they're using fullscreen exclusive but they aren't as we talked about lol) so I've actually just started doing nuclear option which is why it came to mind.
22H2 started releasing about 2 weeks ago and they are trickling it out week by week over the course of a month, it only became available to me early this morning so I installed it and I'm only just now able to check it out and tried out DBD to find it a mess :( Feels exactly like it did "out of the box" which is so awful I genuinely can't believe they don't realize how bad it is or think about how many people that turns away from the game.
I suspect the crashes are somehow due to Reshade. I installed a newer version of it on my new PC than I had had before, but I was too lazy to do all the settings and get all the filters again, so I just replaced its files with those of my old install, and I suppose that can somehow have led to this. At least when I googled my crash code, the only thing DbD-related among the already very limited results was about Reshade. Why running on DX12 prevents those crashes beats me however. Either way, I haven't noticed any negative performance differences as compared to DX11, so I don't mind staying on DX12. Only thing is that the game takes a little longer to open perhaps. I think I'll uninstall Reshade and see if that prevents crashes on DX11, and if so, I'll see about getting around to actually installing it properly.
I'm still on Win 10 (21H2), but I had to change from Education to Home with my new PC, so I unfortunately won't be able to hold off on the 22H2 update too much longer either I'm sure. I guess maybe the Win 11 windowed optimizations won't be in it however? Do let me know if in your nuclear approach you find anything to get DbD back to being/feeling like "true" fullscreen.
A little something you might not be aware of: Using
[/Script/Engine.InputSettings] bEnableMouseSmoothing=False
in the Input.ini makes mousing feel noticably better to me. I think it's another thing making DbD feel a little off "out of the box". And yeah, "true" fullscreen mode, distinct resolutions, disabled V-Sync, uncapped/unsmoothed framerate, these are all things that make the game perform and feel so much better, it's ridiculous they are still not options in the in-game menu. Those are completely default options in basically all video games.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3213776#Comment_3213776
-"From a DbD perspective, Oni is clearly more dangerous"
Nemesis has wolverine like levels of regeneration. He's like 9 feet tall in DBD and has forearms bigger than most mens legs. The main armament of Nemesis is also a rocket launcher - which he is not allowed to use in DBD but does get to use in RER. Sword vs rocket launcher is not really much of a contest in my mind.
You even specifically quoted me saying "From a DbD perspective", and then you talk about regeneration and rocket launchers. Again, from a DbD perspective Oni is stronger since his attack deals much more damage. Nemesis' raw muscle strength is at best equal to Oni in DbD - both deal 1 health state damage on basic attacks, both take the same time to break pallets/walls at base and can destroy them in 1 hit with their abilities, they also take the same time to pick survivors up, carry and hook them, and both get stunned by pallets for the same duration and move at the same base speed. While these are obvious, it's not like BHVR is unable to adjust base stats like this for different killers (and particularly for Nemesis I had actually hoped they would do so, at the very least with increasing "mutation" tiers, to do justice to how much physically stronger he should indeed be expected to be compared to most other killers).
And yeah, once in Fury, Oni is propelled by some supernatural, demonic force that not only gives him objectively more powerful characteristics than anything Nemesis can do in DbD, but again, even when facing RE Nemesis I would not write Oni off due to this. It could be entirely possible and plausible given his backstory that Oni is essentially immortal, since even after being tortured to death and beyond, he came back to haunt the lands, stronger than before despite his wrecked body. Like with Spirit, it's even possible that being a demon, he isn't even strictly bound to his body and can move limbs even after they've become detached, which would of course go to show that physical strength in the sense of muscles, tendons, joints loses most of any meaning, and it's a magical strength.
My main angle with my post was honestly more of a "Nemesis is completely neutered in DbD and a shadow of his menacing self from the originals", but even if I were to take the premise of the topic more seriously in a general sense and ignore what has already been said about that being more or less impossible given that these are entirely fictional entities, I would not see as much of an imbalance there. Of course Nemesis at latest in his mutated forms appears like he should be able to toy with Oni, but I mean, freaking Jill killed Nemesis, and survived encounter after encounter against him, including of course all the mutated forms. While this would probably entail Oni using firearms (lol), at the very least we can say that if Jill is able to consistently dodge/survive Nemesis' attacks (including the rocket launcher), then Oni certainly should be too, given that he can achieve superhuman speed and has a superhuman ability to endure.
-
From a DbD perspective, Oni is clearly more dangerous. Nemesis' tentacle strike doesn't even inflict damage on first hit, it only infects the victim - with a mild cough... And from there it only deals 1 health state damage. Oni's demon strike not only inflicts 2 health states damage instantly, but it can in theory even inflict 8 (or more), if people line up or run into it while it lasts. His kanabo has much more destructive force than Nem's tentacle in DbD. Oni is also much faster.
Oni does need to draw blood to get access to his powers, but not only does that seem easy enough to do given that he can slash Nem's arms during punches or tentacle during strikes, but there's also those zombies with him, which are easy targets for Oni to slice and fuel up on blood from.
Pitting him against RE Nemesis would be more interesting, but ultimately Nemesis is merely biological, whereas Oni is supernatural - rather than being brought back from the dead with science/a virus, he's an undead spirit, a sort of demonic force propelling a body that should already be dead. There's a cosmetic showing him with serious wounds all over his body, and yet he's still as fast and strong as usual. So we have to assume he would be able to keep fighting fiercely even in drastic stages of being injured, and who knows, maybe this demonic force could even achieve what Rin, his relative, did: be able to keep moving limbs even after they're severed.
-
@forthelulz said:
Can you check your Registry to see if you have the following?
- Computer\HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\Dwm
- DWORD: OverlayTestMode
- Value: 0x00000005(5)
I remember this being a fix for some multimonitor issues a year ago, normally it wouldn't be there but for some people adding it solved their issue.
Entry wasn't present, created it myself. Didn't change anything so far, as far as I can tell. But maybe important to note is that I'm currently playing on DX12 since I have been having crashes on DX11 on my new PC for some reason. So perhaps I will play around with this some more and try to get actual legacy FSE in DX11 too. Main monitor is DVI btw, secondary HDMI.
-
@forthelulz said:
To find out exactly what's happening and know if you're using FSO vs FSE and so on, instead of guessing the simplest and best way is to install Frameview:
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/technologies/frameview/
It's free and from Nvidia and works with Nvidia & AMD GPUs. You don't even need to restart your computer to use it.
I made a quick video awhile ago demonstrating it so that anyone interested can see how easy and useful it is even if you just want to use the overlay. Simply install, set any applicable options (I disable PPW because it doesn't interest me, I prefer using F10 instead of Scroll Lock to start/stop benchmarking and I like using a 5 second delay before benchmarking begins and using a 20 second timer for benchmarking because that's usually enough for what I need) and then startup game.
The last line is the mode tags which are as follows:
F = Fullscreen Mode - the game is running in a Fullscreen mode
I = Independant Flip Mode - the game is simulating as if it was running in Full Screen Exclusive mode but is actually running in either Fullscreen Optimized or Windowed Optimized mode
W = Windowed Mode - the game is running in a Windowed mode
V = Vsync Enabled (Lack of V means Vsync is Disabled)
T = Tearing Allowed (Lack of T means Tearing is Disallowed)
Edit: I would be interested to know if you're actually using FSE because like I said, it's very rare to find someone that's done it because it requires a lot more than just changing a line in GameUserSettings you need to change specific registry keys inside Windows, most times people just think they are using FSE when in reality they're using FSO and don't realize it because they don't know how to verify which Presentmode is in use and Microsoft has done such a good job with FSO that the difference is essentically zero.. in fact using FSE nowadays actually creates issues with other programs.
Installing Frameview and firing up the game will let you know immediately what's happening, and it's awesome! :)
Thanks!
F I T, so fullscreen in simulated mode. Did suspect that registry tinkering would be needed to actually get legacy fullscreen mode, but since there's no discernible difference between it and simulated I never really looked into it. Although I would be curious whether it'd bring back the right-click functionality I mentioned.
-
@e1ix said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206946#Comment_3206946
Devs have already stated that in order for the game to have a replay function, the game needs to be built from the ground up to support it. So it's unlikely and possibly quite difficult (not to mention expensive in terms of time and money) to implement a replay system. At this point, the devs have to go ahead with the product they have and include features that can be implemented in a reasonable amount of time like server-side validation etc. (which the devs have already confirmed in their roadmap). I am quite satisfied by the roadmap that they have proposed, now the only question is if they can implement the features they mentioned within the timeline that they have given us.
The idea that the entire game would have to be rebuilt to support a replay function is pretty wild to me. Granted, I don't know of any game myself that got retrofitted with such functionality, but it's still quite ridiculous that even games from the turn of the century or even earlier than that had fully functional replay systems, even with advanced operations (such as free-roaming cam), yet DbD apparently cannot have it. (And even its spectator mode is pretty rudimentary and awfully limited in features.) I'm not a programmer, but in my mind it would be as simple as having the game server log the game events that it already processes anyway, and provide client functionality to re-create the match from that log.
The roadmap is more of a "meh" to me. Anti-sniping measures mostly only benefit big streamers that are being targeted; the failsaves (match is forced to end 5 minutes after EGC concludes, and after 1 hour at the latest) are something that seems like it could be shipped tomorrow rather than in weeks or months, and really could have been shipped ages ago already if they had actually taken these things seriously, and I also wonder whether more advanced "failsaves" or analytics aren't possible (identifying things such as players moving at speeds that are literally impossible, or engaging in otherwise impossible actions (e. g. being hooked 10 times within a second)), and if so, why they aren't being implemented to if not outright ban, at least kick these players from matches; "improved support tools" and "continued support" are pretty vague, the best improvement for the anti-cheat support tools would of course be a replay function, anything short of that will always come down to "did you happen to record the player in the precise moment where the alleged cheating is also undeniably evident?"; "player report feedback" is nice for non-Steam players. And as you said, now we'll have to wait and see what actually comes of these things, and how effective they will be if they come. Server validation specifically is something I do not have a lot of confidence in, since even the crucial hit validation ended up being "if the killer has an abysmally bad connection - and no earlier than that - the server will sort of sometimes overrule their hits, but most of the time they'll still hit you from 10m"...
That all said, if nothing else, I am glad that the devs publically addressed the cheating issue here, and that some work is being done on that front. And while the 200k is not saying much, it's at least saying something. While I would be curious how many of those bans were manual, and whether they aren't also including temporary bans in that number (which would be pretty disingenuous), I'm still glad to know that on average, a 100 accounts have been getting banned per day throughout the game's existence.
-
@ZamasuManzon said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206894#Comment_3206894
Thanks for replying. :)
All of this makes sense. Went ahead and changed a few things in the file and it didn't made ANY difference XD
It seems I was already using max settings indeed.
Thanks anyway :)
According to @forthelulz, 3 is now identical to 4. I wouldn't know because I always play on 0. One cool thing about setting graphics options through the file though is that you can selectively choose quality for the different elements. So you can for instance have everything on 0, but then set shadow quality to the highest value. This is also something most games offer from the in-game menus.
I would recommend using true fullscreen mode to most of anyone, in my experience the performance is much better. It also allows you to actually disable V-Sync (in windowed mode even with V-Sync disabled you still have the DWM's compositor), which reduces input latency.
@forthelulz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3206894#Comment_3206894
When a fresh GameUserSettings is generated it sets =4 and shows "Ultra" on the in-game graphic setting. Previously using =4 used to be Cinematic mode and would show nothing on the in-game graphic setting but now =4 is identical to =3.
Also, at least in Win10/11, simply setting Fullscreenmode=0 does not enable exclusive fullscreen mode, it's FSO even if you manually choose "Disable fullscreen optimizations". To actually get exclusive fullscreenmode is possible but almost everyone that thinks they are using FSE is really just in FSO they've just never actually checked and are assuming. FSO works better than FSE ever used to and using FSE actually creates issues.
Thanks for the clarifications.
I'm actually interested in the different fullscreen modes, do you mind sharing more? What are the practical difference, are there non-negligible performance differences, and how does one actually enforce different modes?
I've been using true fullscreen in DbD for a long time, even back on Windows 7. I haven't really noticed any difference with it in Windows 10 - it still applies the set screen resolution, screen tearing still occurs when V-Sync is disabled, and tabbing out of the game still takes a relatively long time if the desktop and game resolution differ. I have manually disabled FSO from the executable, but I also don't think it really changes anything. The Windows media playback overlay thing pops up on top of the game, which did make suspect it's not the FSE mode it used to be.
One thing that did change but that I'm pretty sure was due to updates to the game itself, is that it used to be possible to open the Steam overlay, right-click anywhere within it, and then move the cursor to a secondary monitor and do stuff on it without having to tab out of the game (so even the game resolution would be maintained on its monitor). This was pretty handy, but it stopped working at some point.
-
I agree that it's pretty empty talk given that they had been silent on this topic for years. Would have hoped for more than "we'll do things". The 200k number is also not really worth all that much. The game's more than 6 years old, save file modifying had been rampant in past times and probably makes for a good chunk of the bans, and another chunk are bound to be rage-cheaters using free accounts they gave out at multiple points, most of all of course the Epic Store cheater feast - a disaster really, I don't want to know how many thousands of accounts there still are from that in backup, waiting to be used for cheating.
It's disappointing as I have been facing more and more cheaters, subtle and otherwise. MMR and the Epic Store thing have really made this a fairly substantial issue. I would not be surprised if 5% of players in high MMR brackets are cheaters, meaning you will have one in every 4th or 5th game on average. What I have been noticing increasingly more often are subtle wallhacks, which are however still fairly blatant for experienced players. I think these cheats are some of the most popular because you cannot be manually banned with video evidence for this, as no video evidence will ever guarantee someone is wallhacking, even if it is very blatant. They either get caught by EAC or nothing happens. And EAC is infamously terrible at detecting non-public cheats. I personally know about a few players that even admitted to cheating years ago and are not banned to this day. And I've seen others that I suspected of cheating and who turned out to have multiple cheater accusations on their profiles for the same stuff, and they too are still not banned. I have little confidence in EAC.
Here is a suggestion for something that could actually help the game a ton: Implement a function that allows players to save replays of matches to their device, from which they can watch the match from all perspectives and enable/disable auras of every player in them. Not only would this solve the issue of only being able to report a cheater if you happened to have a recording running at the time of the incident, but it would also make it much easier to identify cheating to begin with. You could watch the entire match from the perspective of the suspected player and check for any possible incident, as well as enable player auras to make potential wallhacks obvious.
Not only that, the replay function would also be a tool of gameplay analysis enabling players to get a lot better at the game, understanding the flow of matches, what everyone did in them, how matches were won or lost, mistakes they or anyone made.
You could anonymize all the player names in these replays such that they won't as readily be able to be used to "shame" players or whatever, only of course you'd still have to retain the option to report players from these replays such that the player ID can be identified.
-
I do think the killer should have the authority to pick up survivors being healed and kick generators being worked on. Everything else is pretty silly.
Killer should not have the authority on hit reg though, but that's another story.
-
You technically can be, but you in all likeliness won't be. EAC does not recognize these file changes as malicious, and if it were to, it at most would tell you your game files have been modified and not allow you to play until you rectify it.
This is a user configuration file that is being written to all the time anyway, you "manually" modify it by using in-game settings as well. Plus BHVR has restricted the use of most of all variables that could be harmful from these files to my knowledge. Either way, as long as you only change values of existing variables, you will be fine.
And there are various important changes people use this file for that the game unfortunately (and ridiculously) still does not present from the in-game menu. Such as disabling V-Sync and enabling true fullscreen mode with distinct display resolutions. Although the "3" and "4" thing is something the devs had already realized - "Ultra" used to be 3, but last I checked Ultra does now set the variables to 4. If that has since been reverted, I'd chalk it up as one of many such oversights where old issues pop back up in the game by accident. Their internal version documentation must be pretty wild, because old build bugs always showed up again frequently.
-
With Unbreakable, you can pick yourself up in 23.7 seconds. Basekit Unbreakable will take 45 seconds. So that's about half an Unbreakable. Killers got half a Brutal Strength basekit. As well as 25% of STBFL. And more if you also consider the hit sprint reduction. Also 10% of Weasel.
And regardless, it's not about some petty tit-for-tat, these things should be done on a basis of the state of the game, and camping/tunnelling have always been problems and they continue to be (tunnelling honestly only got worse). They are much too effective for how easy they can be, and they often yield uninteractive or downright anti-gameplay experiences. And this is especially the case for non-SWF groups and therefore exacerbates the already problematic balance issue of the SWF/solo gap. There should in fact be more measures to combat these things, such as Kindred basekit, removal of hook grabs, disabling of killer powers within a certain vicinity of hook, unhook invincibility replacing unhook Endurance such that you can get the latter on top of the the former, rebuffed DS, ... Naturally, any and all of these things have to go along with buffs to killers in other regards.
For the record: I'm not a fan of this basekit Unbreakable idea and don't know where it is coming from. Camping and tunnelling are by far the most prevalent and problematic aspects of killer gameplay, and BHVR decides that slugging needs to be rebalanced? I for one enjoy slugging playstyles a lot, playing either role. I am disappointed with this change which will all but delete this playstyle, you will only be able to slug opportunistically for a brief duration anymore. Knock Out is basically dead, and it as well as Third Seal were some of my favourite perks for a playstyle where I just chase until I down people and then leave them. That is a very welcome change of pace even when I'm playing survivor, since there's a lot of action and chases and little downtime of going through the motions, as well as no camping and tunnelling.
I hope the universal Unbreakable thing won't make it to live. What I do however think does need to be addressed are instances where everyone is in the dying or hooked state. Not only does it make for a boring endgame sweeping the map for slugs or trying to hide as a slug, but there's obviously also obnoxious people that let people bleed out just to be annoying. Allowing survivors to pick themselves up if everyone is either dead, dying or hooked would solve this. It would obviously still be a survivor buff though, and I would want there to be some endgame buff for killers to go alongside with this. Plenty of those to choose from, including perk buffs, various of which BHVR should have shipped ages ago already anyway.
On a related note, the "Mori" changes that apparently were the reason for BHVR to consider basekit Unbreakable to begin with are also strange. Since you'll only ever get to mori people when you have already won (or when everyone else has escaped), it's not like it's a killer buff. Plus with the stupid, uncalled-for changes to Devour and Rancor, as well as the changes to the Mori offerings themselves of course, we'll if anything see much fewer kill animations than we used to. It's basically Cypress Mori basekit, and anybody that's ever used those knows that they are far from a guaranteed kill.
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3193278#Comment_3193278
It was the right move to have a cap. I mean Streamers are a huge thing in promoting the game and bringing in new players how would it look if streamers either quite or were having longer queues than actual matches. Also you would sorta have an assembly line life of a player in the game, they start out, learn the ropes, improve, find a niche they enjoy a lot, become highly skilled with that niche, gets hit with extreme queues, likely leaves out of boredom. Capping the time someone will play the game is not a good idea and while few will reach it, those few are also the most likely to promote your game and to buy cosmetics/tomes. It might seem bad to have 1k hrs and 10k hrs matched up against eachother but its work for every account above a certain MMR to be stuck in matchmaking and quit.
I don't think ~5-minute queues are extreme or would ruin the game for the small percentage of 2000+MMR players. And that already could be a huge improvement in terms of quality of matches for the upper end of MMR, if the matchmaker at least tried to look for equals for a couple of minutes before expanding the range.
Your view that mismatches at the upper end of MMR are less detrimental than longer queues would be is also debatable. I mean, we see with the current queue incentives that not enough people want to play survivor despite having faster queues and getting extra bloodpoints for it. Because the experience is more often worse, certainly solo. Likewise, the high MMR experience can be awful because of the skill and experience disparities, not seldomly making it either frustratingly impossible to win or mindlessly boring. I really doubt the upper echelons of players would mind waiting a couple of minutes longer to get actually engaging matches. Sure, there's certainly killers and SWFs that love beating up on lesser opponents and winning 90+% of their matches handedly, but I can't imagine most do. It's not gratifying winning against players you knew never stood a fair chance against you to begin with.
-
@dugman said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3193278#Comment_3193278
That's not true. The estimate we worked out previously was it's more like 6% of players are over the 1600 cap.
Worked out how?
Genuinely interested, not saying I am not pulling the 20% out of nowhere, it's mostly based on my experience (and that of the people I know and/or watch) that the skill and experience disparities in matches of players well above the MMR cap is almost as ridiculous again as it had been in red ranks.
Although ultimately it could still be that it's actually only a very small percentage of players that are that good at this game, and that the cap actually needs to separate that 1% or whatever from the rest (at least up to a few minutes of queue time), so it'd need to be higher either way. That it isn't high enough is plain to see, given the fact that good players can still win 90+% of their matches, which should be impossible with a sound MMR system.
I don't understand why they aren't doing anything of that sort anyway, like having the matchmaker look for identical MMR and expanding that range by 100 every 20 seconds or whatever. Even if you are at something like 2500MMR, you'd be able to be paired with what is currently the effective cap after a mere 3 minutes. But at least prior to that if there are people queueing that you should much rather play against, you will.
-
The issue with OTR + Renewal is that if you get hit before Renewal procs, all the latter will do is get rid of your Deep Wound, you won't get an actual health state out of it. Otherwise the combo would be great.
Renewal isn't completely awful, but it's not really good either. OTR and DS are the go-to perks against being tunnelled, DS is of course worse now but it's not completely dead either, using both will get you good value if you're getting tunnelled. Sprint Burst is good to get away from the hook so that you won't have to waste your OTR hit just for that.
Something else you could try is Resurgence plus an Emergency Med-Kit. The Emergency is actually able to heal you twice off hook with Resurgence, and it only takes around 5 seconds, which is something you can pull off mid-chase as well.
For something else entirely, Lucky Break with Quick & Quiet, try to break LoS after getting unhooked and get into a locker. Sprint Burst, OTR and Inner Healing are more perks that can work with this. Or Head On/DS to have a failsafe if they still find you in the locker.
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
I guess thats the whole soft cap system. IIRC its something like 1900 MMR and past that it doesnt matter how high your MMR is youre constantly matched at 1900. Its there to avoid the whole Dowsey Twins ordeal.
They apparently lowered it even more, to 1600. It was never necessary to have a cap that low anyway, there is an entire world between queues that are still reasonable and bearable and literal hour-long queues we had in Dowsey's Twins case. ...And even then, someone that has won 190+ matches in a row arguably should be waiting in queue for ages to find actual competition. Of course, ridiculous win streaks like that would never even be possible in a working MMR system to begin with.
The cap is so low that the top 20% of players or something are matched among each other, which is a huge range. It's the same issue we've had with all the old matchmaking systems, where the skill and experience levels in the top ranks ranged from "meghead with 500 hours that consistently struggles to last 30s in chases" to "5000 hour comp blight that usually gets 6 hooks before a gen is done".
And it's not even like a solution here would be difficult or make queue times prohibitively long. Just make it so that the matchmaker looks within a more restrictive MMR range for a certain period of time, like a couple of minutes. If there's really nobody queueing in that MMR range in your region, then the matchmaker can gradually open up the range. And they could make this more restrictive only at the highest and lowest MMR brackets too, because those pose the biggest issues when mismatched.
-
it feels like the game is still in the phase of Peer-to-Peer connection
That's because with regards to hit reg, it pretty much still is. Just like in P2P, hit calculations and confirms are done on the killer client, their perspective alone counts, which means their own ping does indeed benefit them. This changes somewhat if the killer player has a terrible connection (250+ms), but even then not really.
There is still hit validation for Dead Hard and pallet stuns though.
-
@Peanits said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3188367#Comment_3188367
Definitely not that much. I don't have the exact numbers handy (and our MMR wizard is still off), but to give an idea, the distribution of players across MMR is a bell curve. Very few people are at the low end of the spectrum, most people are near the middle, and very few people are in the highest end as well. The soft cap will pull in some people who are already close, but not that many.
Would really like to see actual numbers on this as well. I have recently learned that rather than increase the MMR cap over time, you guys have supposedly lowered it even more. Something like decent players sitting at around 2000-2200MMR, really good players around 2200-2500, and gods (cheaters) reaching an effective ceiling at around 3000. Yet the matchmaking cap is apparently 1600, making all of this irrelevant. If more than 5% of players fall within the cap, that's already too much, given that even the skill ladder jump from the 0.1% to 1% of players can be huge.
I really think that for anyone even just decent at the game, the cap is almost entirely nullifying the possible benefits of the MMR system, because it's just too wide a range. And (soft) proof for this is that decent-and-above killers/4-SWFs still win about as often as they did in the rank-based MM system, so about 80-90% of the time or more, which is ridiculous. Even more ridiculous is that really good players can have win streaks of hundreds of games in a row, which is unheard of in pretty much any competitive game with MMR. While those streaks are of course very rare in the grand scheme of things, surely you have to regard them as issues, at least insofar they are indicative of major issues with the MMR system at the upper end. The matchmaking cap really does seem like old "red ranks" now.
I think having a ~5min. queue time window at the upper end of MMR brackets is not unreasonable, so I think for the first 5 minutes of a queue, the matchmaker should strictly look for players within a close rating range of each other (100 to at most 200MMR). Players good at and dedicated to the game won't mind sitting in queue for a few minutes. If this is not accepable in middle or low MMR brackets, just increase the range for those, or decrease the time.
-
I've never cared much for the "nobody wants to play X/Y, game so Y/X-sided!!!" bickering, but ever since the queue incentives went live I legitimately haven't seen anything but +100 survivor on my end (well, one time +50). It's honestly crazy to me that we basically have a constant double bloodpoint event for survivors (depending on region, time and MMR of course), and yet still not enough people are playing survivor for my killer queue times to dip under 5 minutes.
More than balance changes however, I think it's something to do with matchmaking. Randoms have always been terrible more often than not, but lately it's especially bad. I think we've either run into the same issue we've always had in the past and everyone and their mother has reached the matchmaking cap (red rank in the past, now max. MMR), or the algorithm has been changed to consistently pair low MMR survivors with high MMR survivors against high MMR killers. Going against killers with 3000+ hours that camp and tunnel at 5 gens and having "teammates" with 300-600h that die in 10-20 seconds and don't understand even the most fundamental of game concepts (such as "generator") is as common or even more common now than it had been in rank-based matchmaking. So I am not surprised that high MMR survivors don't feel like playing anymore. You basically need at least a 3-SWF now if you want to have a shot at being competitive with any reliability, duo is not enough anymore, even if you are great players.
-
Similar story as with perks and a whole bunch of add-ons: 90% of them most likely see less than 1% use, but people keep buying so BHVR is complacent about changing anything about it. Of course, if they were to do more exciting things, it might increase sales...
Charms have more than outgrown their welcome. There's hundreds of them, most of them Rift fillers, people rarely use most of them, if any, and if they do nobody really notices. It's cool that completing a Rift gives you the Cells to unlock the next, so I won't complain about "deserving" better for my money (I would instead simply not buy Rift passes), but charms have just clearly exceeded whatever they were meant to be, you can't even find them in the list without scrolling for ages looking at every little icon, and if you click on one that's equipped it doesn't even jump to it in the list. They will have to deal with this sometime.
It's not like I have great ideas for alternatives either, but lobby and match loading screen customizations would be a sensible start I guess.
-
- Inherently useless because just like Devotion, it's only a number.
- Sort of can be used to tell if other survivors in a lobby are newbies, but also only to an extent.
- Allows killers to also see this to the same extent, which can lead to dodging/refusing to chase certain survivors, and chasing certain others.
- Increases time spent spending points, since you have to through many more "web finished" animations.
- Even after the rarity change, I'm not finding that I get as many good things over the same number of nodes as I would in old level 50 webs.
- That there's not even some special reward for prestige 100 is pretty pathetic. Right now I have no reason to want to prestige my main character(s), and on survivors I if anything want to avoid doing so as much as possible because it will only lead to me getting dodged and whatnot. But if there were a sort of cool, legacy-like cosmetic unlocked, say at level 50, 75, 100, that would be an actual incentive.
-
I think they took two server locations simply because EU is a major region, might as well get more coverage. The "split" between the German and British servers isn't a hard split, you can in theory end up on either one, although it is true that most of the time players that are decidedly closer to one will almost only ever end up on that one, and that means the UK server is missing out on a lot of players from all over EU, especially Eastern EU and Russia of course. It is odd if you're regularly getting Russians on UK servers, though that might be due to VPNs.
I think Swedes are more likely to end up on UK servers, at least I rarely see them on German servers. Might just not be that many Swedes playing DbD. Spanish and French players probably get routed to either one roughly equally.
-
There absolutely are 3-gen setups that not even a top-tier coordinated SWF would have a hope of breaking. If the gens are close enough and the killer has the right perks and ability, they can draw the game out indefinitely and either always win by attrition or just by people giving up because it's obnoxious. At best you get a stalemate of survivors refusing to enter the area the killer is defending. There are some maps that frequently spawn ridiculous gen clusters like this, those definitely need looking-at.
But it's very rare that a killer actually goes into a game playing for a 3-gen from the get-go, let alone with the killers and perks to support it. And whether a good gen cluster spawns at all obviously depends on the map and RNG. In general playing for a cluster of gens is definitely a viable tool that most good players use, it's bread and butter in tournaments for instance, but it's also not really problematic, most of the time it can be contested since the gens are still far enough apart, and against most pub players you can regularly break it before they really commit or even think about defending it. Although I will say that Brine, Overcharge, Eruption and the base regression buffs have made it even more viable.
-
Cross-referencing a different comment of mine: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3169558#Comment_3169558
Hyperfocus by itself is problematic only insofar that it is not nearly good enough to be used. Hyperfocus alongside Stake Out is okay, good enough to be used. Those two perks alongside a toolbox and BTL/SWF are busted.
The numbers of the perk don't have to be toned down, they only need to make it not work while repairing with a toolbox. Alternatively they could also "fix" the Stake Out synergy (Stake Out gives extra bonus progression on every great skill check even if you land it yourself, it does so regardless of having tokens or not, and it modifies the base value that Hyperfocus scales off of - changing any 1 of these 3 aspects of the perk would make the perk combo much less potent), then it would be decidedly less ridiculous with a toolbox as well.
Things that increase gen repair speed are always bound to be sort of problematic, but one reason why I like Hyperfocus is that it makes repairing gens more engaging of an activity, and that it also makes toolboxes more worthwhile again. Toolboxes are mostly only viable in SWF anymore if you stack multiple of them, the impact a singular survivor can have using one is seldomly that notable. So my ideal solution would be this: Make it so that Stake Out turning a good into a great skill check does not award the extra bonus progression SO otherwise awards (this way players have to actually hit greats to get the full combined benefit of SO and Focus), and make it only award extra bonus progression on great skill checks as long as it has at least 1 token. As a little buff to compensate for this nerf, the extra bonus progression on SO could scale with the amount of tokens on it then, with .5% for every token sounding reasonable (or 1% per token if you make it not modify the base value that Focus looks at). For the issue of SWF stacking this and other stuff, the solution has always been to limit any perk and item/add-on to one instance between any player in a group.
-
The house itself looks similar enough as well. Isn't the first time that their "inspiration" material for something is a little close for comfort, but eh, in this case it's if anything cool to have what is essentially an homage to this fun, lesser-known flick.
-
@GoshJosh said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3172461#Comment_3172461
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd3-9N6HKso
The clip in question begins at the about 1:49 mark. Unfortunately to me it is very unclear from the video if the survivor was actually considered in chase or not, but I don't see how it would be possible they weren't. They did get some boldness points at the end when the killer DC'd, but it's not in English so I'm not sure if that was the "Escaped" scoring event or not.
Yeah, I know what's going on there. You can hear the player say "Shift tech", which is referring to the fact that he's only pressing Shift (the sprint key) very briefly to initiate the medium vault and then lets go of it again immediately. That way chase state is not established and he can get more than 3 vaults here. There's no chase music. This type of Shift micromanagement is one of the ways to break chase state mid-chase.
-
Have to agree that Boons are just not good or problematic enough for basekit Shattered Hope to be an adequate adjustment. I do think it would be interesting to ship snuff buffs alongside Boon buffs though.
For the time being, I think Shattered Hope definitely could do with a buff or two though. For one thing, it should show the aura of a Boon totem whenever you're within its area - it's useless unless there's a Boon in play, so at the very least it should be really useful against Boons, and having to search for the totem when you hear it can be annoying. Alternatively, give it the killer equivalent to Small Game, and make it so that the perk icon lights up whenever you're looking into the direction of a Boon totem (map wide) within a certain degree.
I also think it might be an interesting change to make it so that Shattered Hope reveals the auras of all survivors within the Boon area whenever you are in the Boon area yourself. This could make Boons sort of a detriment to survivors, and can even give the killer incentive to leave a Boon standing. Shadow Step gets around this of course, which would encourage more players to use it alongside their Circles.
And then rather than getting an aura read when you destroy a Boon with SH, it should increase your movement speed for some time. It regularly happens that you come across Boons while chasing someone, and snuffing them mid-chase gives the survivor a lot of distance - SH should work around this by giving the killer a significant boost to catch back up (or catch the survivor out if they stayed).
Additionally, I think SH deserves at least some kind of general effect that can benefit its user regardless of there being Boons in play, such that it isn't an entire waste of a slot whenever there isn't. Maybe something like +1% movement speed for every cleansed totem.
-
As long as you're in chase state, any vault should count toward the Entity blocker, it's just that slow-vaulting usually breaks chase state.
I haven't recently had any instances of the blocker not spawning when it should have, neither as or against a survivor, and I would have to see the video you're referencing, but in general it has to be kept in mind that the window blocker has counterplay - survivors can do different things to break chase state while in a chase, which can allow them to get vaults that are not counted toward the blocker.
Here's something I refrained from talking about in the past, but whatever I guess: I have no clue why BHVR decided to tie the Entity blocker to chase state. There is no reason for a survivor to be vaulting a window 3 times outside of chase interactions anyway, and even if there were, blocking that window on the third vault still wouldn't matter. So, why this chase state condition, rather than making it so that the Entity blocker simply spawns any time a survivor vaults any window 3 times within a certain time frame?
Of course, the chase state condition enables skilled survivor players to do things lesser players cannot, it increases the skill ceiling of the game, so that's why I personally want it to stay. But I am pretty confident that BHVR did not intend for people to be able to play around the Entity blocker. The only thing I can come up with as to why they tied the blocker to chase state is that they wanted to save resources, in both computing and networking, by not having to keep track of vaults and spawn blockers outside of chase.
Would it be healthier for the game if they got rid of the chase state condition? Yeah, being able to abuse a window for more than 3 vaults is pretty ridiculous. Does it really matter? Not really, it's maybe 0.1% of players in this game that actively play around Entity blockers in this way and are good enough to consistently do so. And killers also have counterplay to this, starting with the obvious one that is Bamboozle (and Crowd Control), but also knowing about the ways in which survivors can break chase state, and adjusting their pathing to not allow them to do so as easily. Plus a whole bunch of killers have ways to deal with windows innate to their kit.
-
Make it apply to vaulting speed. Same for Overzealous. Instantly much more attractive perks.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3169035#Comment_3169035
-"But eh, it's just two rounds, and it's still not like he actually "played" for those 30s"
If you treat it like a fault in any sport then that would change those 4ks into two 0ks. That's a huge swing to lose 8 kills. The way in which he forgot to go AFK made a huge impact on both of those games.
-"I've seen my share of Tru3 content and while I won't say he isn't competent/decent, he's far from the best killers I know"
True plays DBD to make money. Most of the games he plays are builds people pay him to play. Most of the builds are sub optimal to say the least. While he plays he always gives little bits of teaching advice.
This is an example for you of "evening" players. Look at how few of the pallets get used on The Game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H7PrPFMjpI
-"9 hooking events into the match is just not feasible. Some of the killers can do it, but overall the game is definitely not balanced for that idea."
It's not just the killers base power kit. Most of the maps are completely game breaking for the old killers. It would be a different game if slow movement speed killers could never play maps larger than 9000m². It would also be a different game if the pallets were spread out so there were more dead zones and less zones that allow you to go from pallet to pallet to pallet.
-"just stop using those strats and you should eventually arrive at an MMR where you can on average do well without them."
In other words : just throw the game and you will eventually be in a "fun" MMR. No thanks. I would like the game to be fair beyond low/medium levels of skill. In order for it to be fair past that point you need to play vs solo queue or you need to play dirty. Alternatively you can just play "ok" with the best two killers in the game because they are so much better than every other killer. This is also boring.
-"I wouldn't really call them misleading, there is still a substantial difference between duos, trios and quads, so it's fair to make the distinction that 4-SWF specifically only makes for around 5% of the global player pool"
So many people are of the opinion that SWF is when you have 4 people in a group on coms. Two groups of two people playing in a SWF is two SWF groups. They aren't playing alone and have extra information if someone in the pair dies. The devs were clear that about half of all games feature SWF and that SWF gives a 15% escape advantage - even though they seem to refuse to nerf it.
If you treat it like a fault in any sport then that would change those 4ks into two 0ks.
Well, I don't treat it like a sport, it was just some random challenge a few players did, and that I at that only brought up to showcase Otz' opinion on balance in the game's actual game mode, which in turn I only did because you brought up Otz. In my mind, even taking those two rounds out of the results altogether doesn't change anything about what the challenge went to showcase, which is that even when putting themselves at a stark handicap, good killer players can win most of their matches with most killers even at top MMR.
This is an example for you of "evening" players. Look at how few of the pallets get used on The Game.
I don't need to watch that video to know that most players in this game range from bad to mediocre, but this goes for players at any time of day or night. Again, I have never seen evidence that the average prowess of players predictably changes throughout the day (in any given region), and I doubt there is such evidence out there because it's not objectively quantifiable. I guess if we had BHVR's insights we could look at whether the amount of top MMR players playing consistently reaches a peak at certain times of day, but eh, the MMR cap is too low for that to matter much anyway. And again, if the argument is that players at night are worse, that's not something that makes sense to me, not from my own experience nor just from the common sense perspective that the "no-lifers" are more likely to be playing at night.
Either way, I did watch like half of that video, and if I feel like pointing something out, it's that Tru3 plays a rather mediocre Freddy. He had some good uses of snares and some bad ones, his basic chase mechanics and decisions were alright but nothing special, with a few blatant mistakes and shortcomings, but what instantly separates a mediocre from an advanced Freddy is whether they constantly spam his abilites, and Tru3 basically never does. There is no reason not to constantly fake teleports on gens around the map while you are in chase or otherwise traversing the map, and there is also no reason to walk around with snares in your back pocket, you want to constantly set up snares because you never run out, they just replace themselves, and the optimal scenario is always that you have all your snares set up on the map since that can potentially cut future chases shorter before a survivor even reaches a loop or notices you trapping it.
Just to point out some of those blatant things I mentioned, here's a few timestamps (going very off-topic, but we've been pretty far from the main topic for a while anyway, plus I feel like I've already said all I wanted to say here with regards to that, and maybe these pointers can help some players):
0:20 - He approaches Meg on the forklift dropdown pallet. He has Red Paint Brush, meaning that all survivors start the trial in the dream world. So he is free to start working with his snares, and here it would have been the obvious play to snare up the right side of the tile and go around the left, meaning that if Meg tries to loop around the tile, she's getting hit. While I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he went around the right side here because he was already planning to make her drop and jump down the other side (which is easier from the side he did it on rather than forklift side), that only works if she's actually camping the pallet rather than looping it, which a good survivor would not do, meaning that by going around the long side here and not using snares, against a better survivor all he would have done is waste more time, and even open up the possibility that the survivor could run away from the tile while he's making his long way around rather than immediately cutting along the left side.
0:30 - After he drops down and hits her, he follows her through the pallet, which is a basic macrozoning mistake. He knows the room he just came from is the LT corner map tile, and the room the pallet is in has a closed gate making it a deadzone. That means what he should have done after hitting Meg and seeing her cut to the left behind the pallet is go back through the LT room to chase Meg around the other side. Not only can this potentially already catch her off-guard because line of sight was broken and she might just not expect him not to follow straight, but if he's chasing her in that direction, now she will be in the deadzone when he breaks the pallet. Instead, he loops around with her (and respects the pallet despite having Enduring) and gives her a free way into the entire map by breaking the pallet from the deadzone side. Plus, reversing direction here would have also allowed him to set up snares to try and chase her into. What can also be pointed out is that he constantly shows her his red light around the many corners where line of sight is broken here. Hiding red light is something you can do for free, there is no reason not to do so in situations like this because you aren't losing distance and you can potentially make the survivor hesitate or even double back into you. By showing the red light, she knows well in advance that he is simply following her straight and as such she knows she can just hold W to the safe pallet.
1:06 - Here it would have been possible for him to do a bit of an advanced play. If this Meg has Dead Hard, she is almost certainly going to use it here given that she's in swing range and that there's a pallet in front of her which "forces" the killer to swing. Knowing this, he could have played around DH by doubling back and going around the other side of the pallet - if she uses DH or drops the pallet, she dies. That said, a really good survivor/one with really good ping and reactions might not actually preemptively DH or pull the pallet here, so there is obviously a risk in trying to go for this play, it's not objectively a mistake not to do so.
1:45 - His play was alright, although sliding along the wall here can reveal his red light earlier than if he were to angle himself to the right a bit. He could also have went a few further steps toward the pallet from the front side before cutting around back, he might have gotten the pallet drop (and potentially a hit) out of that rather than having Claud keep running. Little things, but they can and will matter, it's very helpful to be in the habit of utilizing micromechanic details like that.
3:20 - While Cheryl played it pretty well, it was obvious she was taking a wide curve around the snares to get past them, which might have already allowed Tru3 to catch up had he simply followed her, but at latest once he heard her step into the snare he had just set up in front of the pallet he should have immediately doubled back through the pallet, she would not have made it anywhere after that. Instead he spends time setting up a third snare, allowing her to get to the pallet to drop it on him.
4:00 - Good on him that he notices she isn't in the dream world and doesn't waste time setting snares.
5:15 - Good that he already thinks about the gen teleport to intercept her, and then he plays it competently with the snares at the pallet and waits for potential DH as well. Obviously Claud played it awfully putting herself in that spot to begin with, but that's a given, not commenting on survivor play here.
Stopped watching after this. Again, not gonna say Tru3's a bad killer or whatever, he isn't, but he has plenty room to improve, and these are just a few random examples of as much.
Most of the maps are completely game breaking for the old killers.
Some maps are definitely an issue, especially for killers without map traversal or potent chase abilities, yeah. Map adjustments and/or buffs to these killers would be part of that compensation for camp/tunnel nerfs in my book anyway.
I would like the game to be fair beyond low/medium levels of skill.
Well, camping/tunnelling/slugging aren't inherently "unfair", if you don't mind using those strats and can't regularly win without them past some MMR point, that's obviously your prerogative. My suggestion was just in case you don't actually enjoy playing like that. That said, again, it is possible to become good enough of a killer player to win frequently without camping and tunnelling at top MMR, it is not absolutely necessary to be able to compete and succeed.
The devs were clear that about half of all games feature SWF and that SWF gives a 15% escape advantage - even though they seem to refuse to nerf it.
Yeah, around 50-60% of the player pool were solos when we got stats on this (https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/719/CPIDC1XE8JBT.jpg), which obviously means around half of all matches include at least a duo. And while the survival rate increase was around 10% for 4-SWF and 5% for 3-SWF, 2-SWF only made for a difference of like 1-2% (https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/771/II0BH5BS6HP0.jpg). This can have changed somewhat over the years and with MMR, and obviously we can't just look at averages, the top performance ceiling of a good 4-SWF is just way too high for the pub game mode, just like the killer equivalent to that is too - both can have win streaks of hundreds of games in a row, and that just shouldn't be happening (although matchmaking is at least equally as much to blame for that as balance).
I think duo SWF is not a problem, not even double duo, but obviously they are still more competitive than four solos. My main desired SWF nerf would affect all of them anyway, by making it so any perk and item/add-on can only be present once between members of a premade group.
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3169428#Comment_3169428
i mean if 1 person is still free to work gens and at any time any group of 3 can assemble into an unstopable choo-choo I wouldnt call it throwing. And yes about 15 killers can counter it in someway but that leaves 14 still ######### unless some of them have specific addons. Also I feel like the whole getting around the train would be fairly difficult since you know they can just turn maybe BL 3 but also map dependant as some maps it can be impossible to get through certain areas without hitting someone bodyblocking and well map offerings is still a thing. As long as the full health person is blocking the killer it isnt imperitive to have the other 2 in a direct line. This is all in hypotheticals but 1 perk unlocking the ability to turn into a bodyblock chain against almost half the killers is not a healthy perk. Sure at 34%-49% it is throwing the game that wouldnt make it any less frustrating to play against.
This is a bit "when the stars align just right" but at the same it doesnt seem unreasonable if you and 3 buddys bring a few midwich offerings and reactive healing.
Perk needs a buff as it but imo it should give 50% guaranteed but then just deactivate until you leave the range + maybe a healing speed bonus for you being healed or by healing yourself once you leave the terror radius.
But the killer can simply get off the choo-choo train's wild ride to pressure the one survivor doing gens, and then if the remaining survivors want to get anything done they have to leave the choo-choo train too, and can't instantly reassamble it as they please. And that's not even mentioning how many risks there are to just going for clown fiestas of grouping up taking hits willy-nilly, there's definitely a lot of scenarios where even a pure M1 killer can get around a survivor trying to block, where survivors are in a position where it's not even possible to take a hit, or where they just make mistakes, running into each other and whatnot.
And the only killers that really can't do anything innately against bodyblocks are Trapper, Hag, Doctor, Freddy, Pig, Clown, Ghostface, Demo, Slinger and Pinhead, and even they situationally have their ways of playing around it. Plus there's obviously perks that can help, such as STBFL, various Exposed perks, Forced Penance, as well as various add-ons that can enable these killers to directly counter bodyblocking too (well, Engineer's Fang for Pinhead and Pinky Finger for Clown).
While I agree that the potential to abuse the perk in a coordinated manner in an SWF to tank hits would be problematic (albeit not really in a choo-choo train manner, more so just in the context of general hit-tanking which is really effective if done well and sensibly), and while I as I've said would wish for there to be loadout restrictions in place for SWF such that any perk (and item/add-on) can only be present once between members of a premade group, the problem generally with balancing these things for the SWF scenario is that a full SWF actually coming together to coordinate and abuse builds like this (and then actually also managing to pull it off) is vanishingly rare, to a point of being something you will basically never encounter even in hundreds or thousands of hours of gameplay. When have you last seen a group use 4 BNPs? And that is something everybody knows is strong, requires no gameplay coordination nor even a perk investment, and is completely easy and reliable to use. So yeah, we shouldn't leave perks on the trash pile for everyone just because they might once in a blue moon create unhealthy situations in an SWF looking to abuse them. But again, the real solution would be to implement SWF loadout restrictions, then we wouldn't even have to worry about people stacking and abusing stuff in a coordinated manner, lifting design limitations too.
Reactive Healing even at a flat 50% would not be an omnipresent meta perk or anything, and it would still not be something you would commonly see on solo survivors. But it would at least not be trash anymore, it would still be fairly situational, but situationally good.
But I know BHVR won't do this, they for some reason have no real issue with the huge pile of subpar and downright trashy perks in this game for both roles that all most likely sit in the <1% global usage realm.
-
@PaintedDeath said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3169428#Comment_3169428
I feel like 50% is to much, you gotta consider its relationship to the other perks around it. Resurrgence currently gives 50%, reactive giving a further 50 would be quite powerful.
Resurgence is actually a synergy I was thinking of as well. But here again, I think it would make the perk(s) usable at all; currently both are trash that nobody uses, most likely global usage percentages below 1% like so many other bad perks. I really don't think the perk would be too powerful, fairly far from. It would still be rare to see people use Reactive Healing, or the combo of it and Resurgence - but you'd at least see it sometimes, it would actually be something that could situationally be seriously impactful, particularly because the combo helps against tunnelling.
-
Hyperfocus on its own is actually garbage.
- You are dependent upon the RNG mechanic that are skill checks. At 8%/second base probability to trigger a skill check on a gen, you can often go a long time before even getting your first, and even then at +4% trigger probability is not like you can't spend another long period without getting the next. And any time spent repairing without getting skill checks obviously diminishes the impact the perk can possibly have.
- Whenever you aren't unlucky, a realistic average scenario is that you get around 8-10 skill checks on a gen while using Focus. If you do the math on that, that's 14.49-19.53 seconds shaved off of the repair time. But this is including the base bonus progression for great skill checks, which we have to subtract to get the actual bonus Hyper provided - that only leaves us with 7.29-10.53s. It's entirely comparable to Prove Thyself in terms of the time saving.
- This is assuming you are repairing a generator from 0 to 100%, on your own, uninterrupted without ever stopping.
- You obviously need to hit every great skill check, which gets to be difficult enough as the pointer speed increases that even veterans cannot do it consistently.
Alongside Stake Out, Focus gets to be better since its progression values are doubled, meaning in the 8-10 skill check scenario now it can make for an additional time saving of a total of 15-20 seconds, which on top of the base bonus for great skill checks and the bonus from Stake Out itself will mean we are shaving off around 30-40 seconds. And Stake Out of course can also help with scoring great checks without needing to actually land them.
Does that actually make Focus + Stake Out worth it? Well, it is certainly not bad, there's decidedly worse things to be spending perk slots on. That said, the aforementioned issues still exist, namely that this scenario only applies to lengthy, uninterrupted gen repairs and needing to land increasingly difficult greats consistently (with which Stake Out only helps if you actually happen to have tokens, and then only for a limited number of checks of course), that you can randomly get unlucky and just barely get any skill checks to begin with, and additionally it has to be kept in mind that any repair time shaved off of a gen also means the amount of possible skill checks that can be triggered decreases, so the combo sort of diminishes itself to an extent. All in all, I would not say this combo is good enough that it trumps other perks you could be using in those slots if you are trying to go with an optimal win-oriented build. But making gen repairs more engaging is a good argument to still run the combo, and again, it's certainly not a bad thing to be running, it will have its impact and will help in matches.
Now if you use this combo alongside a toolbox, it's actually pretty amazing, because toolboxes increase skill check trigger chances fivefold and thereby basically guarantee that you will get value out of the perks. The genrush potential of Focus, Stake Out, Built To Last, Streetwise + toolbox is downright ridiculous. Although again, even veterans are not consistently hitting these greats, so it's not like this is something anyone can just slap on, fairly far from. But I would say it is problematic enough that BHVR should seriously consider making Focus not apply when repairing with a toolbox.
-
@Friendly_Blendette said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3169390#Comment_3169390
If it was % of health total with its curret numbers you could create an infinite bodyblocking train with only 3 people .
Surv 1 takes the 1st hit and uses no colision to get to the front of the train
Surv 2 takes the 2nd hit and uses no colision to get to the front of the train and now surv 1 is at 50% healed
Surv 3 takes the 3rd hit and uses no colision to get to the front of the train surv 1 is now healed and surv 2 is at 50%
Surv 1 takes a 4th hit and uses no colision to get to the front of the train surv 2 is now healed and 3 is at 50%
And you can see where it goes from there. Granted it would need coordination in a SWF but still even if it is pretty much locked to just SWFs it would be a definite possibility since it doesnt even need the RNG, skill or timing needed from something like locker saves just basic assigning of role and 3 people rocking the same perk.
It would need pretty big numbers nerf to avoid it as anytihng equal to or greater than 34% still can create the train it just needs 1 more person
I would like to see it changed like that and maybe be 25-30%? I would say 33% but that would make them literally 99ed so they can tap a self care and still likely keep chaining althought probably a bit harder.
Not only would they be throwing the round doing this, but this is assuming the killer is a pure M1 killer without any abilities, and that they can't ever manage to get around the survivor trying to tank a hit.
50% flat progress would make the perk usable at all, outside of coordinating SWFs it's just too situational to be meta-viable even then. For SWFs, I would just finally want loadout restrictions such that they can't stack and abuse perks like this or a plethora of other perks, which would also free up designing space to make better perks to begin with without the worry about having them be stacked and abused in a coordinated way.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3168156#Comment_3168156
He didn't even follow his own rules on the AFK challenge.
-"How so?"
On the game map he ran to the survivors then AFK'd at a gen. On the Nurse game he didn't start afk and was chasing someone then went AFK mid chase while the survivor was cornered. He did not repeat those games and both of those games were not an "AFK" experience.
-"nor do I know whether Otz actually mostly plays at night"
Truetalent ends his show around noon my time. Otz sometimes plays till 5-6pm my time. There is no question that Otz plays later. The EU playerbase is 7-8 hours ahead. You sound like you understand the game. Watch one of true's videos when he has a TY tile like Freddy vs evening survivors. You will see the difference.
As for the Otz camping issue - I turn on his stream and he is playing LF. He downs someone in a terrible corner and immediately says : I don't want to make it obvious I am camping. Lol. To be fair he is doing a face camping thing today but he wasn't the last few times I watched him.
-"So I for one do want substantial killer buffs to go along with any substantial nerfs for camping and tunnelling"
Make it so survivor's cant tunnel gens and make it so the killer doesn't want to tunnel survivors out. The killer objective is too long and the survivor objective is too short. It's really that simple.
-"I doubt you face 3/4-SWF that often, let alone them then also being super good and coordinated and whatnot"
I understand that you are doubtful as there are a lot of people pushing a BS narrative. The last game I played last night was against a streamer in a 3 man SWF. I could hear her friends in discord talking to her. I was listening not watching to the stream to counterbalance the SWF. Are you telling me I was imagining the other two voices that were obviously in the same game?
And what about the games where I can see all four players on each other's friends list?
Do you think that two people on console wearing matching costumes/names are not friends? If they are in a game with 2 people on steam who are on each other's friends list that is a game with 4 people in a swf. It's not a 4 man SWF but it is still allows for good coordination.
You cannot deny my experiences. I am not one of those people who say every game is a SWF just because they play well. I scout every lobby. I usually don't play against SWF if they play with lots of items.
-"But I obviously agree that SWF is a notable balance issue. Actual 4-SWFs still make up a tiny portion of the overall"
The stats they posted were very misleading but the majority of players are in a SWF of some kind. Considering that was a time when it was easier to play in solo queue I think those stats have heavily shifted.
He did not repeat those games and both of those games were not an "AFK" experience.
Fair enough, obviously breaking his own rules if those things happened like that. But eh, it's just two rounds, and it's still not like he actually "played" for those 30s, doesn't really take anything away from the overall point he tried to make with that challenge.
Watch one of true's videos
I've seen my share of Tru3 content and while I won't say he isn't competent/decent, he's far from the best killers I know. And something I've learned from playing and watching (a lot of) DbD is that good killers often make it look easy if they catch survivors, even if those same survivors could run another killer around. There's a lot of micromechanics and micromanaging stuff that doesn't immediately or intuitively meet the eye that goes into skilled chase play, those things can even make competent survivors look stupid.
That said, obviously there are a plethora of telltale signs whether a player is good, and while I can't say from my (admittedly limited) time of watching Otz and Tru3 content that either of them faces better players more often, I also can't say I've actually set out to seriously compare it. Maybe I will, but I honestly just doubt it's the case, I just can't see why it would be, again, if anything I'd expect better players to be roaming the fog at night.
To be fair he is doing a face camping thing today but he wasn't the last few times I watched him.
I'm inclined to believe Otz uses his challenges to be able to play like that without losing his "nice streamer" status, lol. He definitely cares about winning, and this stuff gives him a pass to do anything "mean" he might not normally want to be associated with.
Anyway, this is obviously all beside the main point.
Make it so survivor's cant tunnel gens and make it so the killer doesn't want to tunnel survivors out. The killer objective is too long and the survivor objective is too short. It's really that simple.
Yeah, given equal skill and experience on all players in match of DbD, for most killer characters the idea of winning while going for alternated hooks such that they get their first kill 9 hooking events into the match is just not feasible. Some of the killers can do it, but overall the game is definitely not balanced for that idea. So with nerfs to camping/tunnelling, there should have to be compensatory adjustments. And preventing survivors from being able to "tunnel" and "camp" gens is not actually as absurd as it sounds - an early game collapse where all gens are blocked until the first chase begins as well as blocking the gen with the most progress whenever a survivor is hooked or unhooked until another gen is finished are just two ideas for something that would actually lead to survivors not being able to stick to gens from the get-go, nor to just stay on their gen until it is done. Or for a simpler implementation: "Corrupt and Deadlock basekit".
You cannot deny my experiences.
I won't say you are lying or whatever, but for a lot of people it really is that they remember their worst games the most, so even after a playing session of 10 games or whatever where they pretty comfortably succeeded against 8 random groups, the 2 coordinated SWFs can make them feel as if they had a really tough day in the fog. But if you scout out all your lobbies for SWFs I won't just deny that perhaps you actually are getting them that regularly. Either way, as I suggested before, if you do not enjoy having to play like that in order to win and can't seem to manage to win without it, just stop using those strats and you should eventually arrive at an MMR where you can on average do well without them. If you however want to win most of your matches and don't mind camping and tunnelling to do so, you can't really complain about getting tougher opponents either of course.
The stats they posted were very misleading but the majority of players are in a SWF of some kind. Considering that was a time when it was easier to play in solo queue I think those stats have heavily shifted.
I wouldn't really call them misleading, there is still a substantial difference between duos, trios and quads, so it's fair to make the distinction that 4-SWF specifically only makes for around 5% of the global player pool. While we have no concrete reason to assume that the group size distribution has to have changed significantly since then, I will say that MMR in all likeliness has made it more common to face SWFs at the cap, that's been my experience too anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if 4-SWFs make for around 10% of the high MMR player pool on average, and we're probably having at least a duo in like 70% of our killer lobbies there. But yeah, this is all anecdotal.
Like I said, I'm confident I am at the MMR cap on my "main" killers, and I usually refrain from camping and tunnelling and yet I still succeed more often than not. I definitely get my share of tougher opponents, and I have more people escape than I would if I were to camp and tunnel of course, but if I look back at a killer session in earnest, I would be lying if I said I don't also face a lot of subpar survivors, or that I'm struggling to compete.
-
@DBDVulture said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3167603#Comment_3167603
He didn't even follow his own rules on the AFK challenge. If you look at the series he did of that challenge he had the survivors throw at least 7 games. Compare when Truetalent did the same challenge and there was 1 throw. Needless to say when True did the challenge the level of competition was a lot more fierce. Otz often plays late into the night when the competition gets weak. Truetalent makes a note of this all the time when he streams. Most of Otz's show is pretty late at night and there are a number of people that take note about how he gets overall much easier games. I'm not saying one is better than the other it's just a reflection of a notable fact.
The point about Otz was that the last two times I watched him were two games of tunneling/camping each time. When he wants to win he will engage try hard mode. He will be the first to tell you that camping/slugging/tunneling accomplish that and are often necessary against good teams. You even agree on this point.
I think a more honest representation of DBD is when playing DBD it becomes more necessary to camp against a SWF team. The only problem with that is that Every game I played tonight with perhaps one exception was a 3 or 4 man swf. I don't want to play against that every game because I have to camp/slug/tunnel against it or I lose hard.
He didn't even follow his own rules on the AFK challenge.
How so? Besides, multiple people did the same challenge, everyone apart from Tru3 averaging 2 or more kills. https://twitter.com/otzdarvayt/status/1479461876669030400
Again, this is while perkless and giving survivors a crucial headstart. Note that I don't care to go into some useless argument about what specifically happened in all of those streamers' matches for this challenge and whatnot. I only brought this thing up to tangentially highlight how Otz, who you brought up as someone whose opinion you trust, is of the opinion that if you improve your killer play, you can win most matches pretty handedly. Take it from the man himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acHiwnCW7eI
Otz often plays late into the night when the competition gets weak. Truetalent makes a note of this all the time when he streams. Most of Otz's show is pretty late at night and there are a number of people that take note about how he gets overall much easier games. I'm not saying one is better than the other it's just a reflection of a notable fact.
Even if I were to accept it as a fact that competition on average gets worse at night (I don't, I have seen no evidence for this, nor do I know whether Otz actually mostly plays at night), the argument would just become "then play at those same times yourself lmao". Besides, why would we even expect players that play during the night to be worse? They are more likely to be the die-hard gamers that don't have work commitments or whatever, it is much more likely for casuals to play during the day.
And regardless, the argument that people apparently consistently get a completely different species of survivor players where suddenly the otherwise allegedly "IMPOSSIBLY SURVIVOR SIDED CAN'T EVER WIN" game becomes "yeah they 4k 99% of their games but that's totally normal at that time of day" has always been asinine. Not least because part of that "sentiment" is also that survivor is brainlessly easy to play and anyone can win if they just click a button or two... yet apparently thousands upon thousands of real human players did not get this memo since they don't stand a chance against these killers, time after time. Gotta be because they're a completely different type of humans from those that other people face! Those other people that are totally super good at the game but supposedly just can't win as killer. Which is not true for Tru3 either by the way, last time I checked he wins most of his matches too.
While I have followed some of the best players in this game across most major regions and can confidently say that on average there is little difference in the average competition they face (good killers 4k 90+% of their matches everywhere, including Korea where I am convinced the average level of play is at least slightly higher than elsewhere), I would if anything argue that Tru3 is more likely to face lesser competition than Otz. As far as I know, Tru3 is situated in the UK while Otz is in Spain. UK has its own servers, Spain gets routed to central EU servers in Germany most of the time. Russian, Eastern European and Middle-Eastern players also get routed to German servers, and believe me or not, players from those regions are some of the best in the world, and they don't regularly end up on UK servers because obviously they have a lower ping to Germany.
Again, all of this is just a tangential point not really relevant at all to the main argument, which is that provably (like, there's actual recorded proof, not sure what's there to even argue), good killer players can and do win most of their pub matches even at top MMR without camping and tunnelling, with every killer.
The point about Otz was that the last two times I watched him were two games of tunneling/camping each time. When he wants to win he will engage try hard mode. He will be the first to tell you that camping/slugging/tunneling accomplish that and are often necessary against good teams. You even agree on this point.
Yeah, we agree on this, and Otz definitely isn't some hyper-wholesome player that doesn't care about winning more than survivor fun or whatever, I have played against him multiple times myself (on both sides) and he absolutely does camp and tunnel and all that sometimes. I'm just pretty sure from the times I watched him that he's not a super "sweaty" hard camper or tunneller at all, that is not his usual playstyle, as opposed to lots of "tryhard" killers I face that camp and tunnel hard all the time every time from the second the round begins, and they have the thousands of -rep profile comments from frustrated survivor players to go with it, spanning years. Otz from what I've seen is more likely to use gimmicky builds and fun playstyles and not be super concerned about killing everyone all the time. And yet from what I know he still kills most survivors most of the time. Pretty sure I took kill rate stats from a few of his VODs for an argument on here sometime, and he averaged around 3 kills I think? And that was while using random perks in many of those matches if I remember correctly.
Either way, we agree that camping/tunnelling can at times even be downright necessary to win, and this is increasingly true the better and more coordinated the survivors are, where at the top end (high-skill 4-SWF on voice comms with good loadouts on a good map), I consider it a necessity even on Nurse and Blight if you want to consistently be able to compete and win. So I for one do want substantial killer buffs to go along with any substantial nerfs for camping and tunnelling. But yeah, that doesn't mean good players even at top MMR (the average match at which is still worlds removed from top end caliber) wouldn't still be mostly fine in most of their matches even without any compensatory buffs for such nerfs. I don't consider myself an elite killer player and yet I still win much more matches than I lose, despite regularly even going out of my way not to camp or tunnel. And given how often I win, I have to assume I'm at the MMR cap, at least on the killers I frequently play.
I think a more honest representation of DBD is when playing DBD it becomes more necessary to camp against a SWF team. The only problem with that is that Every game I played tonight with perhaps one exception was a 3 or 4 man swf. I don't want to play against that every game because I have to camp/slug/tunnel against it or I lose hard.
For one thing, I doubt you face 3/4-SWF that often, let alone them then also being super good and coordinated and whatnot. But if you actually are, and actually can't seen to manage to do anything against them without camp/slug/tunnel, may I suggest that you simply take the L and have your MMR decrease such that you are more likely to face groups that you can compete against without having to camp/slug/tunnel all that hard?
But I obviously agree that SWF is a notable balance issue. Actual 4-SWFs still make up a tiny portion of the overall player pool, last time we had stats on this solos and duos combined for like 80%, with solos alone being 50-60% of that, but I do think SWF is one of the biggest balance issues in the game, alongside certain maps and certain killers. I've wanted and advocated for SWF nerfs for years.
-
@TheLastHook said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3166302#Comment_3166302
The 12 hook win is a myth past ash ranks. As long as Survivors are not doing stupid rituals like "go to the Killers face and wave your hand 2 times.
? In my original comment that you replied to, there is documented evidence of someone getting 12-hook wins on almost all killers without camping and tunnelling at MMR cap. Nothing mythical about it.
@DBDVulture said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3166302#Comment_3166302
-"good killer players can and do win the vast majority of their matches even without camping and tunnelling"
I don't see that as true. Again the last time I watched Otz two games in a row he needed to tunnel to win.
And the time before that I watched Otz play the game he went against a crack team on Lerry's where he camped someone for all their health states in the basement.
Otz has 9000 hours of playtime and he regularly tells his audience that sometimes you need to camp/slug/tunnel to win. I feel like as a "professional paid" player he has a better informed opinion than you.
I feel like you are being obtuse. Sure, sometimes you need to camp/slug/tunnel to win, I never argued otherwise and even outright said that I think those things necessary to a degree to be able to consistently compete at the top level (so against an actually good, coordinated team of players). Doesn't mean that it's impossible to win without them, let alone in public matches. There it is possible to win most of the time without them. I haven't watched Otz in a while, but from what I remember he doesn't generally camp or tunnel all that much or hard, and still comfortably wins most of his matches, despite often using memey or gimmicky builds and whatnot.
Beyond that, it's not only weird to take a random example like that of two games you watched, but Otz is not really the streamer you want to be using if your point is "killer so difficult!" I'm afraid. You are aware that he started the challenge of being AFK as killer for the most crucial seconds of a match and still averaging more than 3 kills? His opinion definitely is more so leaning toward it being totally possible to do well most of the time as killer in pubs if you are good enough at the game.
-
@SuzuKR said:
For things like healing, repairing, blessing/snuffing, etc, they have a total number of charges that you must fill to complete the action. For example, a generator takes 90 charges. The default repair rate is 1 charge/second. The below is the formula for calculating the total time it would take to do a given action from 0 to full:
[Charges needed] / {([base charges per second] + increase1 + increase2 + ... + increaseN) x slowdown1 x slowdown2 x ... x slowdownN}
Speed increases are additive, speed reductions are multiplicative. They always go off base speed.
For things without a progress bar (eg, pallet break, attack cooldown, etc), it's just a flat multiplier to the number itself. For example, a 40% attack cooldown reduction on a 2.7s default is 2.7 x (1-0.4) = 1.62 seconds.
Are we actually sure about this? Because it absolutely used to be that for those interactions, the action speed modifier was not a flat action duration percentage but an action execution percentage as well.
I confirmed this back in the day with internal game messaging. Here's one example for Resilience and Spine Chill on pallet vaults:
Interaction time: 1.100000 Requested to Play: PlankVaultFast Left AnimTag_Female - vanilla pallet vault
Interaction time: 0.956522 Requested to Play: PlankVaultFast Left AnimTag_Injured AnimTag_Female - pallet vault under the effect of both Resilience and Chill
1.1 / 1.15 gives us the in-game value. 1.1 * (1 - 0.15) would be 0.935 instead.
The wiki on Brutal Strength (https://deadbydaylight.fandom.com/wiki/Brutal_Strength) also uses your calculation of 2.34 * 0.8 rather than 2.34 / 1.2, so I'm confused.
-
@TheLastHook said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3166222#Comment_3166222
Maybe you are not good enough as Survivor if you have to find a team ON DISCORD.
Maybe you are not good enough if you are unable to rescue safely and need so many pallets and crutches, maybe you are not good enough at hiding.
I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to say, but again, good killer players can and do win the vast majority of their matches even without camping and tunnelling. I'm not saying this is true in tournaments, but it is provably true in the actual game mode that 99+% of players actually play. Even at the upper end of MMR, it is possible to win most of your killer matches even without camping and tunnelling. Even without playing Nurse! If you do camp and tunnel, you can even win most of your matches perkless (as you'll see in the vods here https://www.twitch.tv/kaiizoru/videos for just one random example).
The solution to a real extent really is "gitting gut". But again, that doesn't mean I am ignorant of the fact that in high-level matchups against competitive teams on voice comms, camping and tunnelling to a degree are necessary to be able to consistently compete, and that therefore nerfs to those strategies have to go alongside with buffs to other aspects of killer gameplay. I also am for SWF nerfs. And various lower-tier killers deserve buffs anyway.
-
Hate to break it to anyone, but if you find it "impossible" to win without camping and tunnelling, you are just not good enough. Even at the oh so "competitive" MMR cap. https://twitter.com/KnightLight1337/status/1563656841976057863
To note: I do think actual nerfs to camping and tunnelling have to go along with buffs to other aspects of killer gameplay.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3163489#Comment_3163489
Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it. I had one other game, against a doctor, where it would pop up with two of the lines yellow whenever he was near me. He was farming so it was easy for me to test it out, going near him and then away. It was kind of like a radar lol I wonder if it was popping up on their end when I was close by too
Interesting, ty for the info. I wonder what causes it, it's gotta either be specific to certain connections or some bug with the indicators, because if getting a high ping when close to the killer would be a global issue we'd all long have noticed by getting laghits on low latency. I'll try and look into this in a controlled environment.
Another bit of interesting info:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqQN-n-yyucThis video shows the killer experiencing packet loss (diamond icon on their screen), yet the survivors get the red bar knife icon, making them think the killer has a high ping. The killer is from Sweden however, and they're all from Europe, so it's not latency. And packet loss as opposed to latency actually doesn't benefit the killer, on the contrary it can lead to their hits just not happening because the server never received that info. So the issue here is that the survivors are being led to think they have to play around a high ping killer, pre-vaulting and pre-dropping, without the killer actually having a high ping.
-
@Nazzzak said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3163471#Comment_3163471
Thank you for this, I've been trying to find specific info. I had a game where I was fine until around the killer, then it was laggy and jumpy and I couldn't fast vault. The image below is what appeared on my screen. So this means my ping was at fault? It would only pop up around the killer. Never had issues with the survivors or skill checks etc
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/L51EX7C5JNIT/20220901-121744.jpg
Yes, that means it was your connection going above 200ms. It's weird that it would only pop up around the killer, but here's one speculation: when around the killer, the amount of stuff being communicated to you by the server increases, meaning the bandwidth usage does too, which can lead to latency if your bandwidth is limited. Although gameplay packets are always very small, unless you are playing on some severe bandwidth-throttled connection I can't see this being the issue. That said, another user here also reported mostly only seeing the ping warning pop up when around survivor players, so something's seemingly going on with that...
-
Yellow bars will always be if your own ping is over 100ms (shown above the survivor list). Red bars shown above the survivor list mean your own connection is over 200ms, red bars above the survivor list with an icon (knife) mean the killer is over 200ms, and red next to a specific survivor in the list mean that survivor is over 200ms.
This new "system" is really rather useless, I have no idea why BHVR even bothered to work on this stuff if they weren't gonna implement any real improvements to the situation, and arguably make it even worse.
We could always see all survivor pings in the overlay, as killer and survivor, so the "warnings" for those are nothing we couldn't just check ourselves before. And the warning for the 200ms killer ping just is of no use - if a killer has a connection that awful, you will notice instantly anyway, and you also won't really be able to play around it effectively at all. The very least they could have done is also warn survivors of a killer with 100+ms ping, i. e. yellow bars with the knife icon. What they actually should have done however is show the killer's ping realtime in the overlay just like all the survivor pings. Why the hell is that not there? Makes no sense. More than that, the severe connection warning should already be shown in the lobby, you shouldn't force anyone to play against people with that bad a connection. Alternatively, disable disconnect penalties for survivors in a match with a killer experiencing severe connection issues. Really, they should already show all player pings in the lobby... (And also, of course: General hit validation should already start applying at 100+ms, not only at 200+. Or regardless of ping altogether. Or better yet, move hit reg to the server entirely.)
Players now cannot see their own connection to the server in the lobby anymore. While it is fortunately vanishingly rare for me in my region not to end up on a server below 50ms, now we will never know until we load into a match. Guess we have to spam the lobby chat again to get a feeling for ping, lol. And as killer you still won't know your ping even once in the trial, since it's not shown in the overlay. Why did they take this info away? Coupled with the incognito mode, now you'll be led into even more matches that just shouldn't be happening (severe connection issues, severe mismatches of players).
The packet loss warnings are something actually new, although luckily packet loss is vanishingly rare for most people these days, so it's whatever really.
-
@dugman said:
As an anecdote Yerv posted a video last night highlighting how he’s having decent results against face camping with Reassurance in solo survivor queue since it gives extra time for either the gens to get done or the killer to get enough out of position to mount a rescue. 30 seconds is not a small amount of time in this game, it’s the equivalent of an extra chase.
It’s not a silver bullet and killers inclined to facecamp will do so regardless of whether or not it’s actually strategically a good idea. But Reassurance does punish it.
It's funny because in none of those instances Reassurance did much of anything.
In game 1 he didn't get to use it until the endgame, where it had no impact whatsoever. One time he just unhooked instantly after activating it, the other time he activated it while being the last person in the trial along with the hooked survivor, Wesker just made the mistake of trying to hit him when he could have simply waited. Reassurance will usually not be useful in endgames, the only real case where it can be at that point is if your fellow survivors need more time to heal or get to the hook. Although finding NOED or waiting out abilities like Blood Fury or Corrupt Purge (or No Way Out) can also be relevant, but then again, getting to within 6m of the hook while that's happening should usually be riskier than the alternative.
Game 2 he could have simply unhooked instead of using Reassurance in the first instance, the killer wasn't there. Unhooking is the better play almost every time the killer isn't hard-camping, as that way you have 4 survivors back in the trial rather than being at 3. The next time he used it it was again just for fun, he unhooked immediately after.
Game 3 where he activated it from above the hooked survivor was arguably not necessary either. The killer was not camping, he could have taken a shorter path downstairs and still gotten the unhook before struggle. The next time he uses it he does so instead of trading for the unhook, such that... his teammate can trade 20 seconds later, with both not having been able to do anything else in that time and having spent an extra health state on that entire ordeal.
Reassurance is not a bad perk, and it can be useful against camping situationally (and the more coordinated the team is, the more reliable and impactful it will be, i. e. a 4-SWF on voice comms stacking 4 Reassurances will definitely be able to combat camping very effectively with it), but it's just nowhere near the camping destroyer it was prior to the nerf, and that's especially true for solo queue where the lack of coordination (on builds and plays) will make its already situational impact even less reliable/less effective, since you've got other survivors that still run/sit/die around the hook not knowing you're gonna use Reassurance, and you yourself are obviously spending time using it to begin with, which quite often can even be more than 30 seconds. Prior to the nerf, any survivor could single-handedly make it basically impossible for a killer to win if they simply kept camping. And many people (myself included) don't see what's bad about a perk that very effectively combats that.
IMO they should make it so that it can be activated up to twice per player per hook stage, although only up to a maximum of three times total (so if survivor A uses Reassurance twice on a stage, survivor B can only use theirs one time on that stage anymore). That way it can still be more reliably impactful in the hand of only one survivor and in the context of an uncoordinated group, while not being a silver bullet either. I mean, ideally we'd get a silver bullet, although not in the form of a perk, and not without compensatory killer buffs to make up for the global nerf to camping.