xFAKExAxoN

@MeatBycicle said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1422467#Comment_1422467
It's not divided at all. There's only one queue.

Not what I meant. But if you didn't understand, you will eventually. There's a reason why matchmaking has gotten as long as it has. The playerbase has been dropping too fast for a while now, people are getting bored of the game, some are getting annoyed at the changes the devs make, and some are getting annoyed at how other people play and the toxicity in this game's playerbase, which are all the main reasons the playerbase is so divided. why do you think there are so many discussions of either killers or survivors attacking the opposite side? When I said the playerbase is already divided I meant it in the role they play as in killer mains, survivor mains, swf groups, anti swf groups, and all those in between. Adding a seperate mode in which you won't face swf groups just makes all those against swf groups play in that mode only, with the ocasional player that could care less, all it would do is extend the queue in all modes even further than they already are, which wont just make the playerbase drop even further (which will also make the queues even longer in effect) but it will also defeat the purpose of the devs adding swf in the first place. They already added swf, it's just something we all have to accept especially when being able to play multiplayer games with friends has always been one of the reasons people consider buying multiplayer only games.

in Please add a Matching option to not have to play against SWF Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 12, 2020

@CrusaderNella said:
It is the most infuriating thing to play against these t-bagging SWF groups. Can there please be an option where your Match making filters out all friend groups and matches you against a squad of solo survivors?
I don't really care if my match search time spikes to an hour if it at least mean i get to enjoy playing killer again.
Please devs.

I don't think this game needs any longer matchmaking ques and also I don't think the devs will ever divide the playerbase even more than it already is

in Please add a Matching option to not have to play against SWF Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 8, 2020

@Frareid88 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1421665#Comment_1421665
Why would you want children playing a game like this???

You ask that as if there weren't already children playing this game, adding fnaf wouldn't make that much of a difference especially since it's fanbase isn't exclusively kids, they probably were when it was starting out but not anymore, especially with how dark the games and books have gotten over the past couple of years

in Why I don't think Springtrap would be a good addition in dbd Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 7, 2020

@grayon444 said:
I'm sure they won't add him.
The fanbase would be torn apart and it would be pretty bad for the game.
Plus fnaf is cringe.Period.

I don't know if you've noticed but the fanbase of this game is already torn apart right down the middle, between the balance of killers and balance of survivor debates and the debates of swf the fanbase is already like this, adding a killer that not everybody agrees with wont change anything, just look at demo, and it wouldnt surprise me if some people were against some of the other licensed killers. If you ask me whenever something like this happens it's just better to just either debate it without taking shots at the others or just sit back and grab some popcorn and watch as they fight about it

in Why I don't think Springtrap would be a good addition in dbd Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 7, 2020

@SirCracken said:
I want to start off by saying that I'm not vilifying anyone who wants a fnaf chapter. Everyone's free to have their own opinions. But I am highly not in favour for adding in Springtrap. Here are my reasons.
He cannot be taken seriously
Say what you will about the subjectivity of horror, but the reputation of fnaf is a far cry from the likes of Halloween and Friday the 13th. What I mean by this is that someone who has never seen any movie from either franchise will instantly know that they're both horror related.
Now I will fully admit to not playing all of the fnaf games, nor reading any of the books. Maybe they've greatly improved since I dropped them and what I'm about to say is no longer correct. But fnaf is mostly known for its themepark-like jump scares and teeth-shatteringly obnoxious fanbase. The latter is not even a fault of the game's, (mostly because of content creators like Matpat ~~and his hilariously baseless theories~~), and the rabidity of the fans. But even if that information is outdated, the fact remains that fnaf's general reputation is only loosely based around horror. Which would heavily contrast dbd's tone as a horror game.
2.The game does not need more licensed characters right now
This point is self explanatory. There are currently 20 killers in the game right now. 7 of them are licensed. Almost half of the entire roster! The majority of which have had lacklustre receptions and do not add much to the game besides their name. Pig and Cannibal are the main culprits. And the most recent one inclusion, Pyramid Head, has been nothing if not divisive. I believe that exploring killer ideas that haven't been thought of yet, *cough* *cough* Egypt *cough* *cough*, would have a better chance of producing interesting killers than ones that already exist.
3. Literally everything is broken right now
Survivors randomly get iron will, the End Game Collapse can happen at the start of a game, the killer can be phased through when they vault. My point is, the devs really need to stop content updates for a bit so they can add some much needed bug fixes. If you take anything away from this post, take away this:
Dbd has been long overdue for it's variation of Rainbow Six Siege's Operation Health. But ideally a version that actually fixes the game a bit.
In summary:
Fnaf is not seen as scary by most people due to its reputation, and thus Springtrap wouldn't be taken seriously
The game has enough licensed characters for the time being, original killers are more interesting
The devs need to focus on fixing the mountain of bugs in the game and hold off on content updates for a bit, the game can literally end the moment it begins thanks to the End Game, the last thing dbd needs right now is content that brings more bugs

I can understand this but as for the first reason, I mean yeah, he is nowhere comparable to the top slashers in history, but thats mostly because they are older and also they were from movies which more people see than there are people playing videogames, also when you really take a look back at those movies they mostly do jumpscares also for the main scare factor, otherwise they aren't really that scary most of the time they just do really predictable stuff or just stand there watching their next victims, I'm not trying to diss on them though I'm just pointing out that even though they can't be compared on terms of horror, they do have similarities. Fear comes from different places and in some cases they aren't very common fears like the fear of animatronics/manequins, kind of like the fear of clowns (cough cough), so even though most people wouldn't take him seriously, there will be a lot that do, also those that are fans will also.

As for your other two points, if he were to be added at some point, and I'm not saying he will be, but if he were then it wouldn't have to be anytime soon, I don't think anyone want's to see him be for sure the next killer, people just want him to be added at some point, so they can add however many killers they want or fix however many problems (which everyone knows are a lot) the game has, but those that want him in the game just want them to consider it.

If I'm being honest I wouldn't mind seeing him in the game, but if they do it they should do it right.

in Why I don't think Springtrap would be a good addition in dbd Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 7, 2020

@Sonzaishinai said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1415007#Comment_1415007
How many movies do you think the Haloween franchise sold in 2016 before he got released on dbd? Spoiler not a lot
Forgotten might have been a poor choice of words but he definitivly wasen't on anyone's mind at the time. Hell dbd could very well be the sole reason movies about him are being made again

I doubt a rando "horror" game is the reason they are getting traction again, they can throw out a movie at any time and nobody would stand in the way of that because of how famous of a killer he is, it would be insane to believe that they need the atention of a bunch of gamers of this one game out of thousands, just to release a movie

in Help us getting Springtrap ♥️ Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 7, 2020

@bm33 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1414550#Comment_1414550
Myers being forgotten has to be one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever heard. 😂

Yeah, we are talking about probably one of the top 3 most iconic killers in the business, he wont be forgoten, just like jason, ghostface, leatherface, freddy... the list is long but the top spots are always the same

in Help us getting Springtrap ♥️ Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 7, 2020

@Szauek said:
http://chng.it/2YxYSkMCJB
This is a petition for Springtrap as a new killer, please if u can sign the petition and show devs that we really want him in game ♥️

I'm ok with springtrap but michael afton being a survivor is really redundant since he is springtrap, and the bullies would be unnecesary skins since legion already has too many skins/reskins as it is and also because they just would be pointless simce they really are not that important other than being the reason the kid got bit

in Help us getting Springtrap ♥️ Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 5, 2020

@Sonzaishinai said:
I mean you can get as much signatures as you want but that doesn't change that he's licenced
On top of that licenced to a franchise that is still throwing out games/books/movies like nobodies bussiness. Not a horror icon that stopped making revenue ages ago
This licence would be a fortune. And seeing how this community already was crying about one 15 dollar skin to make up for it I wouldn't get my hopes up.
Would like it though but still I'm not seeing it happen. Fnaf doesn't really need the publicity so there would be no reason for Scott to not milk any potential licence transaction for as much as possible

Just because he's licensed doesn't mean he's expensive, I mean yeah the franchise keeps making games and books but they aren't so popular as to give his license more value than any of the past licensed killers, I mean we are talking about horror icons... well except for demo..., also the movie is mostly rumor, yes it was confirmed at some point that there was a movie in the works but since then there hasn't been much talk about it in fact it was rumored a few times that it was cancelled because of the very fact that there hasn't been any information on it. The games are all indie games, except for help wanted since that was a massive project in comparison to the rest, the books are just strories to keep people interested in the franchise and it's creepy lore. Honestly it's not something that would be out of reach for bhvr if they got 2 of what are easily the top 3 horror icons, and they definitely didn't need the publicity.

I don't think it's fair either to compare a possible 10-15 dollar dlc that would bring in something diferent to the game gameplaywise to a 15 dollar skin that brings nothing but a cosmetic change, I mean we are talking about 15 dollars... it's obvious that most people wouldn't pay that for something as simple as a skin when they could use the same amount for a dlc killer, this isnt like smite where people literally waste hundreds of dollars for a tier 5 skin just because they got many other goodies just to have access to one skin. I'm all for springstrap joining the dbd lineup (as long as he's actually worth it) but I don't think he'd be worth nearly as much as the rest of the licensed killers... except for demo I guess.

in Help us getting Springtrap ♥️ Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 5, 2020

@Flyguy115 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1395707#Comment_1395707
yeah so what? the game is rated m for mature, dont know too many mature 9 year olds.

I mean so is cod and those are always full of 9 year olds

in Help us getting Springtrap ♥️ Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 5, 2020

@Zaitsev said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/166449/help-us-getting-springtrap-%EF%B8%8F
While I still firmly believe that FNAF is simply not scary enough to be in DBD, I do think that if a FNAF chapter happens, Springtrap is the best bet.
How would his power work? How would he attack? Hes never seen attacking anything in the games. Would his M1 be bitchslapping a survivor with his hand?

Honestly I think fnaf can be scary at times but it's mostly because of the tension and unexpected jumpscares, the first game was extremely good at building tension while the second got your heart rate up because you had to pay atention to so many animatronics at a time that it made it easy to get hit with an unexpected jumpscare from foxy which was the biggest threat in both of those games, both games excell at making you pay so much atention to them that if they got you they would at the very least get your heart rate up after a jumpscare

On that note though I dont think how scary a killer is, is much of a factor here since all licensed killers (except for demo I guess) are only scary because they produce a lot of tension in their respective spaces, demo is a special case because its not just about tension, its also about how he himself looks and also a fear of the unknown plays a big roll with him in his case, all the others are just normal guys with either a mask or scars and a weapon, and if you ask me a psycopath spirit trapped in a 7 ft. worn down killer robot bunny with human flesh and guts spilling out is way more scary than any of the others even if he doesnt hold a weapon

As for his ability though I don't know what they could do for him but I'm guessing that it wouldn't be impossible to find something good for him that is still true to the fnaf franchise, as for his weapon and mori though, I think it'd be fine if he just slapped people to the ground since he is a robot after all, or they could make it so that he could cut into survivors with a sharp, jagged piece of metal in his arm (like say if it were broken), the mori though they would have to go for an animation in which he either bites into the survivor or he crushes them under his weight as he does his jumpscare scream.

Edit: his power could possibly have something to do with the fnaf ghosts that jumpscare you in his game, like a trap that he could place that would jumpscare the survivor and it would make the survivor scream like when they get shocked by doctor, and it probably lets him see their aura for a very breif period of time, I dont know I'm just throwing out ideas

in Help us getting Springtrap ♥️ Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 5, 2020

The nerf isn't really all that bad, it's mostly to deal with people that ONLY use the chainsaw to down survivors instead of whacking them with the hammer when up close or close enough to not justify using the chainsaw, honestly if you ask me, I'd be fine with or without the nerf it doesn't really affect him so much that you would have to change the way to normally play him, all it does is make the person using him think if it's really the right call to hold it for so long

in Is the new update a prank? Comment by xFAKExAxoN July 5, 2020

@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1371663#Comment_1371663
The devs have said that a hostage situation is one where one or more players are behaving in such a way that the game will not end unless the other player(s) disconnect. Slugging, for example, has a fixed time limit of 4 minutes. Bodyblocking the two remaining survivors in a corner before the EGC starts, on the other hand, can go on forever.
That's the definition the devs use. You can disagree with their usage of the term, but this is what they mean when they say "holding the game hostage".

I know I'm saying that that isn't the only way though because yeah slugging has a time limit but it's still 4 minutes that the killer has the freedom to hunt the other one without the posibility for escape, also the goal the survivors have at that point is them both escaping which is impossible if the killer is keeping heavy preasure so the last survivor standing has to keep trying to revive the downed survivor or the downed survivor has to dc to give the other the chance at escape

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 21, 2020

@Nurgling7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1371473#Comment_1371473
Buddy, you opened up this discussion with a copy paste of a google search with zero context to DBD. You really think anyone will take you seriously after that?
I only mentioned that one instance of hostage taking because there is no other instance. All of those other situations simply are not an instance of anyone being taken hostages(as defined by the devs) no matter how much people want to try to make that connection.
This really has been amusing, but I think I've had enough. You have been educated, but whether or not you learn anything is up to you. Horses and water, you know?

Honestly I don't know why I even bother with people like you, no matter what anyone might say, even if a dev themself would tell you you're wrong you wouldn't admit it. Neither one of us opened the discusion because you started this when you said you found it amusing how people confuse what is actually hostage taking in response to someone else and I responded to you by pointing out that they aren't actually wrong based on the term's definition even if it isn't exactly how the devs would define it on a reason to report it, but there actually is more than one way to take hostage in dbd and more than one way to do it and deem a report, it's not people trying to make that conection when the conection is fairly obvious, and just because the devs gave 1 example of a way to take the game hostage it doesn't mean that it's the only way of taking anything hostage in the game.

I gotta agree though it has been amusing, but no for the same reasons, it's been amusing simply because you are the perfect example of the typical killer main that's so stubborn to realize that a lot of your fellow killer mains maybe even yourself like to take advantage of how poorly designed this game is and then try to defend themselves for doing so while undermining the survivors opinions on how horribly unfair this game can be for both sides. Now I really don't care if you respond again or not because to be honest this discussion is getting nowhere. Btw for anyones that is wondering I am neither a survivor or a killer main because I like playing both sides and I can understand the concerns of both sides but I cant agree with most of the stuff people cry about on this forum on a daily basis including how camping is always justified just because the devs can't do anything about it

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 21, 2020

@BabyCameron10 said:
If they were to add a Supernatural Chapter, who would the killer be? I have seen a few episodes for fun but never enough to see the antagonist. I know there are two protagonist Sam and Dean which both look really badass, do you guys think they will fit into the DBD realm?

I would probably say the leviathan since angels aren't the right fit and demons would probably be too OP, and most of the other stuff are actually either not very important to the story or might be harder to put into the game without compromising too much on their balance. On the other hand though they could probably get away with adding them the same way they added ash since the killer would be harder to pull off and they could probably give some sort of skin to some killers so that they resemble something from the show like give the demogorgon a leviathan skin or wraith a skin that looks like a ghost from the show or something else on that line

in A question for Supernatural Fans Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 20, 2020

@Nurgling7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1371259#Comment_1371259
I KNOW that taking the game hostage in DBD is determined BY THE DEVS to be when the game can not end naturally without someone DCing. Usually by getting bodyblocked and then going AFK.
I am not making anything up or redefining anything. That would be the cute Survivors I mentioned originally trying to equate holding the game hostage to tunneling, camping, or slugging because they dont like them. In each of those cases your will bleed out or die on the hook. No hostage taking.
Really cute attempt at taking a shot at my upvotes, but no. You cant react to your own posts. That is just other people agreeing with me at pointing out your level of ignorance.
Worry not, young grasshopper. Your schooling is complete. Go forth with the knowledge you have been enlightened with.

But see all you did was mention 1 of multiple ways to take something hostage in the game, in case you haven't noticed in none of my comments I related it to tunneling or slugging specifically, when I mentioned slugging that was a very good example of the game ending in an unatural way there is nothing natural of blocking all means of exit by exploiting their conditions to open in the first place, also when I mentioned taking hostage I never said specifically the term taking THE GAME hostage unless I talked about something that is reportable like the aformentioned slugging second to last survivor, others might be redifigning the term but in this case nobody did because in the case of camping, the killer is literally protecting the hooked survivors from their would be rescuers which is the exact same as a hostage situation (like in tv for example) where they are doing that to get some sort of advantage or to get something out of it.

I'll admit I didn't know about the upvote thing because I myself have never tried it, but good to know you have though since that further solidifies my acusation especially when all of your comments seem to always get one really fast especially with the fact that upvoting something is bassically pointless and that this discussion isn't exactly new anymore and also that some of your comments are further out on the pages of this discussion. But then again what would I know since according to you I'm a kid, but then again you might be one since you're saying really lame stuff like "worry not young grasshopper, your schooling is complete. Go forth with the knowledge you have been enlightened with." and putting little smiley faces at the end of what you wright, and immidiately calling someone else kid when you feel the need to be someone older when nobody had taken a shot at you... I mean it's either that or you're just childish wich is worse, either way how about you go take a nap since you clearly seem cranky

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 20, 2020

@mentalpopcorn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1365443#Comment_1365443
Between the infinite looping and sfw with voice though, survivors have much more advantages. When people are calling for changes on survivors it's for genuinely broken things. Other than the called for nurse changes and some perk changes on killer, there isn't a whole lot that's broken. Camping isn't a feature of the game, it's a playstyle. Are you going to just tell players to not play a certain way or get banned? That would be nothing less than idiotic. I'm all for voicing concerns on the game, but if that concern is something like camping, a strategy that by all accounts doesn't work unless the survivors let it work then I don't think it has any business being brought up. If the person brought it up and added some genuine advice that would help fix the problem, that's different. But as far as I can tell there's no way to fix something like this. Why? Because it's not broken. It's a strategy that causes the killers to lose more often than not.

Sure I agree with what you're saying just like I agree that it's not an easy fix based on so many factors, but it's like I said to another guy on this very discussion, I actually can condone camping, slugging or tunneling on very specific circumstances but other than that I can't agree with the fact that they later say that they had no choice, they did and they chose to do that when they didn't have to yet they still had the rest of the game to try and get kills but they chose to, early on, camp someone to death which is completely uncalled for and also dettering to their odds of getting more kills, it's not a smart play to camp early on which is what most campers do and it's also really scummy to do especially with how bad matchmaking has gotten over the past year, I mean can you imagine being in a que for 30 minites just to not play at all, like imagine it the other way around how would it feel if the killer couldn't do absolutely nothing during the game because the survivors just decided to dc for example, the killer spent probably 20-30 minutes looking for a game and they didn't just get nothing out of it, they also had no chance to even play.

Sorry btw for how long winded this comment might seem but I felt like it had to be said

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 20, 2020

@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1365515#Comment_1365515
Indeed, survivors cannot force the killer to play in a certain way. Like I said, that's par for the course when you choose to play survivor. The killer is the one who can force you to do something differently.

But see that' where I was trying to get, you said it yourself the survivors can't force the killer to play a certain way, yet that's the excuse that most of the sweaty campers use "the survivors forced me to camp when they got close to the hook to try and rescue" or "the survivors forced me to camp when they genrushed me for 3 gens" neither are true because they chose to camp because they wanted an easy kill (which I can only condone myself only when the gates are powered and you have no kills) and what bothers me is when they act like they didn't have a choice and when others defend them even though they did have a choice just like they can decide not to tunnel or slug, yet they still do and they still come to the forums preaching to the survivors that they had no choice. Like I said I can condone those 3 things only when the survivors are about to escape and you still have no kills but otherwise I can't agree with doing any of those things. The only other time I would condone doing one of those is when you find a recently unhooked player while he was being healed and you down him but still chase the one that was healing, you'de be spugging the first guy but at least you didn't tunnel him which is way worse

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 20, 2020

@Nurgling7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1365480#Comment_1365480
So much written and yet nothing said. Still very far off from what holding the game hostage means in DBD.
:)

Tell me then mr. Know it all, what exactly do you think taking hostage is in dbd? since you clearly seem to know better than every one else. Explain to me why the term is wrong, why it wouldn't fit or why the very people that made up the term seem to have got it wrong, why the devs and the comunity seem to have given it another meaning (according to you). Because you keep talking as if you know something the rest of us don't. You can't just give a new meaning to a term like that depending on where it's being used, it doesn't work that way. Also just because you say something wasn't said it doesn't mean that it actually wasn't, just like how you (most likely) upvoting your own comments doesn't actually mean people agree with you, but then again it probably makes sense that you would say that since your first response to my comment was a hostile assumption that I was a kid, now who's acting childish?

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 20, 2020

@GoshJosh said:
After over three years and 2.3k+ hours, I have never felt more 'meh' about loading up and playing DbD. The amount of bugs that are introduced or never fixed, the player voices that go unheard or unaddressed about severe balance or gameplay issues, the list goes on...
I know it's a different set of developers, but the below screenshot just about sums it up for me. Rather than doing something about the boring and hostage-esque face-camping of the game (which exists on all platforms), the mobile devs take the time to make this loading screen 'tip' - which gives credence to the gameplay style and basically says to let your teammate die. Don't be altruistic, don't give that player another chance inthe trial... let the killer set up a tent and get a free kill. Such a boring situation with little or no counterplay, when Borrowed Time doesn't trigger on half your killers now or Bubba/ranged/small heartbeat killers.
Please make your game a more enjoyable and fair experience for all players.
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/15JIB0M777NO/dbd-mobile-camping-prompt.jpg

There is nothing wrong with them giving you a tip on how to deal with a situation, especially when most times there is some way around it. And this doeant make them out of touch with their comunity if anything they would be more because of it because they know about the situation and are trying to help you through it also the term facecamping is another factor that solidifies this, since that is a term that the comunity invented

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 19, 2020

@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1365318#Comment_1365318
The killer is making that choice by camping. That's literally its main drawback, that the killer might be forced to let every other survivor go because they're focused on one kill. The problem is that other survivors feel entitled to the unhook, so instead of using the two minutes of free reign on the map wisely, they instead decide to crouch around the hook and waste that time.

I completely agree with you on this but what I meant was that there is nothing on play that forces the killer to make the choice they just decide based on their style of play, if the killer likes easy kills they camp if the don't or don't care enough to want easy kills they don't. What I meant with my previous comment is that if there was something that forced them to choose between them like say survivors being next to hook then they should at least be forced to think about their aproach to it not just camp for no reason. If they camp then I want it to be for a tactical reason rather than just camp to satisfy their style

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 19, 2020

@Nurgling7 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1365201#Comment_1365201
Aw, now go find out what it means in DBD, kid.
It has specific circumstances.

First of all I'm not a kid, but then again you wouldn't believe me anyway so why bother with someone that starts off a comeback with a comment like that

Second of all taking hostage isn't a maleable term there are two cases in dbd where the term fits camping and slugging the second to last survivor just so the killer can get an unchallenged 4k, which is taking the game hostage which is also punishable because in both cases you are depriving the survivors of any chance. I can simpathize with camping, tunneling and slugging on very specific circumstances but the reality of the situation is that in most cases the killer just uses those tactics to get easy kills, which again I can simpathize with on very specific circumstances, like camping/slugging a survivor if you haven't killed anyone and the gates were powered. I'm not against any of those tactics I'm against people abusing those tactics just to get easy kills

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 19, 2020

@mentalpopcorn said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1364376#Comment_1364376
A killer can abuse certain types of camping, sure. But the fact is there are perks and strats to be abused on both sides. I personally think survivors have no right to talk about any dirty killer tactics as long as infinite looping exists, because that should just be blatantly impossible as a survivor.

Devs have been fixing infinite loops and the truth is that loops are still not perfect because of the sudden boosts in speed killers get when chasing survivors for extended times, and those two things are being acomplished because killers have been voicing their problems in the game so saying a survivor cant do the same is just selfish and biased

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 19, 2020

@NekoGamerX said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1363888#Comment_1363888
if killer see a survivor near by why should he not stay that how it got Abused 1 or 2 survivor would stay near hooked person.

Then that 1 or 2 survivors would just be waisting as much time as the killer making it harder on themselves because the killer would already know where they are and once he doesn't have to camp anymore, it wouldn't take him as long to get another survivor on hook

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 19, 2020

@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1363863#Comment_1363863
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1363888#Comment_1363888
So if a killer is chasing a survivor near a hook? The survivor is just invincible are they?
Tried, tested, abused by swf. Try again.

Killers are faster than survivors for a reason, and if they aren't then they have the means to stop them, I mean no survivor can just run in circles around the hook and not be downed, also it doesn't make the one that is on hook invincible because it's not stopping the progression its just adding more time to the progress which wouldn't be much either way, it takes about a minute and a half (if i'm not mistaken for the hook to progress completely through all phases so adding 90% would just add about a minute more, and that is if the killer stays within the radious of the hook there would still be a lot of ways around it though, like watching it from further away or patrolling around it or checking on it every once in a while

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 18, 2020

@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1363888#Comment_1363888
Nope. Look up what happened during the first PTB for how it was abused.
Bottom line is, when you play survivor, you sign up to be the victim and have to overcome a powerful opponent (the killer). The killer should be able to stop you from doing certain things, or else the role becomes pointless.
What you're saying here is that if you want to unhook you should always be successful, no matter what the killer does. This is not "fun", it's just giving the survivors the ability to ignore the killer's presence. The killer, meanwhile, gets shafted, because his presence is irrelevant. The survivors want to do something so they do it, end of story. The killer has zero agency.
And before you say the camped survivor has no agency either, yeah, that's true. On the other hand, even if the survivor wasn't being camped, the hooked survivor still wouldn't be able to do anything, they'd be reliant on their teammates. That's because being on the hook is what takes away the survivor's agency. It's a consequence of their multiple failures, not of anything the killer does to them.

It's not about the survivors always being sucsessful in this situation it's about making the killer choose between risking the chance at killing the others just to kill 1 or hunt the others, risking the kill he could have.

Also even though it is mostly the survivor's fault he was hooked, it isn't his fault to die if he was camped, the survivor doesnt get to decide if he isn't rescued that is mostly in the hands of the killer in this situation since he would be the one stopping the others from saving him

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 18, 2020

@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/162540/devs-losing-touch-with-community
Survivors aren’t entitled to 2 extra chances. They’re simply an available possibility. If a survivor gets caught and hooked, they need to accept that they may very well die, hence be more careful in the first place.
If the game were intended that survivors should be 100% guaranteed 2 additional chances, then the game wouldn’t have a hook system but a respawn system instead.

Actually survivors are entitled to 2 extra chances, that is the point of having to hook them 3 times to kill, it's just different when they reach a new phase in the hook system, like if you were hooked but weren't saved before you reach the second phase then it cost you 1 aditional chance. Also no matter how carful you are, you will always have a run in with the killer at some point and the killer does have the power to down you, so it's just a matter of how good are you at loosing him

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 18, 2020

@GoshJosh said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1363827#Comment_1363827
There is no such thing as a safe unhook for the situation described above. The killer will NOT leave the hook. Say that player happened to be caught first thing in a match.. they get 400 chase points, hooked, then get to die? And again, let's disuss how many killers you can not even get Borrowed Time off of in camping situations...
1) Cloaked Wraith
2) Pig crouched
3) Asleep vs. Freddy
4) Ghost Face in Night Shroud
5) 'Tiny heartbeat killers' (i.e. Monitor and Abuse on Deathslinger)
The list goes on...

You can safe unhook on that situation, it's just harder to pull off because it depends on how the killer reacts to the attempt, the basics of it is you need 2 people for the save, 1 to get the killer's attention and the other to unhook, the aproach depends on how the killer reacts to the survivor that would take the risk of distracting him, if the killer is smart about it, it would require more risk, but if the killer is more aggresive on trying to keep others away then all it takes is someone to make him swing at them so the other gets the chance

When it comes to borrowed time (which is a really good perk in this situation) it doesn't matter who the killer is, it just takes a little bit of finnesse to use it against those that can nullify it, for exaple the wraith and other stealth killers, you have to bait them into exiting their respective ability or in the case of ghost face you just need anyone to take him out of his shroud

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 18, 2020

@GoodBoyKaru said:
They've said many times facecamping is a strategy that if you want to employ, they won't ban you. Plus, name a fix that wouldn't be incredibly exploitable, I'll wait.
This tip was added because it'd very prevalent on movile, maybe because they don't know better, maybe because it's free to play so more trolls exist than normal.
Also, this isn't anything like a hostage situation. You die in 2 minutes and survivors can take the risk to save you.

You preetty much described a hostage situation in your last point. I agree with you on most of what you said but that last point is just nonsense and so is the fact that it's impossible to name a way to fix it without it being exploitable, it's a game... the devs decide what they can and can't do, what we can and can't do to stop this

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 18, 2020

@Nurgling7 said:
It's so cute how Survivors keep throwing around hostage taking for the things that arent, but they hate because they know it's something the devs actually ban for.

"take hostage

1. To hold someone captive and threaten violence to them in order to prevent another party (e.g. the police) from using force or in order to create leverage so that another party will agree to meet some demand.

2. To assume constraining, limiting control over something in order create leverage to achieve something."

This is litterally the very first thing that pops up when you search the term "take hostage" and it fits perfectly to the situation

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 18, 2020

@Orion said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1363863#Comment_1363863
Already tried and abused. What else?

How could the survivors abuse that? It's a mechanic that would litterally be in the killer's hands whether it's in play or not. Also when did they try that? I don't remember seeing something like that being tested ever.

in Devs losing touch with community Comment by xFAKExAxoN June 18, 2020

When it comes to the last 2 survivors then I only slug if the other one is in line of sight or if I hear them around me otherwise I much rather just hook the 3rd and hunt for the other while looking for hatch

The only other time I would slug is if I down someone and there was someone else with them that I can at least hit once, in which case I decide if I keep going after the one that is running or if I go back for the downed one depending if I had recently hooked the downed one

Honestly the need that some people have to always get the 4k is really stupid, plus the whole if they are swf group reason that some give is also really stupid. I mean what's so bad about wanting to play with your friends? Also obviously that a swf group is gonna be really tough to beat, I mean they are better coordinated and usually they are really good at the more risky aspects of the gameplay because they know that their team has their backs, so slugging them just because of the fact that they wanted to play together is just stupid

in How often do you slug for the 4K? Comment by xFAKExAxoN May 3, 2020

Honestly NOED wasnt common... like... at all, until they buffed all hexes so that they were bassically the same on all levels. I say just revert the buff to it and leave it like it was so that only level 3 had the exposed status. I'm really annoyed by the perk but mostly because most people don't even bother to raise it past level 1 and it still completely flips the momentum of the game in the other direction. I'm willing to bet that if people are forced to raise it's level to actually make it good then it won't be as common as it's been lately. Also we're talking about a universal perk so it's not like you have to unlock a teachable to use it on your favorite killer so that also adds to its appearance rate in games

in Hex: No One Escapes Death Comment by xFAKExAxoN April 30, 2020

@fcc2014 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/133068/how-is-this-fair
This is the game though and a "strategy" . Sometimes it works for killers when over altruistic survivors try to play hero. It is also a reason why they should never reduce gen speed. This will become more normal if the killer isn't as penalized for this play.

But you have to admit that without ruin gen speeds are extremly tough on slow killers

in How is this fair?! Comment by xFAKExAxoN February 27, 2020

@Kwikwitted said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1123974#Comment_1123974
So you were in an SWF with voice communication and you had a flashlight. More details emerging here.
Sorry not buying that this Leatherface just randomly decided to facecamp you. Most killer mains aren't stupid, they know camping one survivor an entire match is an auto-loss so I'm gonna guess you guys bullied him repeatedly, head-on team plays, following him around with the flashlight to blind any pick ups, using OOO and call-outs, etc. And then when he finally caught you he decided that since you wanted to make him miserable in a game that's supposed to be fun he would ruin your fun now.
My guess is you got what was coming to you and now you're salty about it. Survivors can win in this game easily and not be douchebags yet many continue to be because apparently succeeding in a game slanted in your favor is something to be proud of.
I find it doubly hilarious that people are whining about survivor queues, I'm sure that has nothing to do with playing killer being a total sweat-fest just to safety pip while survivors can derp all day with about 4 different second chance perks in addition to to not dying until they're hooked three times and get double pips cause of how ######### the emblem system is.

Jeez man chill. First of all we didn't do anything to him, he litterally just did that for shits and giggles. When he started chasing me I was the second chase of that game and I didn't do anything that would have justified that at all. On the rest of your comment though... yeah I can't even begin to tell you how wrong you are. I highly doubt he got a pip out of that. Rank is honestly the biggest joke in this game for a lot of reasons. And I'm not salty because he facecamped me (I mean I'm not happy about that either though), I'm salty cuz he LF's ability there created an impossible rescue scenerio. Also how is facecamping a total sweatfest? It takes no effort and you get nothing good out of it. What I find laughable is that some killers actually waste time in a qeue just to do this when a match comes around

in How is this fair?! Comment by xFAKExAxoN February 27, 2020

The problem is that even though it was meant for weaker killers (which I can completely sympathise with since my favorite killers are on the slow side of the spectrum), it was used too much by stronger killers also. It was used too much since the hex buffs that made it pointless to upgrade it. It became the go to perk of most of the playerbase just to make the game longer without even having to apply that much preassure. Most people lack the skill or the connection to get the greats and those that can hit them are also affected since they don't get the small boost to the progress you would get without it, most people just rather to look for it before spending so much time on gens (which is understandable, but also takes time away from survivors). DS could be less annoying but the truth of the matter is that nerfing it isn't very easy without diminishing it's true purpose which is to counter tunneling. The excuse for nerfing ruin were weak at best, and they completely went overboard with the nerf since it's mostly useless now. I know that they should try to retain new players but I believe that they should have worried about that a long time ago, way before the changes that drove away so many people, instead of worrying about it now. I believe gens can be fixed way too fast for the slower killers to be able to do any real damage but the gen speed are also a complicated thing to change since changing it will heavilly affect survival rate especially in smaller maps or maps with really bad spawns for gens. I also believe that killers complain way too much though since it's mostly a matter of skill and preasure but I get where some of it comes from (again sympathising with slower killers).

I do agree that killers are affected more by the nerfs they do since the nerfs are mostly for perks that help out new killer players or slower killers, but what I was trying to say is that killers complain way too much about everything, survivors mostly complain about the same stuff and about nerfs to them (which is somewhat understandable since most of the nerfs are going overboard like what they did to ruin, and also since there really aren't that many good perks for survivors, most perks are only worth it if paired with others and the few that are not are either meta perks or useless perks)

So like I said I agree that nerfing ruin like they did wasn't the right call, but I also agree that something had to be done about it, because it wasn't a meta perk, it was the meta, other perks just complemented it or were complemented by it