List_of_concerns
List_of_concerns
About
- Username
- List_of_concerns
- Joined
- Visits
- 472
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Seraphor said:
Pyramid Head bypasses the pick up and carry mechanics to cage a survivor, so there's a justifiable downside to doing so (you can't defend the hook).
Having this for all hooks would be game breaking for killer, and basically mean you can only ever get one more hook once the exits are powered. Unless all killers get to insta-hook survivors when downed? You get to lose DS, Boil Over, Power Struggle, and flashlight/pallet saves.
The actual counter to face camping is doing gens instead of sacrificing yourself.
"Having this for all hooks would be game breaking for killer, and basically mean you can only ever get one more hook once the exits are powered."
I don't see how this is much different from the way EGC plays out the majority of the time... Typically, during EGC, the killer face camps the most recently hooked survivor. The killer would only have an opportunity for additional hooks if the survivors choose to be altruistic.
"Unless all killers get to insta-hook survivors when downed?"
I don't see why killers should get to instantly hook as a compensation for the removal of face camping.
"The actual counter to face camping is doing gens instead of sacrificing yourself."
While this may be true, it typically doesn't play out this way. Also, newer perks like Deadlock makes face camping even more viable.
-
@BrokenSouI said:
What if I told you. It's a terrible idea
I'd respectfully disagree. Then, I'd ask why you think it's a terrible idea... So, why do you think it's a terrible idea?
-
@Pepsidot said:
If I were you I would censor the (apparent) cheat link and remove it from your last paragraph, I doubt sharing a cheats website would go down well here.
Will do. Thanks for the help!
-
@MrPenguin said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2834228#Comment_2834228
yes they are better, thats part of the problem. Sure that action would be technically better, but we should be aiming to solve the issue not just slightly improve it. CoH got nerfed, is it better? Yes. Is it still a problem? Also yes.
Moving 10-15% faster doesnt make up for up to 4 survivors searching, which would be 400% (100 x 4 survivors). Even just 2 is 200%, way faster than a killer.
Sure 1 can break it while 2 get on gens and the other is running the killer, if the killer searches for the hex thats literally all their side is doing.
Boons should be weaker than hexes, not equal or better.
We're on the same side of the argument. I agree that B:CoH can be a little problematic (especially when it's combined w/ other healing items/perks.
I'm just trying to be reasonable and suggest some functionality that already exists, and it better than the way it currently functions. Copy/paste is kind of how they roll for 9 months out of the year.
If it makes you feel any better, I just bring Botany Knowledge and a brown med-kit. It's a faster heal and I don't have to walk across the map for 90s to be in range of the stupid thing.
-
@MrPenguin said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2834158#Comment_2834158
Survivor perks shouldn't be as strong as killer perks. The killer can't have 4 ruins and 4 undying and 4 people to split the work between. Boons should not be equal to hexes.
I mean... isn't the current sentiment that Boons are actually BETTER than Hex Perks? At least those changes would actually bring them in line with each other.
Also, the break would be as fast as the snuff and even the slow Killers move much faster than survivors. It's not like you can't learn totem spawns.
And, one more again... lmao. It may be 4 players searching for the Hex, but only one of them can actually break it.
-
It's so ridiculous that it should just be reworked, disabled, or deleted.
-
@FlameGNG said:
as someone with 2k hours who plays both i can say that killer is a horrible experience rn half the killers are useless do to 1 perk countering their whole power... for everyone saying soloQ survivor try play twins, trickster or just trapper. None of the "non meta killers" works anymore if you want to perform well you need to focus very much run decent perk, a decent killer and most of the times some addons. as a survivrs its very doable to paly without perks and items. try playing killer without perks one mistake and you've lost 20 sec on 3 gens a mistake on survivor and you lose a hook stage
While this is partly my opinions i feel like this is what most killers feel aswell i mean 90% of my games are 4k and i've almost never had a game with 0 or 1 kills cant think of one the last 3 months atleast... but you cant say that devs are killer mains. we get nothing survivors complain abour 1 perk next patch its nerfed. While killers have complained about haddonfield for years and well it totally got fixed quick.
What the actual... ?
"i mean 90% of my games are 4k and i've almost never had a game with 0 or 1 kills cant think of one the last 3 months atleast."
Yeah... must be really frustrating winning 90% of the time. Let's compare that to my ~33% escape rate in solo queue. Yup... WOW. Just wow.
-
I feel like this is MY MOMENT as a 4500hr+ solo queue player. (I've SWF less than 100 trials. Of those trials, approximately half of them were played without external communication.)
Killer mains, I'll give you Dead Hard. It's busted af and is capable of hard carrying a team, especially if you don't play w/ one shot mechanics. Dealing with that in almost every single trial has to take a toll on your mental well-being.
With that being said, solo queue can be and often is absolute pandemonium. If you think Killer is "less enjoyable/more frustrating" than solo queue survivor, I fear for your sanity and your safety. Truly, I do.
We've all experienced a loss. As Killer, you typically lose due to micro plays (chase/second chance PERKS). In solo queue, it doesn't matter if they've got the meta PERKS equipped or not. These folks can throw the match regardless, and there are no gameplay mechanics that alleviate the HOPELESSNESS of a survivor player dying early, quitting, disconnecting, kilting themselves on first hook, etc. What do all of these things have in common? THEY ARE NOT PERKS. THEY ARE DECISIONS. Decisions are macro plays.
Also, if you're experiencing a dry-spell (string of back-to-back losses) on Killer, you can just bring some busted af add-ons and a black ward and fix that shtuff right way.
YOU CAN'T DO THE SAME THING IN SOLO QUEUE AS SURVIVOR. IF THE OTHER SURVIVORS WANT TO THROW, YOUR TRIAL IS GOING IN THE TRASH.
For the non-believers: Equip Bond, Kindred, and Open-Handed. Behold the less than desirable gameplay of others. Question reality. Break things. Now, return to this post.
This not an episode of "Change My Mind" either. This is the cold hard truth, and it hurts.
Try to remember this when you decide to bring some busted add-ons or camp as The Cannibal: We solo players have it infinitely worse than you do. Now, kindly leave me to my suffering.
-
The amount of value Hex: Ruin can provide if it's never broken is astronomical. No other regression or "gen defense" perk even comes close.
There are other perks on the list that are busted af under certain circumstances (PGTW during three gen), but Hex: Ruin unbroken is still has the most potential to be annoying.
-
When the active player count decreases, the experience becomes more polarized. You'll experience the extremes more often. The casual and try hard communities will collide and it's never pretty. During peak times it may feel roughly the same, but during the low periods it may become unbearably toxic.
The game has lost many loyal players since the functionality of SBMM has been revealed and confirmed. I've personally had a much worse experience overall (both roles/game modes). So, expect more toxicity, not less.
Feelsbadman😥
-
The fix is pretty simple. Just make them function exactly like Hex Totems.
- Make Boon Totems breakable
- Make Boon Totem effects global (map wide)
- Remove the audio from Boon Totems (so they are just as easy/difficult to find as Hex Totems)
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2832268#Comment_2832268
But the fact that those teams exist is a problem. You can be doing well at high MMR, through your own skill, and then suddenly one of those teams, or a team who's just quick on gens, comes and gets a free win on you. Doesn't feel like you could do anything to change the outcome. That is what you will lose to at high MMR.
- SBMM and/or MMR in its current form is unreliable at best (It feels like a sick joke tbh)
- BHVR could choose to remove group/team play at any time (I don't think the game would survive the aftermath of such a decision)
- Plenty of groups are just as inefficient as solo players
- The real problem is multifaceted, so the solution(s) will be just as complex
- You managed to capture a portion the overarching problem when you said, " ... and gets a free win on you. Doesn't feel like you could do anything to change the outcome."
- Certain maps, perks, etc. are so egregious that we aren't even remotely close to a balanced game. The disparity between certain maps and perks is so vast ... it's like they've managed to colonize another planet, and laugh at us from across the universe, while we toil away on Earth.
- At the end of the day, nobody wants to play an unwinnable game. Even under normal circumstances, there is a snowball effect that occurs during the match. There are just too many perks that serve to multiply that snowball effect. (You win harder/win more.) When you stand to snowball a victory from the single use of a perk, it can very quickly become an unwinnable game (for either side).
-
@Blueberry said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1734956#Comment_1734956
I brush it off because people exaggerate how bad it is. Many times we finish the match and never even cleanse it as it is quite easy to finish gens with it still up.
Even still there are a couple anti-totem perks you could run or use a map to counter hex's. The counters are there, just no one uses them. Ruin/Undying just isn't that oppressive to me at all and that's even assuming the killer gets lucky with its spawn and it stays up which is the best case scenario when it could be much worse. He's also giving up 2 slots for it.
I'm torn.
I think the people that seem to be exaggerating are experiencing the worst possible outcome. Some people will simply ignore bones/totems (and that's probably the best play). Others spend a damning amount of time cleansing totems, only for Ruin to be saved by Undying time and time again.
Ruin is only as oppressive as the killer's pathing or split pressure. This is why Ruin is typically paired with multiple detection perks. (It's also why Ruin is more effective on killers with higher movement speed(s). If a killer never successfully intervenes in generator repairs, then yes, they might as well have an empty perk slot.
Anyways, I'm sure you know all of this since you've stated that you typically don't bother cleansing it.
-
@Blueberry said:
The issue in solo queue right now has nothing to do with Undying/Ruin.
What is making solo queue rough is a broken ranking and rank reset system. It is piling survivors up at ranks they have no business being in because it's way too easy to rank up and extremely slow to derank.
IE on average your teammates are much worse now because generally you're much more likely to get teammates that really aren't as good as the rank it says they're in. So like it says you and all your teammates are rank 5 which is why you're facing a rank 5 killer but in reality your teammates (and possible yourself) are more realistically rank 10 or worse in skill.
Interesting.
When it comes to the issues found in solo queue, there are many contributing factors. Due to the phrasing of the OP's question, we're forced to compare the current state of solo queue to previous patches and meta(s). I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the current meta (Undying + Ruin) when it's half of the equation.
While I completely agree with your stance on the ranking system, I can't deny the strength of newest meta. That's simply the nature of metas. One meta cannibalizes the other, but only if it's stronger than the previous meta. Undying + Ruin is heavily influenced by RNG, but when it functions favorably for the killer, there's no doubt that it's a strong combination.
-
@kaeru said:
Risky repairs is fine.
But Fight Back and Safe Landing are really difficult. I remember struggling with this challenges variations even without single trial condition.
Risky Repairs is linked to the Terror Radius. Terror Radii vary quite a bit, and there are perks and powers that can remove the Killer's Terror Radius. Overall, I don't think the Terror Radius is a practical variable for challenges.
-
@Jeffalations said:
i almost never do SWF, and currently I use Deliverance, BT, DS, and SB. What perks could i add or subtract from this build?
First of all, every perk you're using is strong, but they are all extremely conditional. Deliverance and Decisive Strike can only be used once per match... or potentially go unused. Borrowed Time is conditional, but many killers play in such a way that it almost feels like a required perk. Of your chosen perks, Sprint Burst is the only perk you're guaranteed to use more than once per match.
I think you'd have a much better experience (more consistent) if you used perks that are always active or have less conditions.
#1 Bond
Bond feeds you live information which can make decision making a breeze. Even you're very experienced, Bond can dramatically increase your time efficiency during a Trial. Generators, Heals, Protection Hits, Distractions, Flashlight Saves, Hook Saves, avoiding teammates while in chase... It doesn't matter if it's defensive or offensive play. Bond can aid you in almost every situation.
#2 Spine Chill
Spine Chill isn't only useful against stealth killers. Knowing the killer is nearby is never wasted information. A little preparation can go a long way. With Spine Chill, you can prepare to make the best use of the tile you're in, "Hold W" early, or even avoid the killer completely. The 6% action speed isn't great, but it has come in clutch a time or two.
#3 Kindred
Almost everyone in this thread recommended Kindred. Personally, I wouldn't bring Kindred with the expectation that it'll change your team's behavior (proper saving). Instead, bring Kindred so that YOU can make proper saves. The Killer aura reading can be a great decision making (pathing) tool too.
Recommended Solo Builds:
Fast Gens & Fast Saves - Bond, Prove Thyself, Kindred, We'll Make It
All Knowing - Bond, Spine Chill, Kindred, Open-Handed
Clutch Saves - Empathy, Kindred, Desperate Measures, Borrowed Time
Truly Alone - Distortion, Spine Chill or Exhaustion Perk, Botany Knowledge, Self-Care
-
@DerpyPlayz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1701226#Comment_1701226
Yhea until you claimed false, its a statement I can go back on at anytime, its silly to think otherwise.
You still haven't answered the question for the simple fact that this is not a subjective matter.
Do you need me to break down my original post into bullet points for you?
Here's a list of reasons (that I went over in my original post) why cross-play isn't good for everyone:
- No text chat between players that aren't on the same platform (before or after a match)
- Survivor queue times are longer
- Pre-existing communities have been divided (some player opted in while others opted out)
- Survivors that opt out of cross-play have a smaller pool of players to be matched with
- Players that opt out of cross-play experience longer queue times
- New friendships aren't being built because of the lack of cross-platform communication options
-
@DerpyPlayz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1701212#Comment_1701212
Ah ok cya, still didn't answer the question.
I of course understand because you can't.
It's not my fault if you didn't comprehend my original post.
If you think you've accomplished something, please remember that you said you would just ignore me.
"I will just ignore you." - DerpyPlayz
-
@DerpyPlayz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1701164#Comment_1701164
What the actual hell are you talking about.
Answer my question then, you just stated stuff I already knew, and stop trying to argue semantics.
If you are going to just continue to argue semantics then I will just not talk to you.
Simple question: How is match-making a bad thing for this game.
If you are not going to answer the question, don't bother replying as I will just ignore you.
Semantics are important. It's important to have a clear understanding of the information that is being put forth.
Anyways, your question was: "If it hurts the game so bad tell me how, not only that why are you one of the only people to complain about it?"
My original post lists a few reasons why cross-play didn't have a good outcome for everyone. (My original post explains the how portion of your question.)
My last response answered the why portion of your question. ("I don't know if I'm the only person to complain about cross-play. That's why I made this post. I wanted to have a discussion and find out.")
I did answer your questions. I just don't think you agree. It's okay to disagree. You don't like my answers? That's okay too.
I've read your opinion and you've read mine. Maybe there isn't anything else for us to discuss one-on-one.
-
@DerpyPlayz said:
Its a fact that first part yes, the problem is none of this is constructive if anything this is the only one thing that was done right by the devs that you are whining about for no good reason.
Sure I am being critical, because as said previously this is bs, that is not my opinion that is a fact as well since we can assert what is and isn't fact.
Imagine actually thinking crossplay hurts the game, if it hurts the game so bad tell me how, not only that why are you one of the only people to complain about it?
Our one-on-one discussion hasn't been very constructive so far, but then you asked a question. Now, it can be constructive. Whether my reasons for leaving feedback are good or not is an opinion.
I'm not sure how you've determined that my feedback is, in fact, bs.
fact (noun) a piece of information presented as having objective reality
opinion (noun) a judgment formed in the mind about a particular matter
I can prove to you that a forum is a place for feedback by providing you with a piece of information. It's a screen shot of this forum.
Now, to answer your question, I don't know if I'm the only person to complain about cross-play. That's why I made this post. I wanted to have a discussion and find out. I could have made the same post under Feedback, but I wanted to have a discussion. In my experience, forum moderators don't like when duplicate posts exist.
-
@voorheesgt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1701061#Comment_1701061
Naw... To many isms in them anymore.
That doesn't seem very prudent.
-
@DerpyPlayz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1700836#Comment_1700836
no its just its not fair to give "feedback" that frankly is dumb asf, and is not an issue.
I dislike how I am even put in the position of having to defend the devs. However, as said before crossplay is very nice and its implemented well.
You do realize that a forum dedicated to a product is a place for individuals to have discussions and leave feedback, right? With that being said, it's absolutely fair that anyone on the forum is able to give constructive feedback. That's a fact.
Your derogatory comments towards my feedback are an opinion. You're entitled to your opinion and there is nothing wrong with enjoying cross-play.
-
@voorheesgt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1701028#Comment_1701028
I don't like searchawordism. It's kind of a eyesie-closie habit I find
You don't use a dictionary? Do you just take another person's word for it when they give you a definition? That's a weird flex.
Whataboutism is real word too.
whataboutism (noun) the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue
-
@voorheesgt said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1700986#Comment_1700986
You are funny 😂.
If Discordance is hand goldy (🤭). What is OoO? Oh I forgot you use another fake word to keep from answering relevant things.
If you'd spend less than ten seconds searching for a definition of handholding, you might realize it is a real word.
-
@xenotimebong said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1700907#Comment_1700907
A “hand-holdy” type of perk? What does that mean, exactly? Discordance doesn’t actually do anything in itself, it only gives the killer information in certain circumstances. If that’s considered “hand-holdy” then so are the vast majority of perks in the game.
Handholding (noun) the provision of careful support or guidance to someone during a learning process or a period of change.
Guidance and information don't do anything? Please...
I should have been more specific. Yes, many perks in the game handhold. (See definition above.) Also, I'm not implying that handholding perks are inherently good or bad. Making decisions based on accurate information is a good thing, so I think everyone should use a detection perk. Personally, I don't have a problem with handholding perks being made worse. The new version of Discordance may be worse than before, but it still serves it's purpose well. I don't think we need a learning or teaching style of perk for every aspect of the game. This may be quite the assumption, but I don't think you'd want to find yourself in a situation where you can't play the game without a very specific perk. Eventually, you might want to have the option of riding your bike without training wheels.
-
I wish you wouldn't have used "whataboutism" in the Title.
Discordance is a handholding type of Perk, but I can't tell you the exact reason it was changed.
Survivors do make up the majority of players. The game was designed that way (4:1 ratio). In general, it does seem logical that survivors would be making more purchases. Also, survivors play in third person, so they can spend more time appreciating their cosmetics.
I wish I could give you a good reason as to why some complaints are seemingly ignored while others receive a noticeable amount of attention. I can't give you a good reason.
-
@DerpyPlayz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/200308/cross-play-everything-we-hoped-for
Actually this is something that is not fair to complain about.
Cross play simply being in the game is very nice, and at that the devs were not pressured into it really, it works good as well in my experience.
All feedback is fair. It doesn't matter if the feedback is positive or negative. It just so happens that negative feedback is typically viewed as a complaint.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
Had CP on only the day it came out, long enough try several rounds as killer, and a few as survivor. The fps difference and latency was all too apparent.
Wish there was console-only CP.
You made a few points that I forgot to mention in my OP. I have experienced latency issues too. I'm not sure if the issues were a direct result of fluctuating client FPS or something server side.
-
@Xbob42 said:
I can play with my friends and family that don't play on PC now.
So, yes. It is everything I hoped for.
Unfortunately, DBD itself is not.
They were your friends and family before cross-play.
-
@MrSmashem said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1677386#Comment_1677386
Killer queues are almost always less than 15 seconds for me, around the clock.
Killer queues are amazing (short) as a result of cross-play. Survivors on the other hand have to wait up to ten times longer than they did prior to cross-play.
-
@ohheyitsbobcat said:
Probably because we're in the down time between rifts. I imagine people are just taking a break.
I wish I could vote this response as the winner!
Your guess sounds the most reasonable, but it's a shame that ExTrA mOtIvAtIoN is required to keep players interested. If I'm being honest with myself, I'm not playing as much because they tease the next patch too early. Waiting three weeks for the "latest greatest" content to come off PTR is a long time to keep players "hyped". I'd rather most the changes be a surprise from now on (Seasons/Leagues style).
-
@Warcrafter4 said:
Ah the strongest killer meta that can be completely countered in 60 seconds and only works on hyper mobile killers who totally need the help anyways. Totally makes slower killers more viable.
Its not like slower killers are being nerfed in the PTB due to the lowered Pop duration or anything.
Its also not like we aren't in one of the most gen rush heavy survivor meta yet which further makes slower killers less viable.
Nope everything is fine and dandy on the killer side...
I am really having hard to keep up the sarcasm right now while trying to describe the current meta.
If your hex: undying is countered in 60s, you're either very unlucky or blind af. It shows you the survivors aura when they try to break it.
-
I don't think I can narrow it down to just one Perk from each side. I can certainly narrow it down to one category. That category would be information. Information Perks can save you (and possibly your group) a ton of time. Some of them can even lead you straight to victory by showing you where you should be and/or where you shouldn't go. In my opinion, nothing beats having the game literally show you how to win.
Survivor: Information
- Bond
- Kindred
- Spine Chill
Killer: Information
- Infectious Fright
- Discordance
- BBQ & Chili
-
@28_stabs said:
I completed the very 1st rift for the brand new part and I dont care about it anymore. It was fun to do it only once, I guess. I do not support infinite grind for perks, but I dont mind, if getting cosmetics is challenging.
One and done, huh? Maybe I should've done the same.
-
@adsads123123123123 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1583257#Comment_1583257
That's just false. Things you can do while slugged to change your fate:
- recover
- crawl to a teammate to make it safer and faster for them to rescue you
- crawl to a pallet or locker for a stun save
- crawl to a location in the open for a flashlight save
- crawl to a hidden spot to delay or prevent the killer from finding you when they leave to chase someone else
- use Unbreakable, Soul Guard, and other anti-slug perks
Things you can do while on the hook:
- #########
- pray that your small chance of kobe works and only if you are on first hook
Slugged:
- Crawl until someone else interacts with you (killer or survivor)
Hooked:
- ######### (doesn't require a specific perk or another player)
- Attempt escape (4%) (doesn't require a specific perk or another player)
-
@adsads123123123123 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1583210#Comment_1583210
As I said, the alternative to being slugged is being hooked. Why would it be more fun to be on the hook than ground?
This a simple case of player agency. One scenario grants you options while the other does not.
When you are left on the ground (aka slugged), you have no control over your fate. Yes, you can crawl forever, but you can't change your fate.
When you are hooked, you still have control over your fate. You can attempt to escape (4% chance) or you can leave the trial by doing nothing if the struggle phase begins. Attempting escape, struggling, and refusing to struggle are all choices the hooked player has control over. The hooked player can change their fate.
DEATH IS NOT AN ESCAPE might be a catchy slogan or motto when it comes to advertising. If you've decided you don't want to participate in the remainder of a match, killing yourself on hook is undoubtedly an escape. By dying on the hook, you will have escaped the situation, circumstances, or events that have brought your enjoyment to a halt.
Why would it be more fun to be on the hook than the ground? While you're on the hook you can still exercise your will and make choices. Those choices grant you the opportunity to leave. You can't make any choices when you are left on the ground.
-
@Zozzy said:
The rift isn't for funsies and to be generous. It is there to generate money.
They nerfed it to make you buy tiers or fail the pass and pay to start the next one.
I don't disagree. Luckily, I don't purchase the pass until I've reached Tier 60+. I only spend the money if feel like I could comfortably finish the Rift with the time remaining. I saw the opportunity to mitigate any potential loss. I just hope that other people aren't falling victim to pre-purchasing the pass during these tests, changes, and unacceptable disruptions.
-
@Dreamnomad said:
You are addressing an issue I've been meaning to make a post about. So apparently I'm not the only one who has noticed that completing challenges doesn't seem to progress the rift as much as it has in the past. Like I'm well into tier 3 of the challenges and I'm in the early 30's I think progression wise. I expect by the time I finish the 3rd tier that I'll be around 40ish. I know good and well that I'm not going to get 30 levels off the 4th tier of challenges. Which brings me to the point of how much grinding is intended to finish the rift? Was there a change? Because it sure feels like I'm not making as much progress with challenges as I have in the past.
There was a wonderful post by @kamisen that explains the changes and they are quite significant.
Here's an excerpt:
The current tome (including non-official stats) yields a total of 348 fragments. That's only 8 more fragments than Tome I that BHVR stated was too grindy. Now, obviously our queue times has approved somewhat since back then, but they cut 57 fragments since last time, almost 6 levels. You get approximately 0.8 fragments per game played. This means you need to play approx. 70 matches on top of the one you needed to play since the last tome. That's quite a few games.
Tome I: 340 fragments
Tome II: 393 fragments
Tome III: 405 fragments
Tome IV: 348 fragments
-
@Fibijean said:
I think I agree with the general principle. However:
It would be worth elaborating on what you mean by "time to kill", since it's a rather vague term with no real explanation given. You speak as though it's something we should implicitly understand, but I for one have a lot of questions about it.
I also think you're making a mistake by assuming that all players determine killer viability in the same way. Most think of viability in terms of how good a killer is at 'winning', but since people have different ideas about what that means, that can lead to varying opinions on which killers are most viable. For example, Wraith is one of the top killers if you judge a killer's strength by their ability to pip, but you're likely to think of Hillbilly as being far stronger if you judge a killer by their ability to get kills. Your system seems to be generally geared towards kills as a win condition, even if you don't state it outright, and I happen to agree with that, but it's worth noting that not everyone will look at it the same way.
Your post has prompted me to make a few additions to my OP.
You were right. I did make quite a few assumptions. I was trying to be brief while still keeping my overall explanation intact. As far as time to kill is concerned, I probably should have given a few examples. In all honesty, I was attempting to keep my post from becoming a wall of text.
Anyways, many of the concerns you had have been addressed in an edited version of my original post. Instead of having you reread the entire post, I'll list a few of them here. 😅
Examples of variables that affect TTK:
- Number of attacks required to inflict Dying State (Exposed, Broken, Saws, Oni, Trapper's Traps)
- Time between attacks (Save The Best For Last, Huntress hatchet followed by melee attack)
- Gap closers (Oni Dash, Nurse Blink, Demo Lunge, Freddy Snare, Hag Traps, etc.)
- Ability to preemptively break Pallets (Billy Saw, Demo Lunge)
Many players have decided that rank (the emblem system) is no longer a priority and/or rewarding pursuit. I can only speak from my own experiences, but many Killers I've faced haven't been concerned with rank. They've wanted to secure a 4k as easily and as quickly as possible. I know it may be a leap, but I'd wager many of them find more satisfaction in fulfilling the killer fantasy (killing everyone/4k) than they do in post match emblems and scoring. I understand that there is a possibility that a silent majority does find satisfaction in the emblem system. With that in mind, I did mean for kills to be considered the win condition.
-
"For me, "viable" means playing and doing well with that Killer depends on my personal skill. No need to depend on luck nor someone else making mistakes. This doesn't mean that the Killer is GOOD or not. A Killer for me can be viable but still weak in the meta. Should still earn wins more often that not, but those wins will need effort in learning and using that Killer's power."
I've edited my OP to show that I did not take personal skill or luck into account. While I recognize that a certain level of skill is required to repeatedly succeed, I'm not sure how to measure the diminishing returns of skill. For one, personal skill and luck cannot be accurately measured from match to match. Also, personal skill and luck can change. Examples of personal skill being fluid instead of static would be preparation (personalizing and/or adjusting settings in a new location or on new equipment) and warming up (last time you played and for how long). I still acknowledge and appreciate your sentiment. 😁
-
"Most of the community sees viability as how easily one can get a 4k. Nothing more, nothing less. This is why Nurse is and always will be considered the strongest killer in the game. She has the shortest chase time, and therefore fastest and easiest kills..."
I agree with this assessment of the community viewpoint (4k only) and The Nurse.
"...and Hillbilly is seen WAY higher than he should be."
Based on my variables, The Hillbilly is quite efficient when it comes to getting a 4k.
-
@[Deleted User] said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1269664#Comment_1269664
Yes
yes
and yes
its better with small game, a map, or detectives hunch, but still entirely possible without those.
I only get annoyed at other survivors if NOED goes off. I might have managed 3 or 4 totems, and it still activates?!?? Makes me furious that the other 3 have ignored any dull totem they’ve spotted.
Asking yes or no questions is kind of risky. I'll just have to take your word for it.
While you don't directly state that NoED's activation is infuriating, it's implied. Yes, yes... it's implied that it's only infuriating if you feel as though you've done your part to prevent it from happening. Perhaps your fellow Survivors simply couldn't find the hidden totems.
-
@Aura_babyy said:
I'd like to add a bit to this as well. This is what I use to determine my "tier list" but instead of using the niche lettered tiers I based mine off scores from 1 - 10 in some categories mainly affected by the things you explained.
There's one more factor, in my honest opinion, is also very important to consider and it might be the only thing that keeps the "weaker" killers, as some would call them; in a position that in terms of viability and its position in my "tier list".
What I am referring to is the Killer's ability to make a "comeback" which focuses entirely on momentum halts and momentum flips. This could be in the form of 3-gen locks or performance where survivors are either already hooked or dead. While any killer can technically do these and fit in this section, they don't really **focus** or **rely** on this category. Hence why killers like Trapper and Hag have a much higher rating here (9.5-10)... So it keeps an average score that places them above some killers, making them still be viable, and even strong killers.
This is one of the main things that I feel a lot of people overlook. Setting up 3 gen locks is a very strong tactic against survivors whom you feel are "gen rushing".
I simply see Trapper and Hag as having the potential to reduce their TTK (time to kill) in a chosen area. I'm not saying that using a 3 Generator strategy isn't a thing. I just didn't want strategies to affect the generalized variables in my example(s).
-
For those of you in the "just do bones" camp, have you ever found and broken all five of the totems all on your own? Did you achieve this feat without the use of a Perk that will help you find totems? Did you still Escape through the Exit Gate?
-
@Timeman63 said:
I'm starting a series of posts about perks that I think are underappreciated and more players should consider using. Feel free to give your thoughts on if you agree and why, or the reasons you think the perk is meh.
Aftercare is kind of an alternative to Bond and Empathy that requires you to go out of your way to either unhook or heal a teammate, or be unhooked or healed by a teammate in order to gain aura reading. But when you do, the information this perk gives is incredible. Empathy only works when other survivors get injured, so you won't immediately know if they're being chased or something to that effect until they get hurt. Bond only works within 32m. Aftercare lets you see potentially everyone at all times, and lets them see you as well, until you get hooked. And even though you lose Aftercare's benefits after getting hooked, you will still be able to at least see the aura of the survivor that unhooks you, so you always have information on at least one teammate. And the only real way to counter this is by applying the Blindness debuff, which Killers don't often do.
What does everyone think?
Hot take: Aftercare isn't for you, it's for your teammates. You can't force other people to bring Aura Reading Perks, but you can force them to see your Aura. You just have to hope they'll make better decisions while the effect lasts.
-
@Dead_by_Gadfly said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/1268280#Comment_1268280
People over state swf, all you need is 4 good survivors that actually do gens and run the appropriate solo que perks. And it hasnt lost until the survivors actually leave. That mentality is exactly why survivors get so upset when a killer camps during end game collapse "but we already won youre not allowed to kill us" 😒
Okay... Could you explain why Killers have the exact opposite mentality? "I feel like I'm being gen rushed. All the gens are done before I've killed anyone. I deserve more kills and/or at least one kill."
-
I absolutely love this: "But relying on the safety net to catch you every single time probably means you're not a very good tightrope walker."
I'm thoroughly amused right now. You've made my day. Thank you. 😍
-
@Entity_Hugs said:
Because it's one of the only perks we have that allows us to have a chance of winning when games end in under 5 minutes and SWF groups are everywhere.
I could say the same thing about D. Strike, and Dead Hard. Every Survivor uses them because they work.
I really wish you'd rephrase this...
You use it because it's one of the only Perks that allows you to have a chance of winning after you've, for all intents and purposes, already lost.
I'm pretty sure SWF are less common than dead zones and proxy camping (at least in my region and/or on my platform). Are you really taking the time to check profiles and friend lists? After all, that is how you confirm a SWF exists.
-
"That one,in my opinion,is completely wrong.The reason why decreased map size is so good for not only the top killer but the rest as well is because the can start their chases much faster than before.It doesn't mean chases will be quicker but there will be more of them in shorter time spans.It also narrows the gap between the top killers and the rest.
But yes,ultimately smaller maps are also a direct buff to the top killers."
I guess I did forget to mention that decreased map size would benefit the Killers that went unmentioned. I definitely agree with that part. I'm not sure I completely agree with the gap being narrowed between the Killers, at least not in a very significant way. The "meta" Killers would certainly get stronger, but with rapidly increasing diminishing returns. Weaker Killers would simply get stronger.
Yes, the gap would be smaller, but the ceiling of power would also be raised. If we could quantify it, I'm not sure how much closer the overall gap would be.
-
@Milo said:
I know it will propably never happens, but in my opinin it would solve a lot of game problems along with its toxicityOr it will increase que times. Probably inrease que times.
I agree. This would definitely increase queue times. This game is already split between Killers/Survivors, Rank ranges (when local player population supports functional matchmaking), and Regions/Time Zones. I don't think we want or need even more splits.