Troman
Troman
About
- Username
- Troman
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,161
- Last Active
Comments
-
Yeah, I had the same idea, it can probably work, at least better than the current MMR.
-
@ShinobuSK said:
My winrate with survivor is 80% and killer about 25-30% so its pretty accurate for me
It's always funny to find out that those who say solo Q is fine are killer mains or sympathize killers:
"So many Noed posts lately. Did people got tired of usual Spirit/Swf posts ?"
"Make killer gameplay even more obnoxious? No thanks ""
"Genrush is when you use BNPs or when you leave teammate on the hook hit second stage or even die because you prioritize the gen. How does it not exist?"
Actually, didn't you write that your escape rate is 90% and not 80%:
"For me it made escape rate from 60% to almost 90 as well."
Another who who states that his solo Q escape rate is 110% and another killer main. What a surprise...
-
I run it now, even without open handed and I like it. The new WoO will be great, I like the changes.
-
Killers will always complain a lot. They always did and they always will.
-
@feruis said:
Solo q is fine.
When someone says "sOlO q Is FiNe" or "I WiN MoSt Of My SoLo GaMeS", I look at his profile and that person turns out to be an entitled killer main 10/10:
Tunneling, Camping and Slugging doesn't exist, killer is simply doing his objective
Soo reward survivor for nothing? No.
Perfect time to buff Myers.
People quit even when i play Trapper, they will quit against anything, they just want easy games.
Solo q would be "fine" for you even if no one ever survived.
-
Why DEVs refuse to buff solo is the biggest riddle of DBD, the forum is full of these threads, they don't listen to the community.
Kindred without the ability to see killer would be a good start.
-
@Babawizwiz said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2243883#Comment_2243883
so in general, still survivor sided
Your argumentation level: the game is Spirit-sided, so it's Killer sided.
Many solo players don't play SWF, so buffing Killers would make solo even weaker and solo already sucks.
-
Buff solo, buff weaker killers. Problem solved.
-
I lost a game as killer/survivor, so killer/survivor mus be buffed. What a perverted logic.
-
killrate is 70% and some entitled killer mains still think that DBD is survivor sided. Sigh.
-
Low quality bait
-
It is much easier, yes. Official killrate is about 65-70%. Until rank 7-5 I win around 80% of my games with Wraith, most of them with only 1-2 gens done.
Concerning winning streaks. Ayrun lately made a 30 solo escapes streak, he used keys every match though. That's not much and he is one of the best loopers.
-
@TruEternity said:
I don’t believe that to be true. I will say most people misuse the term, but it is possible. Bringing BNP’s and gen speed increasing builds, splitting up and trying to end the game in 3 minutes is definitely a thing. Just doing gens isn’t the problem, it’s when builds increasing gen speeds are brought in a coordinated group that is true “gen rushing”
But to be honest this is still doing the survivor game objective. The objective is to do gens as fast as possible.
Although I would completely remove BNP from the game. Not that they are used that often, but still, it is not fair and is not balanced.
What I would call "genrush" is old BNP, which used to complete a gen instantly, other than that there is no "genrush" anymore.
-
Forget about a casual mode already, it's not gonna happen. Also forget about removing SWF, it's not gonna happen too.
-
Because "genrush" is not a problem. It doesn't matter how fast gens pop at the BEGINNING, as long as killers get at least 2k on average at the end. And let me remind you, the official killrate is about 65-70% now.
Gens only pop fast at the beginning because there are 4 healthy survivors and it slows down as the match progresses. Should survivors start the match on hooks? BHVR sees no problem with "genrush" and they are right.
-
Looking at all the replies, are these the same killers that complain that survivors are ToXiC? That's the best example that killer community is the most toxic one in this game, swarming over anyone who's opinion they don't agree with and troll him/her. That's disgusting.
-
Yes
-
@D3spair said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2424452#Comment_2424452
This is why I hid the results, People will assume here "So what? you 4Kd them and without Add Ons right?" but the problem is still there.
There is no problem. Gens pop fast at the beginning, because there are 4 healthy survivors. And later gens get popped very slow, as survivors get hooked, injured, sacrificed and the fact that your got a 4k proves it. I don't understand the "problem" at all.
-
@xenotimebong said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2418138#Comment_2418138
And then the killer gets another Pop regression kick on your gen, removing more progress than the person “wasting time” by letting themselves be hooked and killed bought you.
I don’t think anyone is asking to go back to button mashing, that mechanic was almost universally hated. It isn’t a button mash/skill check binary choice, there are other options.
And all killers have Pop as their basekit and it's always 30 seconds, not more and it's always the gen that someone is repairing, suure.
Usually when someone tries to suicide and gets rescued, he suddenly starts playing again, because it's more fun to go down in a chase. Survivors who just stand still waiting to be killed is so rare, it's neglectable.
-
@xenotimebong said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2418114#Comment_2418114
30 seconds is essentially meaningless when the match then becomes a 3v1.
As long as it keeps the killer busy for some time, it's not meaningless. And I don't have to smash spacebar anymore. To much profit to revert it.
-
@xenotimebong said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2418045#Comment_2418045
It isn’t more fair for other survivors because the person who had checked out of the match is still checked out of the match and still ends up dead, just 30 seconds later than they planned. I’ve never seen a positive scenario where a survivor gets unhooked when they clearly wanted to die on hook, they almost always die immediately after and they never contribute anything positive to the match before they do. It makes no difference, it’s just annoying for everyone.
30 seconds is better than 0. And usually it's much more.
-
@0wl said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2418049#Comment_2418049
I paid for the game so I can do whatever I want with it.
You can do whatever you want, as long as the game supports it. What's the problem?
-
No BNPs, no keys, no insta-heals (not so "insta" anymore, but anyway), although I have tons of them.
-
@xenotimebong said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2418016#Comment_2418016
Then they just get grabbed off the hook and start spamming loud noise notifications until the killer hooks them again and kills them. It really does nothing but waste everyone’s time and give me a headache if I’m the one playing killer.
Just go kill him. It's still more fair to other survivors. But to be honest I haven't seen anyone spamming "loud noises", waiting to be killed for more than a year.
-
@0wl said:
It prolongs unwanted games. Remove it and return the old mechanic.
No. You ruin the game for other survivors by suiciding.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2416507#Comment_2416507
But you can keep it into consideration and decide how you reveal information. You think the killer's memory shouldn't be tested. I believe the killer wanted the information it shouldn't be free. Should we start making scratch marks permanent, too?
How can you test Killer's memory with scratchmarks? You can't differentiate between strategic and static game elements. Showing who's in SWF is a pure a QOL thing. It requires no in-game skill and it is static. Let's fool around with GUI and reveal everything for 3 seconds and pretend it's "balance". Makes no sense whatsoever.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2416480#Comment_2416480
You're not taking into consideration the survivors not in coms, just on SWF. You're making it unnecessarily harder for them.
That's of the problems with SWF that DBD is facing, you can't differentiate between such survivors, so you approximate. Your original idea doesn't make any differentiation too, it's just luck-based.
-
Token-based perk like that is a bad idea to begin with. Killer's aura-revealing perks work the entire match, so it would be better to make Distortion cooldown-based for example.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2416470#Comment_2416470
What would you tweak to balance out knowing who's in coms, while also knowing the game is currently balanced around the intention of having no coms?
This idea would be balancing out SWF and comms, there's no need to balance out something, that's already balancing out another thing.
But as an example, you can give the same information to other survivors, if they see that someone from an SWF group is hooked, they will know that they don't have to rush to a hook, some other SWF buddy will do it, so it's safe to continue repairing a gen. Just an idea, not a real suggestion.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2416449#Comment_2416449
I just think it's bad balancing to ignore one side outright when introducing new ideas. New information is being provided to the killer with zero regard for the survivors. They're players, too, and need to be considered.
Yes, balance is important and survivors too, but this is not the right case to be worried of that and not the right way. It is an overcomplication of a feature that doesn't really have huge impact and can't be controlled by survivors in any way: once you know it as a killer, you know it and by hiding that information you don't tweak the balance in any way, it would be a false sense of "restoring the balance". Balance can be tweaked in other ways.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2416434#Comment_2416434
This is an unfair comparison. The generators are literally the objective of the survivors, and thus that information is absolutely VITAL to the killer's success. Knowing you're against a SWF is not.
That means there are even less reasons to hide it, once you already know it, because this information is static. It's just a matter of your memory capabilities and it's a good game design if this information stays. But we can agree to disagree, we don't even know if DEVs would implement this feature.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2416419#Comment_2416419
I don't know if I agree. Right now this idea already half-applies to Nemesis players. There's been more than once that zombies have tackled some campers and I had no idea because I wasn't watching for it. If it was a longer than a few seconds thing, then maybe we could do different tiers of the offering? It could be intensity of the highlight or the length the information remains available. I'm not even opposed to like 20 seconds, but I still don't think it should be permanent. We do need to consider the survivors, too.
You are thinking in a too complicated way. This is static information (unlike survivor location for example), like the number of gens left to be repaired, number of hooks. We don't play games with that information and reveal number of gens that is still to be done for 3 seconds right after a gen was just repaired. It's the same thing here. You are given a chance to see who is in SWF and once you know it, there's no need to check Killer's memory capabilities by hiding it.
-
@SonicOffline said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2416406#Comment_2416406
I feel that keeping the information visible all game is too much. I was attempting to avoid the neon sign approach, so that it's another thing players have to look for and isn't just given to them. If you didn't care to pay attention when the information was given, then you don't care to know. It's not functionally much different than not paying attention to how much you've hooked which player.
It's just bad design to force players to pay attention to gfx that disappears fast, it will be just luck based: did you have a chance to pay attention or were you in the middle of a chase. If we want to reveal that information, then it's fine for it to stay revealed for the entire game, since this is not something that's going to change in the middle of the game.
-
Theoretically this is not such a bad idea. It would be bad if the killer knew that he is dealing with SWF in the lobby or right after the beginning of the game, he could just DC, but in the middle of the game it should be fine. SWF has an advantage that they can communicate information about the killer, why shouldn't the killer know that he is dealing with SWF and adapt accordingly.
I would actually do it this way: as soon as a survivor is downed/grabbed/hooked (because this is when team-play kicks in), all his SWF members become color-coded for example. Like if there are 2+2 SWF groups and you down a survivor, then his own icon and his buddy's icon are highlighted in the same color and stay this way for the entire game, there's no need to hide this information again. The killer still has no information about the other 2 survivors, until one of them is downed. This way the killer can adapt his strategy.
Sure, survivors will adapt to it, but the killer has the right to know, as long as it doesn't allow him ruin the game for others by dodging the lobby or DCing after the start of the game.
-
Blight is definitely a monster in chases and map pressure, especially with Tinkerer, that's why I personally don't like going against him.
-
@SasukeKun said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2411069#Comment_2411069
How is dealing with stress all the time fun on a video game? think about that
I was too optimistic about my suggestion to think about it. How about you read carefully what I wrote first.
-
@SasukeKun said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2411046#Comment_2411046
You said both in one sentence which is it
Just think about it.
-
Killer is fun and it's easy to win as Killer. The biggest problem with playing Killer is how stressful it can be, especially if you face a seal squad SWF.
-
@ciara1999 said:
I only play solo queue, it's annoying sometimes but I actually like it, I dunno what it is but I think Comms would ruin the game.
I like not knowing where the killer is, and other survivors sometimes. It's what keeps the tense atmosphere during the match for me.
If I'm struggling with my teammates, I usually bring bond and a good medkit so I can heal them quickly.
I think Comms would be too complicated to add in a way that it would be fair to both sides.
I like all that stuff about solo Q too. But I also like to escape, just like killers like to sacrifice survivors.
That said I don't think comms is the right way to buff solo Q, we need another way.
-
Give him Bloodlust in tier 1. Allow him to switch between Tier 1 and 2, so they can be used strategically. That's what Myers should look like.
-
@DemonDaddy said:
Survivor strength is at a peak right now, failure is a result of mistakes and little else.
You must be new to the game. Anyone who plays this game since its release knows that Survivors were never as weak as now. It's Killers strength that's at a peak now.
-
Good points. Tunneling and camping is really unhealthy for the game. It's not Killers' fault, it's BHVR that must address these issues.
One thing I don't agree with is that gen rush is the same as tunneling/camping. It is your choice as a killer if you camp and tunnel, yes, it's allowed and it's a "valid" strategy. As a survivor you don't have an option to gen rush or not. You just spawn, find a gen and start repairing it, you have no other choice. It would be dumb to come to a gen and then wait 30 seconds doing nothing to make sure you are not "gen rushing". Survivors have no control over "gen rush", especially in solo que, since solo survivors can't communicate and decide to gen rush, they are just doing there objective the ONLY possible way. If it is an SWF and they bring several BNPs then yes, you can call it gen rush.
Still, I think DEVs should revive sabotage, not in the form it used to be after release of DBD, it shouldn't be possible to sabotage that many hooks. 1-2 hooks per survivor should be ok, hooks should stay broken for longer, it should take more time to sabotage a hook and should give more BP to survivors. That would prolong the games and we would see less "gen rushing".
-
@MrOogieboogie said:
I play with 1-2 friends at any given time, and the role I prefer is stealthy gen rusher. I build my character around evading the killers detection, or escaping when the killer does find me, and get gens done as fast as possible. The looping and rescuing I leave to my friends.
So basically yes, I would love more stealth elements!
That's my playstyle too, I do gens and evade the killer if I can. It's fun for me to outplay the killer using stealth, it requires more brain to outsmart the killer this way than using looping. Looping is the last resort.
-
I guess I'm one of the few who loves Coldwind, it's the most atmospheric realm and I have no problems with cornfield as a killer, only when I used to be a total newb, I'd lose survivors in it quite often.
-
@JPLongstreet said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2400698#Comment_2400698
What could the devs do about this if they even wanted to? How could it be enforced?
I don't know about the other platforms, but on Xbox the party chat is entirely separate from any game being played. Heck we all can be playing different games and be in the same chat. So DBD wouldn't even know there's a chat. I imagine PlayStation is similar.
Also I believe Microsoft mandated any game they accept cannot interfere with the party chats in any way.
What do you think the devs can do about it?
They can't do anything about it of course, it can't be enforced. That why DEVs should assume that everyone is doing it and duplicate all that information via in-game mechanics and rebalance the game for killers and survivors afterwards. That's really the only realistic way. But BHVR seems to be very hesitant about it so far, there's no real competition for DBD and it's a lot of work.
-
@Raptorrotas said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2400571#Comment_2400571
Additionally, any buff to the survivor basekit will also buff "swf".
In my opinion, the only thing to close the gap, without buffing the people who already use comms, is to add voicechat in the game.
A custom message system like "do gens" etc would not close the gap completely, but not buff swf.
A ping system is enhancing/gets enhanced by Comms as the ping either gets a better explanation or the "im chased by killer" gets a location.
Nerfing SWF will also nerf solo, buffing solo will also buff SWF, but not to the same degree. You can give solo players what SWF players already have anyway. Yes, it will still buff SWF slightly, but not that much. But at the end the global Killer vs Survivor balance will have to be readjusted anyway, so it's not a problem.
Another big advantage to buffing solo instead of nerfing SWF is related to programming issues. If you want to nerf SWF, you have to make a lot of special cases in the code (the famous "Spaghetti-code"), since you will have to differentiate between solo and SWF players in the code, which is more time consuming, less error-prone and will make creation of new content much more problematic.
And the last problem with nerfing SWF is that there are too many kinds of SWF groups: 2-man, 3-man, 4-man and some of them are on comms and others are not. That's too many variants of strength of an SWF groups to deal with selectively and you can't even find out if an SWF group is using comms. Thus a much better approach is to buff all survivors to the information/strength level of a 4-man SWF with comms and buff killers to the same level at the same time.
So, the only right way to close the solo vs SWF gap is to buff solo and killers.
-
@Superyoshiegg said:
There's 36 maps in the game, only five of which are indoor maps (Treatment Theatre, The Game, The Underground Complex, Midwich Elementary School & Raccoon City Police Station).
That's less then 14% of the map pool. If anything, we need more indoor maps.
Who cares about the percentage and why should it be 50%/50%, if the vast majority of players don't like indoor maps.
It's like saying "there's only 3% of people with dementia, we need more".
If you like indoor maps you can use offerings.
-
@glitchboi said:
Constantly doing it = camping
Doing it once or twice = is probably begging to be saved
Yes, this is usually the case nowadays. Fast movement with partial amplitude = killer is camping. Slow one with full amplitude (like when you are trying to kobe) = save me.
The old interpretation is gone.
-
My problem with Blight is that he is really strong in chase, it's very hard to counter him. He gets to you so fast, you can't even make it to the pallet or a window in most cases. And he's not bad at turning, it's hard to hide behind objects during a chase. Usually when a Blights starts chasing me, it's gg, I'd rather go against Nurse, it's easier to outplay her blinks for me.
-
@Power_Guy said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2394335#Comment_2394335
If I understand it, the meter does not reset when saved? So it slowly ahs less and less, even if the Survivor is unhooked?
This would just encourage fast, unsafe unhooks, where the Survivor is downed, hooked again, saved, downed, hooked again, etc. And now the Killer is barely making any progress towards his goal
What I described is a general outline, the problems that you mentioned can be fixed with additional hooking mechanics. Right now when you hook a survivor, you reduce his time on the hook by 50%. Hook someone twice or 3 times within a minute and that survivor is gone, which is very frustrating for the survivor.
If you take my proposal and reduce time on hook by 20-25% each time a survivor is hooked, it can be one possible solution. And it will still fix camping. At the same time you can still use camping strategically if you wish. Again, total time a survivor can spend on a hook will have to be tweaked, probably reduced, to make sure that killers won't have to do more work than now. This approach would be a generalization of the current hooking system. Additional hooking mechanics can be added too, if needed.
It will fix not only camping, but tunneling as well, since tunneling will make almost no sense anymore.