crogers271
crogers271
About
- Username
- crogers271
- Joined
- Visits
- 8,432
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4119311#Comment_4119311
”You are still failing to grasp why survivor is currently miserable, it has nothing to do with if you can win but how you must win in the current game”
Ok, well let’s focus on this then. You say it’s not an issue of how often you escape. What % of your matches do you think you escape? Let’s say you’re escaping at the average 40% of your matches. So in those matches where you’re escaping, you’re still miserable - why? If it’s tunneling/camping or some other objectionable killer strategy that you feel is the problem, but you’re still escaping, then I don’t understand what the issue is. Why does it matter how the killer plays if you still get out?
Why does it matter how the killer plays if you still get out?I'm going to add on to others as my answer is a little different and ties back to the original point.
I want to play an engaging game, try to win (play my best), as survivor play for the team, but am far more interested in it being a competitive game than winning/losing.
Let me break that down
Engaging Game - The mechanics are interesting. If I just do gens and leave, its not fun. If I do a mix of gens, chase, rescues, and still lose, that's a lot better.
Try to win - I don't want to handicap myself and want to set out to win.
Play for the team - hatch escape doesn't mean much, its just a small mini game at the end.
Competitive game - good games are ones where the survivors finish the gens or get really close. If I'm survivor and we lose but all the gens were finished, that's preferrable to a game were we all escape and the killer got only two hooks.
Where I think DbD fails on this -
If as a killer I engage in the 'try to win', I lose out on the 'engaging'. I proxy camp the hook, tunnel, and generally find it uninteresting even if the survivors are good and I end up losing.
If as a killer I instead go for 'competitive game', I feel like I've cheated myself and insulted the survivors by not playing my best. Sure its more engaging, but winning or losing feels ultimately cheapened as I know a handicap was involved (though still, I prefer this over the former).
As survivor, if I gen rush, its usually not very engaging (especially if the killer tunnels, we just do gens, leave).
But one of the things I realized the more I played, and this goes back to the thread title, is that the best game I had as a survivor the killers either didn't have very good game sense or, and I think far more likely, like me trying to play nice to have a competitive game. And then even if I won it was like 'yeah, but he obviously could have tunneled early but didn't for the sake of a better game' which really hurt the enjoyment.
This is also where I think toxicity comes from in the game.
It's kind of like why I, and I know others, where enthused by the anti-tunnel / anti-slug ideas even from the killer perspective. It would have allowed me to 'play my best' as killer, if a survivor made themselves an easy tunnel I wouldn't have felt guilty about doing it, because the mechanics meant it was a trade off I would have to consider. And then when the idea vanished instead of getting refined, well, it was the possibility of a better game that went with it.
-
Couple of points that I probably would have saved for another thread, but now that I may never know if such a thread will appear in the next month -
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4119304#Comment_4119304
Sure, both sides gets things and loose things. But there's a reason SB and WoO were still top 10 most used perks. Same with nerfed DS and DH. The better survivor perks came out years ago. Little has changed. StB the burden was probably the last big meta perk. I guess 5MA but that's just WoO 2.0. And both of those are set for nerfs. Basekit Endurance just got nerfed and is easy for many killers to eat right through. Same with DS. The moment I recover from a DS stun, the user is down again. That's because I play a modern strong killer. The big difference with killer and survivor is that strong killers keep coming out while the survivor meta stays mostly the same, even with nerfs. I don't think killer is easy. I was fighting for my life before the MMR rework but it is "easier than ever" to win more than you lose if you play nearly any killer released in the last couple years with meta perks.
and we need to remember that when both sides are experienced, things tend to be stronger on the survivor side.
I don't really believe this unless all four of the players are exceptional. In that case, yes, four exceptional people working together should win most of the time. But it seems like survivor is still called strong no matter how many nerfs they receive. Even now with nerf after nerf after nerf you're saying it. When does this stop being repeated? When survivors are perkless? When there are three pallets on the map? When every map is Fallen Refuge?
I don't really believe this unless all four of the players are exceptional. In that case, yes, four exceptional people working together should win most of the time.When you compare the two roles
If you want to be at the top of survivor/killer you'd need to - play a lot, study your own game, find other exceptional players to play against, learn the possible perks/maps, take the sweatiest builds (probably a few other things).
As survivor you have to do all that, but in addition - find three other people who aren't friends but as dedicated to the game as you are, practice with them, coordinate schedules on when you are going to play, prepare counterplay for an ever growing roster, memorize the maps even more as you don't have the basekit info (i.e. the clock system).
And I think its inevitable if one side is asked to do more than the other side, and they actually do it, that they have advantage. What I find most surprising is the pure sweat vs sweat match (4 person SWF vs Nurse) is as close as it actually is.
@wesker_shades said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4119304#Comment_4119304
Cogs has a good point here.
While you mentioned that survivors has gotten basekit this and basekit that, alongside a near worthless anti-camp measure (that can be easily bypassed), the reality is that playing survivor outside of custom matches, or god forbid if you play soloQ or anything less than a 4-man SWF these days, you will have to sweat your bums off, and can't afford a single mistake to stay on par with recent killer releases, even if you run full meta perk builds. That is not fun or extiting gameplay anymore, it feels like a chore.To make a counterpoint to your argument, what has killers actually gotten over the years, especially since 6.1.0
- Much slower healing speeds, and especially self-healing on the survivor side.
- 90 second gens, up from 80 seconds.
- Many, many perk buffs, and add-on buffs.
- Complete reworks, often leading to much stronger kits.
- Much less safe pallets for survivors.
- Less strong window setups for survivors.
- More aura read perks, and lots of them.
- Many of the strong survivor perks from the past are now heavily nerfed.
- Ghoul, and subsequent outright broken strong releases (with the exception of Springtrap).
- Smaller maps
Another counterpoint is that, while the general survivor playerbase has developed a better understanding, so has the killer playerbase. The only time the survivor side is stronger is at the very top of the MMR bracket, like the 0.5% level or so. But for the more average players, the killer side is undoubtedly sronger as it currently is. They need to mess up royally in order to lose games.
While you mentioned that survivors has gotten basekit this and basekit that, alongside a near worthless anti-camp measure (that can be easily bypassed)So a very us vs them add on coming from me.
The gen block and the anti-camp frequently get brought up as ways killer play has been curtailed even though, as you point out, they aren't actually a big deal.
On the other hand, before the killer could basekit kill the last survivor, if a survivor was downed near the exit gates and the killer picked up, the survivors could body block / sabo the hook and make the killer drop the survivor and then all run out the door. The remaining survivor couldn't be picked up again because they'd wiggle off, allowing survivors to get a four out.
Now though, if the killer chases the others out, its an almost for certain guaranteed kill.
And I don't know if I've seen anyone other than myself point out that this was just a basekit buff to killers. Substantial? Of course not. Better for the game? Eh, probably. But for as much 'survivors get free stuff' that we here around some very lax mechanics, I've always been surprised that this change just goes unremarked upon. I think its a larger symptom of only seeing the issues for some people that back up their side.
-
You're doing great work.
I don't have any suggestions at the moment, but its something I'll certainly give some thought.
-
@GeneralV said:
Greetings, friends of the Fog! For the very last time here on the Forums, I hope this discussion finds you doing well.
By know I'm sure you are that the DBD Forums' days are numbered. It will remain until this year's Halloween, then it will be shut down, as per the recent announcement.
And well… it would be an understatement to say that these are terrible news. After so many years, so many discussions, so many posts, so many stories of the Fog shared, so many words said about DBD here, and it will all be gone a month from now.
It is hard to wrap my head around it, really.
I was planning to write this post only in October, but I've come to the realization that many people who saw the announcement will, understandably, not return here anymore, as there isn't really a point to do so. Therefore, I thought it was better to write this as soon as possible while people are still around.
It has been quite a journey in here these last seven years. When I joined, back in August of 2019, I did so with the intention of getting my favorite killer, the original version of Freddy Krueger, back to the game, as he had just been reworked. And while that was a failure, I am glad for every second I've spent here. I've met many good friends through this Forum, and it has been an amazing to interact with this part of the DBD community.
Obviously, not everything was perfect. It would be wrong of me to not call out the problems caused by the flawed warning system in here, and the glaring issue of countless friends who lost their accounts because of it. This particular writing has been on the wall for a while now, and I have no doubt that the unfair punishments issued to good Forum members who helped drive constructive discussions forward is one of the reasons for the declining levels of user activity here. Not to mention things such as the feeling of having your feedback never acknowledged, or incidents we witnessed over the years, such as Streetwise and others.
That being said, these Forums will be missed. I cannot claim to speak for anyone other than myself, but I am sure some people would agree that there isn't a replacement for this space the DBD community had. DBD Reddit, the Discord server, the Steam Forums. None of them are the same thing that we had here and, I dare say, all of them are much worse. Unfortunately I believe this will be the end of community engagement for many users, and if not that then overall a worse experience when doing so.
It is sad to see that this Forum will end this way. It truly is. Despite its flaws as a platform, these Forums hold a special place for me. The outstanding support I got for my Old Freddy campaign, the many friends I've met through the threads here, the fun discussions, the different perspectives… these are things that I will never forget.
For those that I'll still be in contact with, I look forward for everything that is to come. And if there is anyone with whom this won't be possible, know that it has been a pleasure to be here and discuss everything Dead by Daylight with you.
So, for one last time, this thread is signed by GeneralV, your friend.
It's going to be a sad month.
See you around.
-
In the possibility any of the following swing by, just to make sure they aren't forgotten.
I really enjoyed @zarr posts, not just because they made mine small by comparison, but that they really worked through an issue.
@C3Tooth always made things more enjoyable along with having good points.
And while I disagreed with them on a lot, I found @Ryuhi to always go out of their way to have a good, productive discussion.
-
@jesterkind said:
To be specific, I'm not talking about the shift from Exposed to Broken. That nerf(? sidegrade?) isn't something I particularly mind.
What I'm referring to here is the change where one person using StB turns off everyone else's StB. Even setting aside that it's wholly unnecessary for this perk - multiple uses only even can happen in scenarios that aren't actively throwing is when someone's tunnelled - I truly do not think it's a good precedent for someone else's actions to turn off your perk completely.
The gap between solo queue and SWF is a lot more than just perks, obviously, but part of it is that sometimes, a perk you want to use is at odds with your teammates. Think something like Inner Strength not scaling well when everyone brings it, or when someone brings a boon perk.
For that example, unavoidable and just an annoyance. But, if someone using Inner Strength once genuinely stopped you from using your own at all, it'd be far worse, and that's what we're at risk of here.Once per trial per survivor is already restrictive enough, and any perk in the game should be balanced around the notion that "once per trial" means "up to four times per trial, depending on how many people bring it". If that means nerfing the effect, I'd argue that's genuinely vastly preferable to being locked out of using your own perks because someone else used theirs first.
That nerf(? sidegrade?) isn't something I particularly mind.It's certainly a nerf because not a healthy survivor is injured, so even if the killer doesn't come back they have a negative effect.
What I'm referring to here is the change where one person using StB turns off everyone else's StB. Even setting aside that it's wholly unnecessary for this perk - multiple uses only evencanhappen in scenarios that aren't actively throwing is when someone's tunnelled - I truly do not think it's a good precedent for someone else's actions to turn off your perk completely.Much like how BHVR approached Diminishing Returns, I think they are listening to arguments that are missing a few key points of logic. Multiple survivors bringing the same perk already has a downside in the trade off they've had to make from other perks. It's especially silly implementation for a counter perk meant to stop something that BHVR overtly recognized as unhealthy gameplay. If they get to stop it multiple times because they brought multiple uses, great.
-
I understand that the effects are strong but that is a perk gone in a matter of seconds.Its not just the effect though that needs to be taken into consideration, but that survivors might spend a lot of time trying to find the totems. I'm not a huge fan of such huge risk/reward mechanics but they only work when they apply to both sides.
Perks to block totems -
Survivors blocking their boons - 15 seconds doesn't sound like enough as the survivor would need to block it and conceivably start making some distance so they'll want to block early. Additionally, I'm not sure it would be very enjoyable gameplay. You have a survivor just waiting around a totem and if a killer takes the time to go over and they find a blocked totem it would probably just feel pretty pointless.
Survivors blocking hexes - If I was worried about hexes I don't know why I wouldn't just take a faster cleanse. I think it would also create confusion among soloq about what hexes are or are not in play, while SWFs could hypothetically ignore cleansing entirely by just timing their hex blocking for when it matters.
I think totem blocking takes a clear working/cleansed mechanic and adds a possibility that just muddles things.
-
We're going to get a lot of 'my time on the forum type' conclusion posts over the next month, aren't we? I'm already thinking about my own.
Anyway, yes, agree with this, a few things to add.
1: Let's say you're a developer who, for whatever reason, wants one side to achieve their objective 60% of the time and the other 40% of the time. A pretty easy way to achieve that is just make the 60% side more straightforward ('easier'). You put more skill expression burden on the 40% side, and the 60% side learns and responds from that.
2: DbD is a very 'stompy' game. This is true I think regardless of the MMR level. If the survivors are better than the killer, than to the killer they seem unbeatable, but if they are worse they are so easy they seem awful at the game.
3: All of the stomps have thrown off what actual 'even' would be like. The classic is the 'the game is survivor sided, look, they almost won this game'.
-
Twitter (and other similar social media) are announcement platforms, not places for discussion.
Reddit has always seemed like a place to drop quick questions, again not have discussions.
Discord is a place to have casual, quick chats between a small to medium sized group, again not having actual discussions.
Steam, I guess there is no reason it should be as bad as it is, but seems absurd to go there.
-
The forums are the official forums. That's always given more of a sense of weight to what BHVR people post here and whether things have a chance of being read or not. There should have been a direct line from starting things on the official BHVR forum and then spreading out from there.
Its also been a great place for actual discussions. The feedback on patches and PTBs seems more detailed here than other places. People have been able to post their ideas on why something does or does not work, and others can post detailed responses. Once upon a time we got BHVR people to weigh in on those issues as well.
Places like discord just seem to much more be 'who shouts the loudest'. Unfortunately that seems be a trend for BHVR on gathering feedback where they don't go beyond surface deep and thus continually seem like they are going to address community concerns, and then don't.
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118795#Comment_4118795
The end goal for me is trying to distinguish between who is here to have a good faith discussion about balance vs who is saying things that obviously aren’t true just to poke at the side they don’t like. People can decide if they want to share their stats to show how much they play both sides - I really don’t care. But I can respect the opinions of those like the ones you mention above because, even if I disagree with them, if I know they’re being sincere and they can back up what they say.
And I’m happy to share my stats any time. Just a casual player who hovers around the average on both sides. I’m certainly not consistently stomping survivor teams like some claim is so easy to do for anyone with just a few hours experience:unsafe:blob:https://forums.bhvr.com/b3d3af8c-f57b-43ba-bb90-71f1e023baf6
The end goal for me is trying to distinguish between who is here to have a good faith discussion about balance vs who is saying things that obviously aren’t true just to poke at the side they don’t like.This sounds like the opposite of good faith. You're demanding people provide something and, if they do, it doesn't have any meaning.
You're also only asking this of people who disagree with you.
But I can respect the opinions of those like the ones you mention above because,But its not an opinion, its a factual statement. You're denying that a thing exists, and then when some people provide their evidence that it does, you just move on. 'Respect' is not a discussion.
Also I don't think the stats posted correctly, though given the stat page really only kinda works for one side of the game it creates its own issue.
You also don't lay out your definitions. What's consistently? How often does someone need to face 'good' survivors for it to count? What exactly do survivors have to do to qualify as good?
-
@Rokku_Rorru said:
bruh this is the same reason they gave for distortion, do they play their own game. People return to the hook regardless lol
It's really sad how much BHVR is affected by the argument of: 'trust us, we'll play in a healthier manner if you make it easier'.
@Hoopme said:
To prevent tunneling we put a giant red arrow above the unhooked survivor
This made me laugh quite a bit. It actually was one of the reasons argued for when they showed the hook states directly on each survivor - just so the killer doesn't accidently tunnel.
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118595#Comment_4118595
Nobody is “dominating” as killer after a few hours of play. I’ve been playing killer for a long time and I consistently face good survivors that provide plenty of challenge.
How are you coming to this conclusion? Are you dominating as killer yourself? I’d be curious to see your hours played as killer and kill rate stats if you’re willing to share.How are you coming to this conclusion? Are you dominating as killer yourself? I’d be curious to see your hours played as killer and kill rate stats if you’re willing to share.What's the end goal of the questions?
@cogsturning and @vol4r posted their stats above. This is one of the classic forum dodges of one sided demands for proof. And when people actually step up with proof, it usually leads to either goal post moving or other side steps to avoid it.
What's your definition of consistently face? What's your kill rate on various killers being you're asking others?
-
@FerrousFacade said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118507#Comment_4118507
Let's say BHVR implemented extensive tutorials on how to loop and a practice ground that could be used to practice against various killers. It wouldn't matter because there would be no way to force someone to use it. I don't have a problem with casual players existing but so long as matchmaking can place those casuals on my team I am forced to deal with it. I can either accept that I lose solely because of matchmaking, always play in a four man SWF, or just stop playing survivor. Only the most casual of players are going to be OK with option one but they don't play enough to maintain queue times and if they started to they would run straight into the same frustrations. If someone does want to keep playing that means going with option two. The logical outcome remains pushing everyone other than four man SWF out of the survivor role.
There could be a way to make this casual player fine amongst less casual but that would mean some sort of overhaul to allow every survivor worse than the killer to die while the ones better than the killer survive. I don't see a way to do that which won't be screamed out of existence before it leaves the PTB. It would need to address the fact that tunneling can leave the match in an unwinnable state for all survivors but that is the primary reason tunneling is guarded so vehemently. I have also seen slugging for the 4k defended far too many times to believe we wouldn't see complaints about the number of times matches would end in a 2k even if that individual killers kill rate didn't budge.
Let's say BHVR implemented extensive tutorials on how to loop and a practice ground that could be used to practice against various killers.It's also a strange standard to say that one side has to do a bunch of tutorials to play the game, but not the other side.
-
@Rickprado said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118395#Comment_4118395
But that's the issue: its not an anti-camp system, its an antifacecamp system. That why it works. Many claim it doesn't work as an anti camp system because they don't like what this system allow.
I've said endgame chat because its a common thing people calling whenever they dislike about a killer behaviour as tunneling.
Its not clear about anti-tunnel. Some people claim that killing someone with 6 hooks still is tunneling and shouldn't be allowed; other believes a kill with 4 hooks is fine. People have been saying things about "tunneling" without even trying to define what is tunneling.
But that's the issue: its not an anti-camp system, its an antifacecamp system.Eh, not really though its common to say. It still punishes lingering near the hook or killers who frequently return expecting someone.
Many claim it doesn't work as an anti camp system because they don't like what this system allow.Whatever system is put in place to address anything you'll almost certainly having some people saying it goes too far and others that it doesn't go far enough.
But by putting a system in place BHVR moved the discussion to that. Instead of 'should the system even exist or not' people argue over the radius and how fast it should tick. That's an overall sign of a healthier game.
I've said endgame chat because its a common thing people calling whenever they dislike about a killer behaviour as tunneling.Sure they do, I've also been called a SWF, bully squad, gen rusher, etc. when not even close to anything of things. The fact that some people troll or have crazy takes isn't really relevant to the discussion.
Some people claim that killing someone with 6 hooks still is tunneling and shouldn't be allowed; other believes a kill with 4 hooks is fine.Very few people have said shouldn't be allowed. One of the more absurd things about the response to the anti-tunnel idea is that certain things were just becoming impossible. Some were harder or had bigger trade offs, which is what survivors have broadly been asking for, but the idea of impossible was never accurate.
People have been saying things about "tunneling" without even trying to define what is tunneling.This is true of everything. How fast does a squad have to do gens to be gen rush? How many hook sabos to be a bully squad (or is that even a bully squad?). How far does a killer have to go to not be proxy camping? This is just a normal part about how words work.
With anti-camping, anti-3 genning, anti-infinites, BHVR recognized an overall game problem and set reasonably cautious guidelines around extreme events and then modified from there based on feedback/gameplay/data. And, again of course, people disagree with them, that's normal, but at least they are approaching the issue in the correct fashion. BHVR did the exact opposite with the anti-tunnel ideas (i.e. throw everything at the wall instead of setting a starting point and working from there) which is why it was such an extreme failure. But the issue isn't shifting definitions or a foundational issue, that's true for many elements of the game, the issue was their approach.
-
I still don't get the idea on why StB being used more than once a match is problematic. If there are two or more survivors the killer never finds/avoids and they get to use it, then the perk is doing what it is supposed to do.
Otherwise, yeah on what you typed.
-
@Slurp_Ramen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118267#Comment_4118267
I don’t like WoO because it lowers the skill ceiling of the game, it also lowers the skill floor, which I’m completely fine with as we shouldn’t be punishing new players even more.
But the problem is it doesn’t lower the ceiling in a fun or interesting way, it just incentivizes you to turn your brain off and run to yellow pre drop and pre run, without having to learn tile spawns, tile weights, and resource management(this is the big one as you can severely screw your team over) ; which are fundamental parts of the macro game for survivor to keep tabs on and learn.
I don’t think it’s overpowered nor do I think it’s overly unhealthy but it does encourage a lack of thinking in the average player which over time will make you worse, because while everyone else is learning the game you’re falling behind and you don’t even know it.
I may have to check my bias here though, because I’m a big believer in self improvement and just learning the deep systems and mechanics of games and overall strategy/knowledge as a whole, I get not every player is like that, nor wants the experience I’m looking for. So perhaps it’s not my place to be discussing such things. But this is where I’m coming from personally.
And on a note about pain res, I think it’s completely fine when not stacked with other regression perks. because it actually does encourage you think about the game on a deeper level, you have to actually get a down to even use it, you have to track which survivors you already use pain res on, whether or not you wanna use the pain res right now or bank it for later , take note on where you’re looping and if you can make it to a scourge hook in time before a gen pops. It’s definitely a far cry from its initial debut of essentially infinite stacks of uncounterable regression.
Perhaps im being too reductive when it comes to WoO and the brain power it takes to use it though.
When I think of healthy perks a few things come to mind: does it meaningfully change the way you play the game, does it encourage you to interact with the games systems in a different way, is the effect noticeable for 1 or both sides, bonus points if it encourages your opponent to play around it in a back and forth. And perhaps the most important thing is it fun which of course is purely subjective.But the problem is it doesn’t lower the ceiling in a fun or interesting way, it just incentivizes you to turn your brain off and run to yellow pre drop and pre run, without having to learn tile spawns, tile weights, and resource management(this is the big one as you can severely screw your team over) ; which are fundamental parts of the macro game for survivor to keep tabs on and learn.That's fine. We all have things we like and dislike. I barely ever used windows because I felt like all the yellow on the map was ugly and broke immersion.
but it does encourage a lack of thinking in the average player which over time will make you worse, because while everyone else is learning the game you’re falling behind and you don’t even know it.I may have to check my bias here though, because I’m a big believer in self improvement and just learning the deep systems and mechanics of games and overall strategy/knowledge as a whole, I get not every player is like that, nor wants the experience I’m looking for. So perhaps it’s not my place to be discussing such things. But this is where I’m coming from personally.Yes and no. There are certainly casual players who want to boot up the fun, silly slasher game and just play and aren't thinking about long term skill expression.
But its also what we consider skill expression. You mention tile layouts. I suspect there are lots of players who would consider memorizing tile layouts and window placement not to actually be skill expression, just a chore. Instead they view skill expression more in game sense and decision making (likely other possibilities as well) and WoO let's them focus on the meaningful parts of the game.
@Slurp_Ramen said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118361#Comment_4118361
“By delving into 16 vs 4 you are going against the stated intent of your title. You are comparing killer perks to survivor perks and claiming that the 16 survivors get across the whole team are comparable to the 4 the killer gets.”
Apologies if I misled you. In your defense i phrased it poorly.
I wasn’t exactly comparing the number disparity between killer and survivor directly like you said that antithetical to my whole post. I was referring to the disparity within the roles themselves. How would balance botany when you can stack 3 additional times across the team and still have room for 12 more perks STOP. How would balance sloppy butcher in comparison to killer addons/powers and other anti healing STOP.
Looking back and reflecting I really wish I could phrase it better I can’t to seem to exactly describe how im thinking about it.
And like Dodoswarm mentioned killers do have their powers and addons to think about on top of perks.
And survivors have items. Which I didn’t really factor in when making my original post.
This also makes me think how cool a draft perk game mode could be with beefed up perks but no repeats between survivors, could be fun for build crafting, kinda like a more controlled chaos shuffle.How would balance botany when you can stack 3 additional times across the team and still have room for 12 more perks STOP. How would balance sloppy butcher in comparison to killer addons/powers and other anti healing STOP.I'm stealing a line from someone, but 'game design isn't easy'.
However, they aren't in a vacuum. If we're just talking balance, the starting point is clear - is a certain game element (perk, map, killer, etc) over or under performing? If so, why might that be? Simple nerfs/buffs might be all that is needed, or you could have a deeper design problem.
Take botany - BHVR should have data on how strong it is if 1 person runs it, 2 people, 3 people, or 4 people. They could look to see how people do with it and if its a problem (they should also look to see if there is something its paired with that might be the issue, such as the Asian self-heal meta).
The issue becomes trickier if its a perk that does something some players find unenjoyable but others like (i.e. Ghoul), then you have trickier decisions.
-
@Rickprado said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4117290#Comment_4117290
I believe there is a lot of miscommunication and confusion around this topic. Probably the majority of players agrees that hard tunneling isn't healthy for the game. But what I've seen too is some people considering so many things as "tunneling" that the issue got diluted in vague discussions that "bad players tunnel" without addressing what they've meant for tunneling. In pub matches people accuse others of "tunneling" even when its a 12 hook game.
In pub matches people accuse others of "tunneling" even when its a 12 hook game.I say this about a few things, but I really don't think people should take seriously what people say in end game chat. Some players are just trolls who will say something negative and others are just emotional/heated after an intense game and overreacting to what happened.
Which, to kind of get around to my point and I think @Aven_Fallen - whenever people discuss this is in a calm manner, there are pretty clear definitions drawn of where tunneling is. Does it vary person to person? Sure, but people are generally able to establish what they view as problematic and not just use it as a buzz word.
BHVR's job should have been to cut through that and establish a clear line. They did it with anti-camp, players had, and still do, widely differing definitions of camping, but BHVR drew clear lines where they thought it was a problem. With anti-tunnel they failed to do that in a pretty shocking fashion, but it is something that they easily could have been done.
-
@HexSlugged said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118220#Comment_4118220
if you actually read what words were said and understand what individual words mean on their own and then what they mean when they are put together, you would clearly be able to see that my statement and premise did not claim that killers do not have object permanence.
I cant abide dishonesty in conversation. you can disagree and nort resort to dishonest tactics to try and bolster your point. I am not interested in communicating further with you.
I think you're upset that I threw your own tactic back at you. You tried to discard an entire post and avoid either defending or clarifying your own words based on a dishonest reading of what was written. I merely did the same thing and even pointed out I was doing it.
I however, after throwing it back at you, still went on to actually explain the point again to give you an opportunity to respond. That's what honest conversation actually is.
-
I liked the title, but the argument is severely flawed.
You have to keep in mind thatkillers only get 4 perks(maybe half a perk with some specific add ons) andsurvivors, in total, get 16 perks.I can't believe this argument has stuck around as long as it has.
If gens took 180 seconds, the killer could play with 0 perks. If gens took 30 seconds the survivors could play with 0 perks. Just because both sides have something that is called the same thing ('perks') doesn't mean one having more is in anyway relevant. You have to compare all of the elements together of the game.
and it’s no surprise over the last few months we’ve seen bhvr steadily lower the power ceiling on survivor perks; because unlike killersurvivor can stack duplicate perks with no downsideOf course there's a downside. They are dedicating a perk slot to something that could serve as another purpose and/or exposing all of themselves to the same counter (going to focus on the former). If four survivors bring StB, and only 1 of them end up using it, that means 3 survivors have a wasted perk slot that could have done something else.
You can't ignore opportunity cost, counter risk, or wasted potential when discussing the idea of survivors having redundancy in the perks they bring. They are trading efficiency in something else to increase the chance they are ensured of having something (which, to be clear, as a gameplay element is absolutely fine)
Back to the top
As an example let’s take the recent side grade to Windows of opportunity, many people have made their feelings known about not liking the change simply because it isn’t an unhealthy perk on the surface and it’s one of the most popular survivor perks, and has been for years.
So people upset at the change go and say‘well what about the popular killer perks like pain res that should be nerfed too’and that’s where they lose me.Because if a person argues that the perk has been common for a long time, the reasoning being popular perks should be changed for the sake of change, people are right to ask why it doesn't apply to killer perks if the goal is to shake up the meta.
If people argue that WoO is handholding for survivors, and the reasoning is handholding is bad, people are right to ask why not just the perk changes but the devs words are boosting handholding for the killers.
If your argument is that WoO was overpowered/unhealthy, then you shouldn't fall into the trap of either the earlier two reasonings, and just explain why its bad. Its possible something could work for killer and not survivor (or the other way around), but you have to explain the reasoning why its only different/bad on one side, and 'power budgets', 'perk stacking', 'meta shakeup', 'handholding', are either all real bad reasonings and/or being very selectively applied.
-
@ShanoaLegendaryPlz said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118197#Comment_4118197
It can block totems, but survivors can now break totems from like 10%-100% faster while also avoiding being able to scream. Thoth will now entirely depend on how often you can hook. Rather than protecting the totems manually like jason or judgement. So theres ways to keep people away from totems but once they touch them they get deleted in seconds.
For examples 'better than new' makes survivors break totems 50% faster, calm spirit 10% faster while immune to scream, 'flow state' 15% per stack up to 5 (75%). And small game now just shows totems through walls
What made totems hard to break was constant interuption while the totems took so long to break. Now you have a very short window to stop them by catching and hooking someone.
It can block totems, but survivors can now break totems from like 10%-100% fasterThey already could with Counterforce. This isn't Chaos Shuffle. The fact that there are more perks that do the same thing doesn't actually make it anymore likely survivors take them.
-
@T1MEXII said:
I believe that the rework was revealed around March 2025. I was just wondering if you planned on releasing a PTB for that soon?
I believe that version of the rework was officially cancelled. People seem to have radically different ideas on what direction to go with Skull Merchant, which seems to just leave her stuck where she is.
-
@HexSlugged said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118149#Comment_4118149
When has in the history of the game has been using scratch marks and blood pools "auto pilot mode"? if this is what your going to start off the premis of your message with, the remainder has no value to me.
if this is what your going to start off the premis of your message with, the remainder has no value to me.Hey, I can play this game to: if your premise is that a killer can't maintain basic object permanence when a survivor goes around a corner, then your posts shouldn't be taken seriously.
Anyway, the killer has varying levels of access to aura read, scratch marks, blood pools, sounds they can hear, their own eyes to see the survivors, and their own brains and game sense to make deductions about where they might be. The only thing that makes this not an autopilot is that the survivors have tools to deny the killer some of these methods, but never all of them. Wanting all of them is indeed asking for the killer to be on auto-pilot mode where they are just pointed at the survivors. To echo what @MashedBroccoli said, we're getting entirely new levels of hand holding for killers.
Like I asked, what actually do you want the killer player to do? What actual skill expression are they meant to deploy to find the survivors?
-
@CrossTheSholf said:
The Anti Tunnel "solutions" fundamentally broke the game. They had so many issues with determining "what is tunneling" that killers would get punished just for playing the game
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118183#Comment_4118183
Again, what defines tunneling.
To quote from my first post:
12 months ago - Here's the anti-tunnel PTB. It's anti-tunnel everything. Even more types of tunneling than we can remember with FOUR substantially game changing punishments/ways to make tunneling harder. You wanted anti-tunnel, we're giving you all the anti-tunnel.I don't think BHVR should be let off the hook because they didn't take the time to figure out what the actual complaints where and instead just threw everything at the wall - if anything it proves their failure wasn't proof of the idea being bad, but they had no clear concept going into the issue. Many, many people have proposed pretty simplistic reasonable solutions over the years, but BHVR took the approach of crazy overhaul or nothing and since has gone in the direction of making tunneling easier.
-
@HexSlugged said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4118094#Comment_4118094
i am also a stealth survivor, and i enjoy very much utilising stealth and such, its quite fun. but its not fun to deal with no tracking tools frequently and for long periods of time because again, 1. the game was not ever designed for you to track people based on that. thats just objectively the case. Would you enjoy the game as killer if there was no aura possibilities or scratch marks?
your eyes work when your looking at someone directly in your LOS. but every single map is filled to the brim with los breakers. i can just slap on lightweight and boom now you will never know where i am because the one tool your using to track me which was never intended to be the primary way to track people is no longer at your disposal. now i do that a couple times a match and waste your time and now you lost the game because you are just lacking the tools that the game is designed around in order to function properly.
if there is 3 gens and 3 different directions you can go to. you know whats helpful to even know where to go? auras and scratchmarks so you can get to playing the game.
i promise you that 99% of killers do not enjoy spending multiple minutes traversing the map not in chase because they cant find anyone because everyone is hiding or preventing the tools from working that allow chases to happen unless you stumble in to someone and even on incredibly proficient killers, they can get disoriented and confused the second a surv just appears to vanish in thin air.
large parts of chases have to operate without you having LOS. if i have to literally spend half the map to catch up to you in a straight line, how exactly am i going to be able to spend half the map keeping track of where your going when you can move left or right, move out of sight and there are 20 different directions you could have gone and i have no option but to make a guess.
you might not feel bothered by it when you run into it every once in a while. deal with it frequently or have multiple teams using it (where there are perks that completely remove the footsteps and breathing as well) and tell me how fun of an experience that would make killer?
furthermore, not everyone has the same level of hearing acuity, nor do they have good headsets. some people only have their tv speakers, some only have a 30 dollar walmart headset and some people dont have sharp hearing like myself. i hear ok, but i had lots of ear infections when younger and it dulled my hearing. the game ISNT precise with its sounds. cuz the game wasnt built like COD where such information is critical. you can also only hear footsteps within 8 meters.
How is that useful when a massive amount of chases will have a distance beyond 8 meters? if your within footstep range i probably already see you or your on the same tile, which has 3 different exits out of and if you choose an exit and are now 9 meters away, which exit you took is now a guess (educated guess sometimes but ALWAYS a guess)
and if im within footstep range, there is a good chance i have chase music going with some killers having more loud or obnoxious music. that music is extremely loud and overshadows all other audio in the game. i play with volume all the way up specificalkly so i can hear these subtler sound but that means that all other sounds are bombs in my ears though the chase music is the main issue.
if games were slower than they are and i could afford to play wheres waldo with survivors than sure, not as big of a deal. i dont have time to play wheres waldo, i need to find my chases or im going to tunnel out the person who i can actually engage the game with.
What exactly do you want the killer role to do? Your post makes it sound like you want killer to be auto-pilot mode.
your eyes work when your looking at someone directly in your LOS. but every single map is filled to the brim with los breakers. i can just slap on lightweight and boom now you will never know where i am because the one tool your using to track me which was never intended to be the primary way to track people is no longer at your disposal'The one tool?' 'Never know where I am?' Just because someone goes around a corner doesn't mean they cease to exist. Part of game sense is trying to anticipate where they might be going. Even without scratch marks the killer can use their surroundings to make a prediction on where they are going.
The survivor should of course also be taking this into account, but that's what makes it a game.
now i do that a couple times a match and waste your time and now you lost the game because you are just lacking the tools that the game is designed around in order to function properly.'Game is designed around' - the line of sight blockers aren't there accidently. Not even the spaghetti code is that bad.
furthermore, not everyone has the same level of hearing acuity, nor do they have good headsets.People don't have the same level of eye sight, or reflexes, or memory. Any game mechanic you can think of will favor or disfavor certain players.
-
@Mandy said:
We don't give much information on how this impacts MMR as we don't want MMR to be the focus here. The player stats also will likely take some time to update as they're going through their own UI related things, given the way things are represented in the game and the Stats page doesn't take from in-game data but from the game's UI.
I believe the change in wording to Surrender definitely indicates that this is losing a match overall.
I believe the change in wording to Surrender definitely indicates that this is losing a match overall.That immediately though makes raises another issue: if we can have a definitive wording in this case, why can't we always have definitive wording?
If surrendering is definitively losing, then what is abandoning? What's the point in telling us what something is considered without telling us what it means?
-
@crogers271 said:
I'm never crazy about these posts because BHVR's player count is ridiculously healthy, but here goes:
Overall, the things I enjoy I find less and less enjoyable as time goes on, while the things I dislike about the game I find more and more aggravating.
More detailed reasons:
1: I really like 2v8. I like Chaos Shuffle. Event depends on the event. So if I'm playing regular 1v4 I'm thinking 'there's multiple superior versions of this game, why am I playing this version?'.
2: A general disagreement with the game direction over the past year or so. I feel like for the years before 2025 they were improving the game, albeit slowly and taking far more stumbles than were needed, but they were working out some of the things that were major game problems. I feel like they are backslipping though into the elements of what I think of as the game at its worst.
3: The way they approach marketing I find more and more annoying. As an example, the perk shake up, we got some perks as a teaser, more to come. Once upon a time I would have found it enjoyable I think, now I'm in the mood of 'just tell us already'. The dribs and drabs of info come off more as exploitative than communicative.
It took like a couple of days for number 3 to come through again (the what are abandon and surrender post).
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4117859#Comment_4117859
Remember during the anti-tunnel ptb when they cited player freedom of choice and it being too restrictive? Apparently that only goes one way. Killers can choose; survivors can die.
A new take on an old adage:
It's not killer's job or BHVR's to worry about survivors fun.
-
@cogsturning said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4117388#Comment_4117388
I don't really subscribe to the idea that it's super survivor sided, mostly because killer macro is much easier in the mode than survivor. Killers can just lock down a cluster of gens and defend them. The amount of matches my survivor teams lose with one gen left but everyone still alive is absurd because of this. It's amplified by the fact that almost no one wants to play Guide and focus on center gens. They want to do the 2v8 equivalent of 3 genning themselves by doing safe edge map gens. And the layout of these maps is much less known to the average player, so it's harder to judge. But the killer gets that info for free.
The buffs that killers have are also weirdly understated by the community. I haven't played Wesker in months because of how buggy he's been but I dusted him off last night and holy crap, I'd forgotten how crazy strong he is with the third dash plus the almost instant refresh. And I'm doing the classic Shadow Wesker thing where I'm just snatching oblivious people up mid-heal with my free aura read. Killers have more than people want to admit.
And yeah, the survivor sided benefits don't matter if the teammates are crap and don't know how to utilize anything.
I don't really subscribe to the idea that it's super survivor sided, mostly because killer macro is much easier in the mode than survivor.I agree, I think in part because 1v4 is more lopsided, something being roughly balanced seems survivor sided. Killers have a lot less games were they just smash the survivors compared to 1v4, but last time BHVR reported the kill rate numbers it still leaned killer. It's just there are a lot more matches with just a few kills, compared to 1v4 where if survivors win its a good chance all four get out.
It's also which version of killer are we talking about or averaging them together, because just like 1v4 there's a huge difference between randoms paired together instead of coordinated pairs, except its now on the killer side instead of survivor.
They want to do the 2v8 equivalent of 3 genning themselves by doing safe edge map gens.I've had lots of players running to the edge of the map for heals. Sometimes even medics and it's like 'we already would have had you healed back there, stop wasting time'.
I think one of the big issues, and would switch the balance of power of the game, is if more survivors understood the hook state economy. Zero hooks? Be aggressive, especially if others have been hooked. Two hooks? Play absurdly safe especially if no one else is on two hooks. Except people don't adjust enough, cautious players stay cautious the whole game, aggressive players get eliminated quickly leaving the team in trouble.
-
I think ruins it is probably going too far, but yeah, the slowly leading zombies around is not a great game.
-
@FerrousFacade said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4117615#Comment_4117615
Pop being replaced with undone or someone slotting monstrous shrine into their build doesn't change the fact that I am still facing gen focused slowdown/regression/blocking with the killer going for a tunnel out. Some of the chase perks will see play but the primary meta will not change.
The survivor changes will not change which perks survivors run because our perk slots are already filled with anti-tunnel (StB nerf, Borrowed Time nerf, no other changes), anti-slug (no changes), gen speed (stake out replaced by this is not happening, no real change). FmA will just replace windows and beginners will need to run both meaning less space for anti-tunnel (even easier tunnel on the player trying to learn). Flow State needs to hit 3 tokens before its healing speed approaches Botany, endgame unhook is the only real advantage. Empathic doesn't work on yourself so still botany. Road life? Better to just bring a medkit.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4117599#Comment_4117599
Monstrous shrine will absolutely see play, pair it with pain res (untouched) and the new undone to kick gens with built up tokens when someone isn't on a scourge hook. You get an uncleansable ruin up most of the match while still being able to kick gens when necessary.
Pop being replaced with undone or someone slotting monstrous shrine into their build doesn't change the fact that I am still facing gen focused slowdown/regression/blocking with the killer going for a tunnel out.But you might get to see different icons in the end game screen? Is that not enough of a meta shakeup for you :)?
Flow State needs to hit 3 tokens before its healing speed approaches Botany, endgame unhook is the only real advantage. Empathic doesn't work on yourself so still botany. Road life? Better to just bring a medkit.The bigger issue with the healing perks is, being they can't stack, they're all just slight variations of the same theme. They aren't really meaningful buffs. Instead of running botany I can now run things that are basically the same as botany. Yay, buffs.
That seems to be a lot of the 'buffs' on the survivor side in the diminishing returns world - instead of using perk A you can now use perk B instead and its slightly different.
-
@Crowman said:
There are more source of endurance than just unhook protections and dead hard.
Made for This provides Endurance when you pick up a survivor from dying.
Soul Guard gives you Endurance when you heal/recover from dying.
We're going to live forever grants Endurance to a survivor you pick up.
Then you have killer powers like Legion and Ghoul.
I think the idea behind this change is interesting. It would allow a survivor to build a protection build around MoM. But there's not really many reliable means to give yourself endurance besides Dead Hard to make such a build worthwhile. It is technically a time saver as it means you do not have to mend which is helpful against Legion, but then it's just a similar problem that Virgil was having against Clown/Freddy.
Overall, probably shouldn't change BT to this as the design space is just not well supported with current game mechanics.
It's kind of funny your posts came right below @Rogue11 's.
Then you have killer powers like Legion and Ghoul.I'm not sure what the scenario is where you get hit by these killers where endurance would not already trigger deep wounds.
-
First impressions from the post:
Better than New: Looks good
Emphatic Connection: I'll be upfront, diminishing returns never should have applied to healing perks. Stacking them was never a problem (outside absolute extremes which could have been dealt with differently) and created some interesting builds. We now just have multiple healing perks and you should never run more than one and they all do about the same thing with slightly different flavorings. So yeah, its another bland healing perk.
Flow State: Not a fan of 'win harder' perks, but being they are part of the game, looks okay.
Friendly Competition: SWF boost? Not sure they need it, or why BHVR is leaning so heavy into 'gen rush good', but okay. I look forward to the world record escape being broken again.
Bound by Obsession: This I was not expecting to see buffed. You sure? This just seems like if you have a really good survivor player they can pop this on and invite chase, if they aren't chased they just hammer out gens even faster.
Blood Pact: It's fine, but again feels like boosting a perk that SWFs have an easier time with, which seems counterintuitive to where changes need to be.
Boon: Illumination: Another looks good. Actually, full out, really good job on the idea here.
Borrowed Time: I'm taking an idea from the general forum, but this is a massive nerf. If you make it so it doesn't extend the elusive it would actually be a pretty good anti-tunnel perk.
Dark Sense: As mentioned, don't like the 'win harder' perks, though this one isn't as egregious. Sure, looks good.
Down the the Last: Better than it was certainly.
Do No Harm: "We want Do No Harm to better distinguish itself from other flat healing speed perks." It won't, you've just got a bunch of healing perks that will differ ever so slightly from each other. Otherwise, fine.
Five Moves Ahead: If you're going to take out the windows ability it deserves more.
Pharmacy/Plunderer's Instinct: These are fine, but chest builds will always be a problem as long as chest offerings remain and people have to sacrifice BP offerings to actually get value out of them.
Premonition: Sure, simplified, good.
Road Life: It's better, but it would have been hard to make the perk worse. It's unclear whether the heal on others still remains (it should, then it would be an interesting perk).
Self Preservation: The reasoning here is really bad. Survivors are too hard to find so the killer just camps the hook? That seems like its own problem that needs to be addressed.
I do look forward one day killer perks being nerfed with the reasoning of 'survivors just stop doing the objective and hide', but I don't think we'll get that.
Shoulder the Burden: "We still fully expect the perk to be strong in the right hands." So if the survivors are good they get to have anti-tunnel? This logic is backwards. Tunneling is the most problematic for newer survivors, skilled players, especially SWFs have a lot of other ways to counter it. But you've now made a perk that whose value will remain in SWF, but soloq can actually disable each other's perks?
The injury/broken and disabling are entirely unnecessary. The idea of the perk is to prevent tunneling. If the killer tunnels so hard that survivors get to use it multiple times, that's the point of having the perk and having sacrificed multiple slots for it.
The way this is getting changed seems like BHVR has been listening to some bad arguments. If you wanted to nerf STB here would be a suggestion - if the killer gets three unique hooks, STB deactivates.
Slippery Meat: Good, probably not actually useful, but the perk needed to die. Can we just go all the way and fully remove random unhook chances?
Small Game: Good, simplified, sure.
Solidarity: Yeah, fine.
Spine Chill: Good. I do find the note funny that you're keeping an eye on it. Wouldn't want things to get too crazy with '10% vault speed'.
Stakeout: I really don't like the idea of this perk even though it needed changed. So really good survivors just regularly knock 16% off a gen and its actually detrimental to newer players.
Wake Up!: Sure, good, needed buffed.
Windows of Opportunity: Best of luck to the new players I guess.
-
Some of the positive changes are good, far from meta shake up though. Survivors are getting that via nerfs I guess.
It's a nice try on healing perks, but all of them are basically slight variations of each other.
A few times in the patch notes it is referenced that BHVR wants to help new players. That's an admirable goal, its just not close to being accomplished. You've buffed some perks that will only be advantageous to good players / SWFs, while specifically worded your explanation for Shoulder the Burden as if counters to problematic gameplay will only be available to the "right" players. Seriously, if you're ever typing out a sentence like "We still fully expect the perk to be strong in the right hands" take a moment to think on who you are designing the game for. Experienced strong players and SWFs, or everyone?
-
I should have waited a day for my anti-tunnel timeline I guess.
Anyway @sizzlingmario4 has a great idea for how the perk would actually be really useful as an anti-tunnel perk.
I suspect though we'll hear people say 'no, it's now actually S Tier. You just need to combine it with adrenaline, get unhooked with the last gen half way done, tank the hit, last out the chase, and boom, heal for the end game.'
-
@Arcturus said:
Love how this update SP got cut in half and StB got murdered in the back alley with most of the other survivor perk changes honestly being closer to QoL updates rather than meaningful buffs, while most of the killer perk changes make them actually strong and some of them might contest the meta.
I like to see more perks becoming viable and strong, but survivors got the short end of the stick once again.
The QoL of life updates were a very 'oh, seriously, you got me again BHVR'. This change could/should have been done in any random patch. But to include it as part of the 'meta' shake up to justify how many perks are being changed is eye roll worthy.
@cogsturning said:
The Self-Preservation nerf notes read like this:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/J8JWUYS7B91I/screenshot-20260915-121447.jpg
This logic is nonsensical. If the issue is killer perks, SP counter one whole aura perk, BBQ, which can and is also countered by lockers. It partially counters Friends and Alien Instinct, but not fully. With this nerf, it will still do those exact same things. A killer that's clinging that hard to aura will still go back to the hook.
If the issue is that they get into chase with someone who has no scratch marks, that person still has 15s to prerun and hide when they hear the terror radius. So nothing changes about the initial effect. Also, I'm not sure why the devs care if the killer goes back to the hook, since anti-tunnel is something they keep rejecting and nerfing.
What SP does allow for in 30s is for the user to safely get across the map for an unhook, and with the added Elusive on unhook, returning to the hook if the unhooker has SP is now countered, as there will be no scratch marks at all. So this reasoning is either completely untrue and is just to hide that they're caving to complaints, or it's not thought out at all. This perk has the opportunity to be more tactical than ever with the recent basekit changes and instead it's getting nerfed into near uselessness, really good solely for personal ratting and not for macro.
And if this goes through, it will make two for two of Yun-Jins reworked perks getting the hammer treatment. What was even the point of reworking them?
Killer playing in an unhealthy manner? Obviously we need to nerf survivors. I'm sure people will switch to playing killer in a healthy manner right away. Well, maybe just a few more nerfs.
-
I'm never crazy about these posts because BHVR's player count is ridiculously healthy, but here goes:
Overall, the things I enjoy I find less and less enjoyable as time goes on, while the things I dislike about the game I find more and more aggravating.
More detailed reasons:
1: I really like 2v8. I like Chaos Shuffle. Event depends on the event. So if I'm playing regular 1v4 I'm thinking 'there's multiple superior versions of this game, why am I playing this version?'.
2: A general disagreement with the game direction over the past year or so. I feel like for the years before 2025 they were improving the game, albeit slowly and taking far more stumbles than were needed, but they were working out some of the things that were major game problems. I feel like they are backslipping though into the elements of what I think of as the game at its worst.
3: The way they approach marketing I find more and more annoying. As an example, the perk shake up, we got some perks as a teaser, more to come. Once upon a time I would have found it enjoyable I think, now I'm in the mood of 'just tell us already'. The dribs and drabs of info come off more as exploitative than communicative.
-
I guess to start, was there something the thread you made a month ago that didn't answer this? Because I don't think anything really changed.
The big answers
1: It's not just about survivor strength, but not having enough variety and interesting things to do. Being strong is helpful for the role that needs players, sure, but its not the only thing. The one 'addition' this go around really doesn't add anything and, in many ways, subtracts.
2: Killer is far more interesting for many, with the ability to play different killers and with a friend.
3: Play while you wait means that duos, the most common form of SWF, can move over to playing killer as well.
4: When you take all of that and factor in the need for 80% survivors, 20% killers, the problem magnifies.
I really think it’s the lack of SBMM in 2v8 that is killing it.That could play a role, though with 8 survivors the chance that a survivor is really bad / throwing is just generally higher than in 1v4. But I don't know of anyone who regularly praises the quality of survivors they are paired with in soloq in 1v4 so that doesn't seem like the reason.
My experiences have been up and down. The last two trials all the survivors were focused and doing objectives and we steam rolled through, but on Friday I hit a stretch where it seemed like those on my team didn't know how to play the play game.
I fully realize that 2v8 is supposed to be a casual, fun mode and not supposed to be hyper-competitive with fully accurate SBMM.The reason SBMM isn't accurate has nothing to do with the mode per se, but with the way queues are they don't want to make them any longer.
I do think a general problem is BHVR's attitude which is encapsulated by your sentence - viewing it as a fun, casual mode. I, the people I've played with, the comments I've seen in chat, don't seem to take it any more or less seriously than 1v4. It's a substantially different game, and whether you like it more or less is completely subjective, but BHVR's attitude towards it doesn't seem to mirror the player base which might be a problem in making longer term improvements.
But that's straying off topic.
Is there anything that can be done to fix 2v8 to incentivize veteran players to play despite the bad teammate frustrations? I guess killer side could be nerfed even more to make killer side super frustrating to play and deter people from queueing up as killer, but I’d much rather have something to incentivize people to choose survivor role instead.I think they just have to keep improving the mode while being careful not to drive away those who like it.
1: Create subclasses. As an example create a variety of the Guides, one with repressed alliance, one with built to last (if they keep the items), etc. Obviously these wouldn't be 1 to 1 conversions of 1v4 perks to 2v8, but the general idea. Give survivors more ways to do the classes.
2: Adjust the way the catch up mechanic works. Give a slight decrease to the progression gained per hook state, but then also make it so deaths reduce the rate at which gens regress (or how many times killers can regress). 2v8 keeps one of the core 1v4 problems, if the killers get out a couple of survivors early the game is effectively finished, but survivors are 'stuck' in the game playing a pointless trial. I think its those really 'bad' game, not just where the survivors lose but its an incredibly boring loss, that makes survivors exit after the game instead of playing another.
-
@cogsturning said:
It's wild that all it took were the recent few months of CCs and their parroting drones to get StB nerfed but ten years of complaints about tunneling and it's getting multiple buffs after some preformative bit of canceled faux hope.
Yeah, I'd like to hear the justification for disabling it on every survivor after a use. That's a forum/CC complaint that's illogical and really makes it seem like BHVR is listening to certain voices verbatim. The 'swapping hook stages around' never made any sense, and if the killer continues to target one survivor again and again to the point that more than one survivor gets to use StB, well good. It's supposed to punish exactly that type of play.
What's interesting is that maybe the best complaint about StB, that a killer who isn't tunneling, but is at 2/1/1 on the hooks can suddenly be 1/1/1/1, isn't changed at all.
-
@Your_Dad_Playing_DbD said:
I play both sides about equally and I’d be fine with some sort of anti-tunnel/anti-camp mechanic, but I have yet to see anything that isn’t overly punishing for killers when they tunnel or camp for legit reason (people who claim you never have to do it are just not being honest or they simply don’t play killer at all). If anyone has any good ideas that aren’t overly-punishing / abusable like the first version that was tried, I’m willing to listen.
There were lots of ideas. The starting problem with how they approached it is that they threw everything at the wall. They called it a Quality of Life when it was a radical, unexpected overhaul of how the game would work on both sides. Even those of us who were extremely anti-tunnel were surprised by the overall changes. Most people believed, even those who really liked the ideas, that there were going to have to be some substantial changes to the original numbers.
If instead of that they focused on one of those choices and seeing if that changed things before going more radical it would have been a lot healthier to get feedback. @Aven_Fallen mentioned it and I and others have discussed it as well, but also just adjusting the amount of gen speed increase that happens after the first survivor dies based on total hooks would have been a healthy way forward as well.
With three genning, players going next, and hook camping they had a pretty clear problem, and it took them too long to make some pretty obvious changes to improve those elements without radically altering the game. Why they totally lost their focus on what worked I have no idea. They could easily though make a similar change to tunneling by giving a large boost to gens if there was a death at 3 hooks - it would deal with what is considered the most problematic form of tunneling and the chance that it would impact games outside of that would be extremely minimal.
-
@NeverSolus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4117234#Comment_4117234
… what?
A killer chasing a survivor around a loop is "forcing" the killer to stay in the same place. How is that fun or engaging design? This logic doesn't work in the present game as it is. Most perks do things of this nature. Doing gens "Forces" a survivor to stay in one place. There's a great deal of things that "force" players to stay in a given place or loop to achieve a counter-action. That's… that's literally the purpose of looping.
Are you suggesting that looping is inherently unfun design? Because I'll agree, don't make me do it. I hate looping.I find it interesting that we're about a year away form BHVR cancelling anti-tunnel on the grounds of 'forcing players on rails'. Which, fair enough, that isn't great gameplay, but then using the opposite logic on survivor play.
-
Don't put yourself in a corner once you know its Wraith and keep a look out for him. Even if he does get you caught, its just one hit.
Nemesis zombies are annoying. Slowly leading away a slow AI controlled creature isn't thrilling gameplay, but he's certainly not a balance issue.
Slinger? He might be the weakest 2v8 killer.
Wesker is fine.
Plague's hypothetical issue is much the same as legions, pairing with another killer removes the downside of being a Plague.
-
In 2v8 - it's pretty bad. As a random item you have no way to plan around it. If the plan is to get one and then engage the killers in chase, you might waste a lot of time looking for one.
Even when you do activate it, there's a lot of possibilities that make it bad
A: You are better at chase than the killer and don't need it (in my experience, the killers who commit to these chases I probably didn't need the added haste to loop)
B: You get double teamed, making it ineffective
C: The killer sees how fast you are moving and just goes to another survivor
D: You just end up doing gens/healing
So it is a guaranteed loss of time (which might get interrupted) for a benefit that might not even be useful.
For 1v4 - I think Invocation's have to be permanent benefits - given the risks associated with going to the basement, the time commitment (leaving the others in a 3v1), and then permanent broken status, the tradeoff has to be pretty substantial to justify those costs.
Now the issue with it being a haste boost in 1v4 is that haste is a lot stronger in 1v4 (somewhat killer dependent). So any type of permanent haste boost would likely be too strong, any type of temporary one likely too weak.
-
@NeverSolus said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4116655#Comment_4116655
Arguably @ForTheEntity is entirely in his rights here. Esa just outright entered the thread straw maning and insulting people. No one owes anyone a response. Like you said, no one forces anyone to engage, but if we're going to, they should be actual responses contributing to a sensible, mature discussion of the topic at hand. Not a 'Lol your opinion is invalid.'
Calling For the Entity out for this behavior when he's responding with the energy he's receiving is not sensible.Esa just outright entered the thread straw maning and insulting people.In this thread, where?
The first post is a pretty straightforward forum style question - what if this rule applied to the other side? There's a couple of responses that I imagine could be made to that, but its a pretty logical question to bring up. @Arcturus brings up the idea its a valid point.
The second post is responding after being called a troll and reiterates the previous point
The third post Esaraf is far more confrontational (though this is in response to twice being called a troll), but he lists a number of reasons for why Nurse is a problem (3), which is in response to being told: "They can't actually come up with a good argument as to why the Nurse is actually a mad dog killer who is problematic in DbD."
In this thread, none of that seems to be straw manning and the insults come after they were already started.
-
@ForTheEntity said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4116640#Comment_4116640
It's pretty well established that DbD cannot be balanced around comp where you have players who are in the top 0.01% of the skill bracket and there are Nurse's who can blink with pixel-perfect accuracy. How many Nurses do you encounter that are that good in public matches?
Tier lists are generally based on potential. In the right hands the Nurse has the potential to be S-tier. But in most players' hands who miss a few blinks they quickly find gens getting done and gates getting opened and that's why she has a kill rate <50%. That's why BHVR keeps leaving her where she is despite continuous whining from the community and her continued placement at the top of tier lists. Tier lists are opinions, unlike the stats.
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4116646#Comment_4116646
Nice try. You just hate Nurse and appear unable to apply logic in a discussion about her.
Nice try. You just hate Nurse and appear unable to apply logic in a discussion about her.No one forces you to engage with people on the forum if you don't think its worth your time, but if you're going to respond to someone it should actually include some type of response and not just avoid what they typed.
-
I'm in the 'rework' camp, though I'd give blindness for her a try as well, because I think she's a flawed design:
1: She's absolutely awful to start off, and way too strong once mastered. Neither of those are very interesting games.
2: Skill expression is too much on her, not enough on the survivors.
3: Being her design violates other basic concepts of the game, cool perk ideas have to be thrown out because 'what about Nurse?'
@esarraf said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4116561#Comment_4116561
Hey real quick, let's say they released a survivor perk that was a little hard to use but after a few hours anyone can realistically use it and when you do you automatically win the game. Because that's what you are saying classifies as balanced right now.
We have a few perks that demonstrate your point that got nerfed, and they weren't even autowins. DS people argue can't be 5 seconds because that would be way too powerful, but starting survivors can't even reliably hit the skill check. Old MFT, 3% for most survivors who aren't looping experts wasn't really that big of a deal and not worth just staying injured.
Probably the closest autowin that definitely got nerfed would be the old, old BNPs with continuous skill checks.
-
having both killers the same character would have made power management a little bit easier as they could both use their props (Trapper traps, Xeno tunnels etcIn the long run that seems more difficult to balance - do you balance around the idea of one killer having access, or both?
I think it might also create engine problems on where do you spawn everything.
There's also a theme feel. Two Aliens would make perfect sense, but two Weskers?
Basically - for some killers I think it would work power and theme wise, for others I think it fails one or the other. I wouldn't have a problem putting it in for only some killers, but I think BHVR would view it as an all or nothing issue.
-
but apparently they can detect if you intentionally die on hook ?They actually can't and the systems they've tried to put in place have demonstrated that pretty well.
-
Outside of it being a streamer whose videos you can watch, I think its generally just a guess. Frequently it feels like 'I lost, most be a SWF' type of deal. Something like all similar names is pretty close, same outfits maybe but I've done that in soloq as well.
There's definitely things that happen that make it more likely, but lots of time randoms also just play well.
@shalo said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4116095#Comment_4116095
What are the other 48%?
32% 2 person SWF, 16% 3 person SWF.
-
@ThatRyanB said:
Thanks for the feedback here, folks! I'm happy to pass along your feedback about the time requirement on this being a point of friction. That aside, though, is the effect something you find interesting or valuable?
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4116011#Comment_4116011
You're correct. Survivors that complete the circle will receive its effects.
I have yet to actually activate one of these after 15 2v8s, but they certainly are causing lots of thrown matches as the other survivors search chest after chest to set one up.
Edit to add: well saying the above apparently was enough to actually make it happen, though both times I did it when it wasn't really important. Once I was on death hook and just found one already set up, as I was trying to not get tunneled went ahead and did it. Second one I found one in a chest, set it up way out of the way, and after all the gens were done I went back and did it just for progress on the quest.
-
@HoodedWildKard said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/4114389#Comment_4114389
This is why i made the thread to spitball ideas to make hard tunneling unviable. Could've worded the title better I suppose.
Well you're now past four hundred comments, a few of which were even on topic, so I think the title did its job.