konchok
konchok
About
- Username
- konchok
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,270
- Last Active
Comments
-
@Scarlett1111 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3955788#Comment_3955788
The average killrate is over 60%, SWFs are a minority in the game and barely happen, killer is so disgustingly easy that people can go on thousand game winstreaks on it. This isn't hard to understand.
I've only just got back into the game. I left when playing killer was so much harder and it was so much fun then. I really enjoyed it, but now I load into killer and it's just kill everyone at 5 gens. That's not fun. So I nerfed myself and started running just bbq and brutal strength. And there's no reason in the world that I should win with only those two perks and zero add-ons and yet I'm still killing more than 2 survivors on average. And I came onto this forum expecting users to demand proper balance in the game and what do I see instead, killers saying that they need even more of an advantage! It's honestly so gross.
-
@Rivyn said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3949055#Comment_3949055
The game is at is healthiest right now for survivor. A number of anti killer gameplay mechanics are in place, a dozen anti tunnel perks, and the ability to swf. There is only so much hand holding you can do with survivors before you throw out the gameplay loop.
Look, I can do a side by side comparison because I put down this game when killers got mega buffed. The game was way more fun for survivor when I stopped playing which was about 2 years ago. I've come back and to give you an idea of how bad it is, I've been playing without slowdown at all and I've been doing as good as I was doing before (60-70 percent win rate). And I started doing that because I was getting annoyed at stomping survivors. Now it is true that my MMR has dropped, but I've also become quite rusty in that time. I'm not nearly as good as I was 2 years ago, yet I'm just crushing now. Somethings wrong with the current balance of DBD
-
I have a counter proposal. Limit co-op to Brutal bases only and keep the unlimited revives.
-
I don't know the exact amount. But when you consider the fact that an a base in Overdrive will get fewer raiders then for it to be worth it the number of deaths is probably more than 4 kills on average. I would guess that it's probably around 5 or 6 kills. Personally I wouldn't run it unless my kills were greater than 10.
-
I've mastered 6 bases. And the only thing that really bothers me is that there is no reward for getting to Prestige 10.
- I feel like it's way to easy to prestige in the first place
- When you do get to level 10 you get nothing for it
So you expect me to continue playing after that. I've taken a break for now because getting to prestige 10 sucks. The rewards that you get along the way are fine in my opinion, but the reward for getting to prestige 10 literally don't exist.
-
So I aim to get as many deaths as possible. But I also only make normal difficulty bases. In my opinion that keeps things fair, You can't make a killbox at that difficulty so traps have to be clever not overwhelming. I rely on trickery for my kills.
My 2 bases were 4.2 kills and 4.5 kills average.
-
I do think there are going to see some balance changes. I expect to see the shield reworked in some way. I expect that the plasma sentinal deathcloud will also be changed because the area of denial effect slows down the game too drastically. I also wouldn't be surprised if the modification dead man's switch is either removed or if the condition for it going off will change. For example I could see it changed to death by player rather than just any death. Oh and of course bug fixes especially those that are being exploited, for example being able to be targeted through corrosive cubes or being able to deny kills to a builder by closing the Playstation application.
-
I use them as references for future bases. I take my best performing traps and use those designs in new bases. Once all of the traps that I care for have been migrated I'll remove all the blocks from them and then use them as a creative world that has all of my different trap designs.
-
As the player base matures there will be greater demand to play brutal maps. Right now though, I would suggest trying to build a brutal normal map. I had a normal map that was getting an AKR (average kill ratio) of 5. Can you do that? With extremely limited resources can you design an absolutely devastating map?
-
Masquerade prevents guards from pathing through them. You can use them for ambushes where once the cube is triggered they will start pathing through the block. If you compare that to a standard holocube, a guard will path through the holocube without issue.
-
- You can simply aim for the parts of the body that do not have armor
- It can be paired with the heavy sword or with the other gun for those situations where you need to break the armor
A strategy that I use, especially with melee guards is to use the regular gun for removing the armor and the falcon crossbow to kill them. Which is much faster than using the regular gun twice. I also use the crossbow in any situation where there's a nearby magma cube. Because I can afford to lose that ammo.
-
@Pumpkinbros said:
The current world feels a bit claustrophobic to me, I see the loading screen with the guy on the bike and that's what I wanna do, so that there's other ways of farming these materials, and looking at these outposts, anyone can raid them, anyone could team up, it'd be really nice to see a 3rd dimension to this world, it feels like I'm constantly buried in menus.
I still feel like being able to teleport to outposts should be a feature that you can do within your base as it is right now, but also giving the option to travel to these places would also be a nice breath of air
Maybe in Meet Your Maker 2. But if there is a Meet Your Maker 2 it'll be many years from now.
-
@Large said:
At level 10, when you master your level, can you reactivate it?
10 is the final level
-
I have a moderate base and an easy base. My easy base gets an average of 4 kills but has killed 2.5 thousand players. My moderate base gets an average of 7 kills and has killed 1 thousand players. They are the same prestige. Prestige 7.
Now I'm not sure what all the factors are. I think my easy one is the first advisor in the list which may be why it gets chosen so often.
So, in conclusion , easy base with the first advisor seems to be ideal for getting people to play your map.
-
@Pumpkinbros said:
Add as many traps as youd like, yknow what you shouldnt do tho? Make those obnoxious traps where when you shoot your bolt it goes into a pit of lava where you cant get it
I say don't go all out on these kinds of traps. But if it just eats a single bolt, then I think that's fine. You don't want to actually starve them of resources but removing 1 makes the map just a bit harder. And the strategy has a counter, just use the crossbow that has more charges.
-
@RaidenHusky said:
Yeah, economy needs a rebalance FAST and the prestiege system needs a rework FAST! I really enjoy this game and its scary to think that people might leave it if they just lose all their resources because bases are super saturated so no one will ever raid yours
I have people raiding my bases, right? I have 2.5 thousand kills in an easy map with an average kill ratio of 4.1 and I have nearly 1k for moderate base with a kill ratio of 7 and I am not earning enough synthite to pay the synthite prestige cost. Like what the hell. I'm almost certain that I'm in the top 10 percent of each category and I can prestige them no problem but I can't earn enough synthite to keep them up.
-
If the bonus for synthite only cost parts then that would at least allow me to essentially trade parts for synthite. I get that cells are hard to get but why is it that I can choose to raid and that's fine but I can't afford to build and only build. My bases are doing phenomenally, like actually super amazing. But I can't keep them all prestiged because it costs too much.
-
The real question is how in the hell do I earn enough synthite to maintain bases? One of my bases is an Easy champion base that's averaging 4 kills and gets 10 plays per hour and it's not earning enough synthite to maintain itself. Like why??? And the best way that I've found to get synthite is by raiding and looking for the skulls, but I think they changed something from the beta because I think now they offer either parts or synthite and I feel like I get unlucky and get parts the majority of the time.
-
Ggjustice, have you ever been involved with an actual development cycle. The way that things work is that when a bug is reported they are first categorized, then prioritized, and then they need to be reproduced, and then they need to be debugged, the root cause identified and then a suggested fix is created and a version of the software where the fix has been applied is created. This does not even cover other items that are happening at the same time, for example making additional changes to the software.
Why are you suggesting that the bugs that you reported are the highest priority for what they need to do?
-
@Hodderfodder said:
Yeah don't expect that.
BHVR used to communicate a lot with the DBD community. There were regular streams where they did Q&As, talked about upcoming developments/changes, they would show how the 3D models were made or how the maps changed etc. And no matter what they did the community raked them over the coals for it.
They would give concrete answers like "Are you going to change x?" "X is performing fine, we don't see it as an issue." "WHAT ARE THEY THINKING DO THEY NOT PLAY THEIR OWN GAME?" or "X really isn't a priority, maybe it will get addressed in the future." "WHAT ARE THEY THINKING..."Even now, when they make a change, the two sentences of explanation they give is criticized as "they think that?! Then why does this thing exist, that's not consistent."
A thing you have to understand in development is that not everything works out. You have an idea of how to address x, and that does't work, you have to scrap it. Or it can take you quite a while to actually fix x because your first idea didn't work but you're committed. The poitn here is you can't give a hard date on a thing because you don't know if it'll fail, or hey it works but the solution now causes a conflict with y so you need to iron out that before you can address it. But people not only want hard dates. Furthermore, devs would say "Well here is a POTENTIAL idea we're THINKING about", and the community would either freak otu because "oh god this is coming out next week" or they would hold the devs to that as if it was a promise.
Yet when the devs started giving vague respones like "we're working on that" "it's coming soon", people HATE it because it sounds non-committal. Anything short of "Yes that is a problem, here is the perfect response to address the thing and it will go in next week" wasn't satisfactory.
When they addressed anything that weren't mechanics based--inspiration material and lore--the community frothed because "lore is all the devs care about". I remember a comment along the lines of "they can't tell us when they're going to change x but they can tell you the name of the Trapper's left foot."
If everything you do annoys or upsets the community, radio silence takes the least effort.
Now in DBD all we get is a few sentences in an update explaining the reasoning for a change, and then a lengthy year-encompassing video during the anniversary event.
I mean damn guys, I don't know a single game where the devs communicate openly and frequently with the community.
This.
Not to mention actions speak louder than words. I feel that it's better that they we are able to communicate what we want through the forums and the developers can work towards making improvements based off of our feedback. Before they implement the changes they will likely have a survey to make sure that they are on track to meet the wants of the majority and then after the changes are made, they may make further adjustments.
I actually do not want more communication than that because it creates entitlement and toxicity from the community.
-
If you don't like a strategy being used by a base then just leave. Even if there are additional traps or suits unlocked in the future as DLC the base game right now is good enough to get kills and prestige. If you want to play without additional content then you don't need to purchase it. But for myself, I would like to pay for additional content because I want there to be an incentive for the developers to make additional content.
-
@Gruffers said:
Normal and Brutal get raided the most. Dangerous is a no-mans land.
Honestly IMHO, break the bases into just 2 categories. Normal and Brutal. Keep Brutal the way it is and have normal go to the current Dangerous.
-
While I feel like the shield should have a longer cool-down. The whole point of that item is to allow someone to survive getting caught in a trap. And the traps that you described as not being fun are actually quite easy for someone who has the default bolt to take care of. I don't understand why you're against using any trap. All traps are fair game and all strategies to circumvent getting hit by a trap is fair game. /rant
-
You've simply described one type of base. It's strong, but there's not a meta after one day of base building and I'd hardly say that's the best design.
-
@Rookie1978 said:
https://forums.bhvr.com/Meet-Your-Maker/discussion/357937/lets-talk-about-monetization
with how they treated DBD, I'm sure BHVR will find some way to shove monetization in our faces. the only question is, considering this game isn't a heavily genericized streamer-bait psuedosocial third-person experience, how will they do it? an ingame shop? if MYM gets a battle pass I'm liable to delete my account. at best, if it's truly necessary, an ingame skin shop.
if they start locking traps, gear/weapons or etc. behind DLC packages like they do chapters in DBD, I might actually cry. we've got such a unique concept and i'd hate to see it get broken down in favor of premium currencies and dividing the playerbase's experiences based on which DLC blocks they've been duped into buying.
addendum: that's what's most likely going to happen. I both predict and fear it.
@Rookie1978 let's say they were to add skins. How much would you pay for skins in a year? If they were to release free content, how often do you feel that they should be adding new content? Is there another game that you play that you purchase skins from?
-
I believe the difficulty rating is what goes into that field. The capacity is only at 177 which makes me think that's a new plot of land.
-
@ShiftyGoblin said:
I have never been more upset to be on vacation... This trailer got me so hyped for this game. Lots of good details here!
I'm a bit surprised that the beta is only for 1 week. I was hoping we would get between 2 and 3 weeks. Once the open Beta ends, it'll be back to waiting for a little over a month for the game to release.
-
----
Spend time and resources making the front of your outpost look nice. It is going to make all the difference in the world when raiders choose which outpost to raid.
Make the outpost fun to play! An Outpost will do well if it's fun even if it isn't super deadly. If you see a particular strategy being complained about in the forums, I highly recommend avoiding that if at all possible. An outpost that is not fun to play does not fair well, beware!
When purchasing a plot, I recommend purchasing the largest plot if you can afford it. And if you can't afford it then consider raiding until you can.
I highly recommend reading through Hugo's post on what is known so far because after purchasing a plot the next step is to start unlocking guards and traps for building.
I'm not going to say what you should unlock first. Instead I want you to think about layering your traps and guards. Everything that can kill a raider will give them a warning with ample time for them to react. If you can get a raider to over-extend then you can force them into a corner where you can kill them with either a guard or a trap.
Raiders are vulnerable
- immediately after using their weapon. This is because weapons have cool-down periods before they can be used again.
- When they jump. Traps can often be avoided by jumping out of the way when triggered. But if they've already jumped then there options are much more limited.
- When they become greedy. Give a raider a reason to take an unnecessary risk, many will because it's fun but especially if they can earn some kind of reward.
Use misdirection
- Give them an easy to follow path only to have it lead to a trap that you've setup
- Make the pathway jagged and confusing. You don't need orderly tunnels. Orderly tunnels are easy to predict. Raiders will identify your traps from a distance. But if your outpost is chaotic, you'll be able to surprise them with many of the same traps that would have been disarmed.
Be careful not to
- Have traps or guards that destroy each other
- Leave a gap in your outpost that will make it easy to enter or exit or allow a section of the outpost to be bypassed
- Use decals that give away the locations of your traps (This will make more sense when you begin to build outposts)
Once you've made your base, there is a replay station 27:21 in the youtube video. I recommend watching each and every raid attempt. Once you've watched a few people raid your base you'll know exactly how to improve the Outpost to make it more deadly. And once you have perfected your death trap, then it's time to purchase another plot of land and take all the lessons you learned and make an entirely new outpost from scratch and bring a friend because making outposts is more fun together!
-
Not an active one...
-
Lore could also be revealed when unlocking something through one of the advisors. It would also be nice to have ways of discovering secrets about the world if you reach a specific prestige for an outpost.
-
When are Alpha Surveyors no longer bound by the NDA? Once the Open Beta goes live?
-
What about if we aren't receiving the invite link?
-
Yeah, I don't understand how to get it either
-
@malatruse said:
If you can slug everyone within 45 seconds of the first down, yes.
45 seconds of the first slugged individual. For example, you could hook 1 survivor and then slug 2,3, then 4. As long as survivor 1 is not unhooked you would be able to win.
So to put this into perspective, Imagine a scenerio where you've hooked 1 and you defend the hook to the first stage, you then down survivor 2 at the 1 minute mark. You would be able to win if you could then down 3 and 4 within 45 seconds of player 2 going down. The time tables obviously change if a perk is brought into the match to reduce the recovery speed.
With the changes, unbreakable is an absolute must bring.
In my honest opinion, unbreakable needs to be nerfed and the time that it takes for survivors to pick themselves up needs to be reduced.
-
@GoshJosh said:
This perk will never see the light of day, as long as Franklin’s and Lightborn remain as they are. Those perks 100% counter items, whereas Overwhelming Presence’s penalty can be avoided entirely - except for flashlights.
Revert Franklin’s to its prior functionality (only draining all charges if the item is not retrieved in time) and make flashlights actually do something when Lightborn is equipped, and OP can have a place in the game. But it’s doubtful the devs will ever do that. Especially after getting humiliated by flashlights while playing.
I don't think that Franklin's needs any changes made to that perk at all. As for this perk, It could have another use added to it. Give the killer the ability to see the aura's of depleted items. (even if a survivor is carrying them) Within the terror radius.
-
@Veinslay said:
Maybe he doesn't like Steve. Also you didn't show the video from the beginning, you could have been teabagging and emoting that boy before the video starts
Two wrongs don't make a right. What a terrible take on this situation.
-
I don't think that sounds dumb at all. Survivor or killer both have to accept that they are going to lose some games. But I definitely think that for Solo Queue they're much less in control of an outcome of a game. At least with killer you don't have to worry about your team mates.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3192098#Comment_3192098
This is what we've been trying to change. Survivors being efficient on gens shouldn't automatically be a loss for killer. Why call it killer at this point when 3 and 4 people escape so often?
Daniel, anytime I see a post of yours you make me roll my eyes. Every post that you post is one where you make it perfectly clear that you are entirely biased in your opinion.
Let's take a look at what I'm talking about.
"Why can't solos and mid MMR just deal with it? We need them to deal with it, because they know it's not the killers that are broken, but the bad teammates they get from matchmaking."
Hmm... Yes, I think this is a great idea. Just leave Solos to rot, why does it matter if the game is heavily biased against them.
"You do realize those numbers are skewed by bad survivors? No way good survivors only escape 39% of the time."
That's an interesting take, but what about good killers. There's no way that good killers are only killing 61% of the time.
"What about it isn't true? It's the same thing with streaks. You can win all you want, but as soon as you face decent survivors, what can you do? You just lose. Survivors aren't required to be amazing to beat an amazing killer; they just have to be efficient on gens. It's not limited to 4-mans either. Solos have shown that…"
Or what about this absolute gem. Talking about how it doesn't matter how often you win as killer, because as soon as you lose that's proof of how the game is survivor sided. You're not at all biased, well maybe just a little.
-
@Tostapane said:
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/1K419MFZPQKR/img-20220917-170436.jpg
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3192119#Comment_3192119
You shouldn't balance the game based on statistics because they are flawed and won't tell you how the matches generally went... I can do an example: yesterday I faced a premade that did 2 gens in a single (short) chase, at some point I went back to the hook since the hooked survivor was almost on his 2nd phase and no one went for the save... Just for this reason they were so salty that they let themselves die on the hook, without even trying to gave me a hard time (and the endchat obviously filled with wishes about the death of my family and various insults obviously... They said enjoy your 10 minutes queue... Lmao, like If I must wait all that time to found matches as killer). Did the match was easy? Yes, but not surely because killers were over buffed, but because they didn't even tried to win for a petty reason
If there are mechanics that inflate statistics, those mechanics should be changed. Once the mechanics are changed then if you're right and those are the reasons for the inflated killer wins, then those changes should increase survival rates. However, if those changes do not bring the game in balance which in my opinion is a 50 percent survival rate, then more changes need to occur.
-
@solidhex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3192119#Comment_3192119
are you playing blight mostly? because thats another thing, the high-tier killers are now stronger than ever but the weaker M1 based ones don't feel that much stronger once you reached an higher mmr level
I play blight, pin head and wesker. But I want this said, overall killer balance is based off the best killers because that's what people are playing.
-
@solidhex said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3192098#Comment_3192098
that's absolutely not what i was trying to say but okay...
the general vibe in the forum and in dbd was "killer is too easy and it's impossible to escape now" and that is maybe true for some regions but in high MMR the game doesn't feel that easy and survivors just adapted. That's all i wanted to say.
I also forgot to mention one point: there are no s-tier killer perks anymore. Like there are some that are "good" but it's not like before where you had Corrupt/Pop/Ruin/Noed/Pain Res and all of those worked on a lot of killers and you always had good value.
MMR by definition obscures balance. Let's say that you are a mediocre killer, just for arguments' sake. The update is released which objectively makes killers stronger. This is backed up by data, killers are on average killing more survivors in more matches. When the change went live, the groups of survivors that you would have been paired up with before are now no longer a match for you. This would lead your MMR to increase despite the fact that you remain a mediocre killer (for argument's sake of course). Now from your perspective, after the change, somehow games have gotten harder. From your perspective I can see how you would feel that the truth is that killers have actually gotten weaker.
I'll share with you my perspective. From my perspective, I'm winning more games then ever as killer. I've stopped running slow-down perks altogether and I'm absolutely bored with killer.
-
I am going to say something and I want you to take it to heart.
You are not going to win every match. You are not entitled to any kills at all. Survivors being able to beat you, especially if they are playing well as you've described is intended.
Read that to yourself 10 times.
-
Honestly the problem is with Star struck works and not with the fact that Wesker has a larger terror radius. IMHO Star struck is an unhealthy perk.
-
@Rookie1978 said:
it's a pvp game and camping is still overall detrimental to the killer in an evenly matched game
I don't think what you said is true. I'll debunk your statement easily. Let's take a group of 4 survivors and 1 killer. The survivors and killer are both new to the game.
The killer after much searching finally finds a stealthy survivor, because he's new it takes a couple minutes. But because the survivors are new, none of the generators have had any amount of progress applied either. The new killer not wanting to let his survivor on a hook escape face camps the hook. The survivors either rush the hook and get grabbed off of hook or simply stand by the sidelines waiting for the killer to leave.
The survivor dies on hook , the killer repeats this process until he secures a 4k.
The killer and survivors in this example are of equal skill. But it is the killer who is at an advantage regardless of skill. It is only when survivors understand to pressure generators and how to have a successful first chase that camping begins to reduce in strength. After all camping cannot work if there is not a survivor on hook. Or if the objective can be completed even without that survivor. But then let's not pretend that camping is a bad tactic, because in competitive play camping is one of the best tactics to win, especially if the down is secured early into the match.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/3190176#Comment_3190176
Um... yeah they do. Why wouldn't they? It's where the most powerful stuff in the game is played constantly.
Yeah, go figure. I'm not saying that high MMR players don't complain, but if you're complaining about repeatedly getting 1k, then you've simply gone as high as you can go in the MMR. Those who are high MMR whether it's killer or survivor win the majority of their games. It's actually a requirement.
-
@danielmaster87 said:
It only goes to show that the stats are still analyzing the wrong thing. The average kill rate tells us nothing about how the game plays out at high level, let alone tells the story of the match. A killer who got 2 kills could either have had 2 hooks or 10 hooks.
Then nerf the ability for killers to get 2 kills from 2 hooks. It seems to me if that was done, we would increase the ability for survivors to survive without nerfing killers who are going for hooks and not just camping to get kills.
-
@Viciusaurus said:
Been noticing lately that my games have taken a drastic turn for the worse. I've been able to get a consistent 3k till today, where suddenly now I'm going against incredibly coordinated teams and am now having great difficulty downing a single survivor, and if I do succeed at most I'm only getting 1k if I'm lucky. Life is now pain.
People in high MMR don't complain about losing...
-
@Ryuhi said:
And so it begins, the newest batch of people using bad statistics to try to justify their perspectives.
Statistics are facts, plain and simple. Now it's true there are different philosophies regarding balance, but I think it's personally reasonable to say that balance is at 50 percent. If you do not think that 50 percent win rate is balanced I'd like to know why not. It seems to me that the statistics are very clearly showing a current lack of balance and that if anything anyone who is trying to justify the current kill rate are those who are trying to push a narrative.
-
@humanbeing1704 said:
freddy
he's the only killer that when I play I actually feel like I have no power
His power is making survivors kill themselves. I'm just kidding of course, but it feels like whenever I verse a Freddy invariably someone suicides, I don't even understand.
-
@RaSavage42 said:
Yea the perk usage has dropped... but the playstyles have remained the same
It's still Gen regression VS. Second Chance
With Chase/ Healing/ Information perks sprinkled in
Like instead of Ruin and Pop... PR still being used is another thing... It's Call Of Brine and Overcharge
And instead of BT and DS... DH still being used is another thing... It's Off The Record for the most part
But yes it is interesting to see the most used perks are VS. what people are complaining about
The overall mechanics of the game have not changed. The game is essentially a race to complete generators, so it's not surprising that popular perks are going to be those that make survivors spend more time (for killer) and those that extend the amount of time being chased for survivor.
I really hate the term 2nd chance perks. Survivors and killers have perks that they can use to help them win. If the perks are balanced, it does not matter if they are second chance or aura reading or healing perks. Now if a specific perk is too good than we can talk, but a perk that extends the chase is not inherently bad.