Dear Fellow Survivors Mains
Comments
-
@ThePloopz said:
😧😧woow talk about busted lol was that not tested? Like I’m not sure how that was put through to live it just screams brokenIt was released live. So very likely tested, and considered as "balanced". For 3 days that is, then it got insta-removed lol.
0 -
@Steebear said:
@Tsulan said:
@Steebear said:
The main problem I have with this is number 1. As a killer you cant make a mistake or you lose the game. you miss a chainsaw? then a gen or two pops, because the survivor keeps looping you. Survivors can [BAD WORD] up really bad and still make it out of the game.
There is certainly an element of truth in here. Killer mistakes are punished more heavily but then that is why I prefer playing killer, it is a challenge no doubt about it. However, it is still your mistake that has cost you in this scenario and I don't want band aids to soften the blow. We just need them to even the balance a little time wise so that there is time to recover.
I disagree. Survivors can make several mistakes and still escape. They got plenty of second chance perks or items to help them if they screwed up.
If the killer makes 1 mistake, the game is basically over.
The whole concept of the killer only being able to capitalize on survivor mistakes is flawed.What are you disagreeing with? I am confused by this post.
I certainly don't agree that if a killer makes 1 mistake the game is over, this is so defeatist and will contribute to poorer performance that then completes the vicious circle.
The concept is not that killers can only capitalize on survivor mistakes (thought of course these help) but can benefit from their own quality play. A good chainsaw, a good prediction of survivor pathing, a quality mindgame or moonwalking to hide the red stain, these are all features of top killers that gain an advantage.
Survivors have the better sight. Imagine how balanced the game would be if survivors would be forced to first person view. They still have the red stain to tell them that the killer is right behind them.
You are comparing with Billy in mind. But what about the Wraith or Freddy? They can´t one hit the survivor.
0 -
@Tsulan said:
Difference is: survivor makes a mistake, gets downed, flashlight save, loop, downed, flashlight save, looped downed next to a wall, DS, loop, downed, pallet slam, loop, ohh joy the gates are powered, a 50 kg claudette blocks a 150kg clown so the injured survivor escapes.I'm saying this in all seriousness: if you get stunned by the flashlight while picking someone up, you're clearly kind of new to the killer role. It hasn't happened to me in AGES; things may change with the next update due to the removal of the pick up vacuum, but seriously, I don't really get how you can get stunned if you're not just mindlessly playing without thinking.
0 -
@Runiver said:
@ThePloopz said:
😧😧woow talk about busted lol was that not tested? Like I’m not sure how that was put through to live it just screams brokenIt was released live. So very likely tested, and considered as "balanced". For 3 days that is, then it got insta-removed lol.
Well, someone thought it would be a good idea to "fix" the issue with flashlight stuns during the pickup animation, at the start of the lunar event.
1 -
@Vancold said:
@Tsulan said:
Difference is: survivor makes a mistake, gets downed, flashlight save, loop, downed, flashlight save, looped downed next to a wall, DS, loop, downed, pallet slam, loop, ohh joy the gates are powered, a 50 kg claudette blocks a 150kg clown so the injured survivor escapes.I'm saying this in all seriousness: if you get stunned by the flashlight while picking someone up, you're clearly kind of new to the killer role. It hasn't happened to me in AGES; things may change with the next update due to the removal of the pick up vacuum, but seriously, I don't really get how you can get stunned if you're not just mindlessly playing without thinking.
As i mentioned the clown, it happend on the PTB.
Yes, i usually know how to avoid most of the flashlight stuns. But this time with the clown was completely impossible.0 -
@Tsulan said:
@Vancold said:
@Tsulan said:
Difference is: survivor makes a mistake, gets downed, flashlight save, loop, downed, flashlight save, looped downed next to a wall, DS, loop, downed, pallet slam, loop, ohh joy the gates are powered, a 50 kg claudette blocks a 150kg clown so the injured survivor escapes.I'm saying this in all seriousness: if you get stunned by the flashlight while picking someone up, you're clearly kind of new to the killer role. It hasn't happened to me in AGES; things may change with the next update due to the removal of the pick up vacuum, but seriously, I don't really get how you can get stunned if you're not just mindlessly playing without thinking.
As i mentioned the clown, it happend on the PTB.
Yes, i usually know how to avoid most of the flashlight stuns. But this time with the clown was completely impossible.It's true and I agree flashlight might return being a powerful tool, if used properly, but at what cost (for survivors)? Pallet vacuum is CLEARLY much more impactful.
If you're playing/played on the PTB you know that. How many successful hits (which would have been a free stun + more loops) did you manage to pull off thanks to that?
0 -
Survivors have the better sight. Imagine how balanced the game would be if survivors would be forced to first person view. They still have the red stain to tell them that the killer is right behind them.
You are comparing with Billy in mind. But what about the Wraith or Freddy? They can´t one hit the survivor.
Yup I agree with you it is harder for them but certainly not impossible. I am still waiting to understand what you disagreed with here:
There is certainly an element of truth in here. Killer mistakes are punished more heavily but then that is why I prefer playing killer, it is a challenge no doubt about it. However, it is still your mistake that has cost you in this scenario and I don't want band aids to soften the blow. We just need them to even the balance a little time wise so that there is time to recover.
Can you elaborate?
0 -
@Tsulan said:
@Runiver said:
@ThePloopz said:
😧😧woow talk about busted lol was that not tested? Like I’m not sure how that was put through to live it just screams brokenIt was released live. So very likely tested, and considered as "balanced". For 3 days that is, then it got insta-removed lol.
Well, someone thought it would be a good idea to "fix" the issue with flashlight stuns during the pickup animation, at the start of the lunar event.
"Fixing", more like making it entirely broken.
0 -
@Steebear said:
Survivors have the better sight. Imagine how balanced the game would be if survivors would be forced to first person view. They still have the red stain to tell them that the killer is right behind them.
You are comparing with Billy in mind. But what about the Wraith or Freddy? They can´t one hit the survivor.
Yup I agree with you it is harder for them but certainly not impossible. I am still waiting to understand what you disagreed with here:
There is certainly an element of truth in here. Killer mistakes are punished more heavily but then that is why I prefer playing killer, it is a challenge no doubt about it. However, it is still your mistake that has cost you in this scenario and I don't want band aids to soften the blow. We just need them to even the balance a little time wise so that there is time to recover.
Can you elaborate?
The band aids that soften the blow. Survivors have plenty of second chance perks and items. The killer doesn´t really have anything that gives him an advantage when he fails.
Blood Warden would be a great perk, if the killer could activate it like Dead Hard. Pressing a button to close the exit. No other requirements. A powerful killer perk, that punishes teabaggers and survivors that want to get a last hit before they get out.0 -
The band aids that soften the blow. Survivors have plenty of second chance perks and items. The killer doesn´t really have anything that gives him an advantage when he fails.
Blood Warden would be a great perk, if the killer could activate it like Dead Hard. Pressing a button to close the exit. No other requirements. A powerful killer perk, that punishes teabaggers and survivors that want to get a last hit before they get out.I understand what you mean now, I still don't want band aids though. I do like the idea of straight up buffs to some killer perks though and the activated Blood Warden does sound like an interesting idea to me. An anytime activation for 30/45/60 seconds after exit gates have been powered would certainly shake the end game up!
1 -
@Runiver said:
I've been tagged a lot in here.
Let's say it : I didn't read the first 3 pages, since you guys went apeshit. I'll just give my opinion about the round.
Don't forgot I'm in Europe guys, when it's midnight for you, it's 6 A.M+ for me, kek.So I've watched the video and I'll be honest :
I didn't see anything wrong with it, except that the survivors did a lot of mistakes at the end of it, giving you a free win. I'm not sure about where your complaints are at, it seems like my everyday match at high ranks tbh (Except I do not commit that much to a single chase)And yes, it's pretty stressful for the killer (sadly), but atm, that's how the game is designed and we're forced to deal with it if we wanna play.
I don't see much toxicity, just decent teamplay, decent repairs, and decent juking from that Feng that outplayed you a few times even tho she was pretty readable.
She did the usual thing most survivors do : She first plays greedy to see how you react, allowing you to, at some point (after several fails) get a free hit (that you could have got WAY earlier if you actually won the mindgames/had proper readings), and then, she played full safe not to risk to get caught and camped. She seemed very common to me, and would have totally deserved to be dropped since it's a clear case of a survivor wanting your attention in a strong spot of the map (the killer's shack).You actually got pretty lucky this match to have been able to catch them due to their overaltruism (that Jake trying to heal around a Billy is a moron for example).
Let's resume it :
- You failed two easy chainsaw early game, even tho they didn't even move that much to dodge it.
- Then, you dropped that Claudette after catching her, which is rather debatable, especially since it's around the shack, and a hook was actually very close. Even a stack of 3 bodyblockers wouldn't have stopped you. But anyway : it was your choice and it's possibly your playstyle, and I respect it. Slugging is a possible good strategy for Billy. Slugging around the shack with full pallets around is still very debatable tho.
- Then, you tried to get a basement hook, which was obviously not gonna happen, since getting someone in the basement is already a 30%+ wiggle time awarded to the survivor, and you gave her 33% already with that drop.
- Then, you overcommited to Feng. You failed quite a bit there, I have to say. At some point, she started playing very safe with pallets, because she knew she could afford it, as her team was skyrocking ahead in term of gens, and you were fully going for her. She ran into gen empty areas on purpose (it was very visible) and emptied the pallets of these areas.
- Then, you (finally) caught her. And the other survivors went fullstupid and suicided on you, even tho you (STILL) failed a lot of chainsaw rushes that was very affordable.
- The disconnections are not an issue, it's PTB and the game was over. Move on to the next match.
I'm not sure where the complaints are at.
You missed a few clutch moments in your match, allowing them to get ahead of you, and they did several mistakes that made you to catch up.That (long) chase with Feng is possibly the most debatable moment, but she actually read through you and even afforded to get a free hit just to try to be cocky.
Arguable points :
Yes, the gens are repaired super quickly, and yes, a single survivor can keep you busy for quite a while, tho it was partly due to your own mistakes and choices in here.I love you man, but I can't support you on that one, even tho you can see that the survivors are kind of in control of the game if they don't fail (and they failed a lot this match).
Survivors weren't toxic, they were just random bodyblockers and obviously over-altruistic (like most survivors). No teabagging, nothing too cocky (except that extra loop she tried on you and earned her a hit), no flashlight spam, no syringue spam, no emote spams, and not even that much looping tbh. At least compared to the rounds I usually play at high ranks, that was NOTHING.Cheers.
Oh trust me, I'm fully aware of the mistakes I made. That's what 2 months out of practice gets you. I respect the opinion.
However, I see you are becoming complacent in how the game is, you mention this is typical for high rank for you. That's a serious problem. I'm not one to ever become complacent in this kind of nonsense. You've just "accepted" it
I will never willingly accept such absurdly one-sided tomfoolery.
0 -
@weirdkid5 said:
@Runiver said:
I've been tagged a lot in here.
Let's say it : I didn't read the first 3 pages, since you guys went apeshit. I'll just give my opinion about the round.
Don't forgot I'm in Europe guys, when it's midnight for you, it's 6 A.M+ for me, kek.So I've watched the video and I'll be honest :
I didn't see anything wrong with it, except that the survivors did a lot of mistakes at the end of it, giving you a free win. I'm not sure about where your complaints are at, it seems like my everyday match at high ranks tbh (Except I do not commit that much to a single chase)And yes, it's pretty stressful for the killer (sadly), but atm, that's how the game is designed and we're forced to deal with it if we wanna play.
I don't see much toxicity, just decent teamplay, decent repairs, and decent juking from that Feng that outplayed you a few times even tho she was pretty readable.
She did the usual thing most survivors do : She first plays greedy to see how you react, allowing you to, at some point (after several fails) get a free hit (that you could have got WAY earlier if you actually won the mindgames/had proper readings), and then, she played full safe not to risk to get caught and camped. She seemed very common to me, and would have totally deserved to be dropped since it's a clear case of a survivor wanting your attention in a strong spot of the map (the killer's shack).You actually got pretty lucky this match to have been able to catch them due to their overaltruism (that Jake trying to heal around a Billy is a moron for example).
Let's resume it :
- You failed two easy chainsaw early game, even tho they didn't even move that much to dodge it.
- Then, you dropped that Claudette after catching her, which is rather debatable, especially since it's around the shack, and a hook was actually very close. Even a stack of 3 bodyblockers wouldn't have stopped you. But anyway : it was your choice and it's possibly your playstyle, and I respect it. Slugging is a possible good strategy for Billy. Slugging around the shack with full pallets around is still very debatable tho.
- Then, you tried to get a basement hook, which was obviously not gonna happen, since getting someone in the basement is already a 30%+ wiggle time awarded to the survivor, and you gave her 33% already with that drop.
- Then, you overcommited to Feng. You failed quite a bit there, I have to say. At some point, she started playing very safe with pallets, because she knew she could afford it, as her team was skyrocking ahead in term of gens, and you were fully going for her. She ran into gen empty areas on purpose (it was very visible) and emptied the pallets of these areas.
- Then, you (finally) caught her. And the other survivors went fullstupid and suicided on you, even tho you (STILL) failed a lot of chainsaw rushes that was very affordable.
- The disconnections are not an issue, it's PTB and the game was over. Move on to the next match.
I'm not sure where the complaints are at.
You missed a few clutch moments in your match, allowing them to get ahead of you, and they did several mistakes that made you to catch up.That (long) chase with Feng is possibly the most debatable moment, but she actually read through you and even afforded to get a free hit just to try to be cocky.
Arguable points :
Yes, the gens are repaired super quickly, and yes, a single survivor can keep you busy for quite a while, tho it was partly due to your own mistakes and choices in here.I love you man, but I can't support you on that one, even tho you can see that the survivors are kind of in control of the game if they don't fail (and they failed a lot this match).
Survivors weren't toxic, they were just random bodyblockers and obviously over-altruistic (like most survivors). No teabagging, nothing too cocky (except that extra loop she tried on you and earned her a hit), no flashlight spam, no syringue spam, no emote spams, and not even that much looping tbh. At least compared to the rounds I usually play at high ranks, that was NOTHING.Cheers.
Oh trust me, I'm fully aware of the mistakes I made. That's what 2 months out of practice gets you. I respect the opinion.
However, I see you are becoming complacent in how the game is, you mention this is typical for high rank for you. That's a serious problem. I'm not one to ever become complacent in this kind of nonsense. You've just "accepted" it
I will never willingly accept such absurdly one-sided tomfoolery.
Oh, I didn't accept it.
I just see no point into complaining/camping survivors because of it tho. I've tried that, it leads to nothing. The game is rather survivor sided, clearly, in my eyes, and I just treat it very casually since going the hard way never did any good anyway.I'm still a try-harder when I play most of the time (except on the PTB where I let ppl go), and I can see where some unbalances are, but most serious discussions are shut down on this game. People just want to have a fun and casual experience and whenever you try to actually try to get mecanics polished and such, a lot of people just drop the discussion and go to the next bait of "Clown OP" or "Plz nerf camping".
It has been a thing since day 1, sadly, and it didn't change much.What I see is : things are (very slowly) getting better for killers, which is a decent thing, and I don't consider that stressing myself out anymore is worth the time. I come around and discuss, give my opinion, knowing the unbalance will very likely not change before at least SEVERAL MONTHS since that's the pace of updates in this game. In that sense, I indeed "accepted it". It's not actually accepting it, it's just that it's either that, or not playing the game at all since this game has gave up on his try-harding aspect and went full on the casual experience, leaving people like me behind (and mostly, on other games that are actually polished. Can't wait to play Monster Hunter and such for example. And I highly suggest games such as Dead Cells for example, that are both fun and "challenging")
2 -
If the survivors were in first person they’d need to rework some killers to make it fair otherwise killers with no terror radius or tier 1 Michael would be so brokenTsulan said:@Steebear said:
@Tsulan said:
@Steebear said:
The main problem I have with this is number 1. As a killer you cant make a mistake or you lose the game. you miss a chainsaw? then a gen or two pops, because the survivor keeps looping you. Survivors can [BAD WORD] up really bad and still make it out of the game.
There is certainly an element of truth in here. Killer mistakes are punished more heavily but then that is why I prefer playing killer, it is a challenge no doubt about it. However, it is still your mistake that has cost you in this scenario and I don't want band aids to soften the blow. We just need them to even the balance a little time wise so that there is time to recover.
I disagree. Survivors can make several mistakes and still escape. They got plenty of second chance perks or items to help them if they screwed up.
If the killer makes 1 mistake, the game is basically over.
The whole concept of the killer only being able to capitalize on survivor mistakes is flawed.What are you disagreeing with? I am confused by this post.
I certainly don't agree that if a killer makes 1 mistake the game is over, this is so defeatist and will contribute to poorer performance that then completes the vicious circle.
The concept is not that killers can only capitalize on survivor mistakes (thought of course these help) but can benefit from their own quality play. A good chainsaw, a good prediction of survivor pathing, a quality mindgame or moonwalking to hide the red stain, these are all features of top killers that gain an advantage.
Survivors have the better sight. Imagine how balanced the game would be if survivors would be forced to first person view. They still have the red stain to tell them that the killer is right behind them.
You are comparing with Billy in mind. But what about the Wraith or Freddy? They can´t one hit the survivor.
-1 -
@ThePloopz said:
If the survivors were in first person they’d need to rework some killers to make it fair otherwise killers with no terror radius or tier 1 Michael would be so broken
Survivors can turn their head and look left and right. But not look backwards while running forward.
There would be some real mindgames. Looping would be disarmed. The game would be a lot scarier.
Tier 1 Myers has some serious drawbacks. That would make this play style viable.1 -
I think this is the point we are both trying to make. Complaining to survivors and saying this is why you are hated is unlikely to provide any sort of change.
Hopefully with enough evidence we can keep moving towards a more balanced system...the pallet changes are a step in the right direction. The removal of Ruin and a reduction in generator repair speed for survivors and the effectiveness of toolboxes would also contribute.
Right now Killer really is a challenge but I don't want it to become too easy because it takes away the satisfaction when you play well and comfortably pip or double pip.
0 -
@Steebear said:
I think this is the point we are both trying to make. Complaining to survivors and saying this is why you are hated is unlikely to provide any sort of change.Hopefully with enough evidence we can keep moving towards a more balanced system...the pallet changes are a step in the right direction. The removal of Ruin and a reduction in generator repair speed for survivors and the effectiveness of toolboxes would also contribute.
Right now Killer really is a challenge but I don't want it to become too easy because it takes away the satisfaction when you play well and comfortably pip or double pip.
No doubt, I don't want Killer to be a cakewalk, but if Survivors are going to get the ability to relax in their gameplay at high rank and win, the Killer should be able to do so and still win the game. That's all I'm saying at this point.
I like the opinions tossed around here. I wish the community could discuss things reasonably like this page or in the last one while still having differing opinions.
I'm hoping this forum will be a good start for community outreach @Runiver and I guess that's the difference between you and me. I'm still gonna be vocal about this stuff until it gets fixed even if it never does.
I don't think there's much left to discuss after this quote. I think this discussion ended well.
1 -
@Dragonredking said:
I can pretty much assure you that in any competitive scene if someone win just because all your oponent decided to give up mid game said someone would be "a sore winner" because he doesn't deserve the win to begin with.And before people get in saying it isn't a competitif game, it is.
As long as the only existing mode is a ranked mode against other humanbeing it is a competitif game.They didn't give up. They already lost when they all got slugged.
0 -
@Mc_Harty said:
@Dragonredking said:
I can pretty much assure you that in any competitive scene if someone win just because all your oponent decided to give up mid game said someone would be "a sore winner" because he doesn't deserve the win to begin with.And before people get in saying it isn't a competitif game, it is.
As long as the only existing mode is a ranked mode against other humanbeing it is a competitif game.They didn't give up. They already lost when they all got slugged.
They did give up. You still have a chance with an unhook via self save. They didn't let the Killer enjoy the victory and get the Sacrifice points. This could still cost a Killer his pip, as it has in the old system.
It's called being a sore loser.
0 -
Being able to look left and right doesn’t help much when you’re face first repairing a gen. Tier 1 myers or pig can legit just go up behind someone or in front of them since the gen will block the survivors view ahead and either pull them off or at least get easy hits on them. Also the nurse would absolutely dominate everybody like she’s already pretty good at killing now and survivors have third person. First person it’d be just be destruction you’d have no way of knowing where she’s blinking so all the survivors would be running around like chickens with the heads cut off which would be pretty funny though I’m not gonna lie. Billy would just snipe everyone. Would it be scarier of course would it be balanced probably not it’d take a lot of changes.Tsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
If the survivors were in first person they’d need to rework some killers to make it fair otherwise killers with no terror radius or tier 1 Michael would be so broken
Survivors can turn their head and look left and right. But not look backwards while running forward.
There would be some real mindgames. Looping would be disarmed. The game would be a lot scarier.
Tier 1 Myers has some serious drawbacks. That would make this play style viable.0 -
Oops let me correct myself disconnects are treated properly in the Emblem system.
Still, that doesn't change the fact they gave up and are sore losers. DC is a bannable offense.
0 -
@weirdkid5 said:
They did give up. You still have a chance with an unhook via self save. They didn't let the Killer enjoy the victory and get the Sacrifice points. This could still cost a Killer his pip, as it has in the old system.It's called being a sore loser.
You would have just downed them immediately after. Besides the odds of that happening are minimal.
They already lost when you slugged them. Complaining that a match didn't go the way you wanted it to, despite clearly being victorious, is the definition of being a sore winner.
2 -
@ThePloopz said:
Being able to look left and right doesn’t help much when you’re face first repairing a gen. Tier 1 myers or pig can legit just go up behind someone or in front of them since the gen will block the survivors view ahead and either pull them off or at least get easy hits on them. Also the nurse would absolutely dominate everybody like she’s already pretty good at killing now and survivors have third person. First person it’d be just be destruction you’d have no way of knowing where she’s blinking so all the survivors would be running around like chickens with the heads cut off which would be pretty funny though I’m not gonna lie. Billy would just snipe everyone. Would it be scarier of course would it be balanced probably not it’d take a lot of changes.
Well, its a 4vs1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.
Survivors can stop doing gens and take a look around. Or cover each others blind spot by repairing facing each other. This would make weak killers a lot stronger. While considerably nerfing loops. Spine chill would be an excellent perk for this. Devs could even add different perks to play into this new experience.1 -
@Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
They did give up. You still have a chance with an unhook via self save. They didn't let the Killer enjoy the victory and get the Sacrifice points. This could still cost a Killer his pip, as it has in the old system.It's called being a sore loser.
You would have just downed them immediately after. Besides the odds of that happening are minimal.
They already lost when you slugged them. Complaining that a match didn't go the way you wanted it to, despite clearly being victorious, is the definition of being a sore winner.
That's an assumption that I wouldn't still give them a fair chance at the unhooks. I wouldn't stand there for a minute waiting for them to get to struggle state cause that's the only way to ensure they wouldn't hop off. As stated by many, I don't know how the others would have chased me so I likely still would have given chances. The moment they all 4 dc'd is the reveal of toxicity.
So they still give up? Earlier you derided me for supposedly giving up, but that's exactly what they did. Doesn't matter how minimal the chance is.
So you are essentially justifying a bannable offense because "they already lost," and don't call them sore losers? The match didnt fo the way I wanted because of several of my own mistakes. The survivors are unable to take the punishment they so graciously give out. You can keep calling me a sore winner all you want.
0 -
@weirdkid5 said:
That's an assumption that I wouldn't still give them a fair chance at the unhooks. I wouldn't stand there for a minute waiting for them to get to struggle state cause that's the only way to ensure they wouldn't hop off. As stated by many, I don't know how the others would have chased me so I likely still would have given chances. The moment they all 4 dc'd is the reveal of toxicity.
So they still give up? Earlier you derided me for supposedly giving up, but that's exactly what they did. Doesn't matter how minimal the chance is.
So you are essentially justifying a bannable offense because "they already lost," and don't call them sore losers? The match didnt fo the way I wanted because of several of my own mistakes. The survivors are unable to take the punishment they so graciously give out. You can keep calling me a sore winner all you want.
I never said they weren't sore losers.
I said you were a sore winner.
Example; this thread.
They can be toxic all they want, I actually don't care. If they DC too much then'll get banned obviously. You can't control human behavior. Its an non-issue if you're in a situation where you clearly won.
1 -
@Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
They did give up. You still have a chance with an unhook via self save. They didn't let the Killer enjoy the victory and get the Sacrifice points. This could still cost a Killer his pip, as it has in the old system.It's called being a sore loser.
You would have just downed them immediately after. Besides the odds of that happening are minimal.
They already lost when you slugged them. Complaining that a match didn't go the way you wanted it to, despite clearly being victorious, is the definition of being a sore winner.
That's an assumption that I wouldn't still give them a fair chance at the unhooks. I wouldn't stand there for a minute waiting for them to get to struggle state cause that's the only way to ensure they wouldn't hop off. As stated by many, I don't know how the others would have chased me so I likely still would have given chances. The moment they all 4 dc'd is the reveal of toxicity.
So they still give up? Earlier you derided me for supposedly giving up, but that's exactly what they did. Doesn't matter how minimal the chance is.
So you are essentially justifying a bannable offense because "they already lost," and don't call them sore losers? The match didnt fo the way I wanted because of several of my own mistakes. The survivors are unable to take the punishment they so graciously give out. You can > @Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
That's an assumption that I wouldn't still give them a fair chance at the unhooks. I wouldn't stand there for a minute waiting for them to get to struggle state cause that's the only way to ensure they wouldn't hop off. As stated by many, I don't know how the others would have chased me so I likely still would have given chances. The moment they all 4 dc'd is the reveal of toxicity.
So they still give up? Earlier you derided me for supposedly giving up, but that's exactly what they did. Doesn't matter how minimal the chance is.
So you are essentially justifying a bannable offense because "they already lost," and don't call them sore losers? The match didnt fo the way I wanted because of several of my own mistakes. The survivors are unable to take the punishment they so graciously give out. You can keep calling me a sore winner all you want.
I never said they weren't sore losers.
I said you were a sore winner.
Example; this thread.
They can be toxic all they want, I actually don't care. If they DC too much then'll get banned obviously. You can't control human behavior. Its an non-issue if you're in a situation where you clearly won.
I didnt post this to rub it in the victory in their faces. I made this mostly salt induced post to highlight how frustrating Killer gameplay can be, despite being able to pull off a Victory. I have plenty of stream examples of me getting destroyed as Killer with a depip and enjoying the match because the Survivors didn't go out of their way to sap every ounce of fun the Killer could possibly have.
0 -
If you think that game was bad, wait until you play vs good survivors...
Just imagine everytime u break a pallet or jump a window u get blinded, feng wasted 1 pallet and she could have looped you at least 1 more minute.and chill dude... far too emotional over something killers face everyday.
1 -
@weirdkid5 said:
I didnt post this to rub it in the victory in their faces. I made this mostly salt induced post to highlight how frustrating Killer gameplay can be, despite being able to pull off a Victory. I have plenty of stream examples of me getting destroyed as Killer with a depip and enjoying the match because the Survivors didn't go out of their way to sap every ounce of fun the Killer could possibly have.
You gloated that this was the worst match you have experience then boasted to all of the survivors they are hypocrites if they don't cater to a play-style that favors you.
You even bragged at them at the end of the match. ie What a sore winner would do.
And now you're playing victim on these forums relying on the perfect survivors argument to claim everything a killer does is pointless.
1 -
@Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
I didnt post this to rub it in the victory in their faces. I made this mostly salt induced post to highlight how frustrating Killer gameplay can be, despite being able to pull off a Victory. I have plenty of stream examples of me getting destroyed as Killer with a depip and enjoying the match because the Survivors didn't go out of their way to sap every ounce of fun the Killer could possibly have.
You gloated that this was the worst match you have experience then boasted to all of the survivors they are hypocrites if they don't cater to a play-style that favors you.
You even bragged at them at the end of the match. ie What a sore winner would do.
And now you're playing victim on these forums relying on the perfect survivors argument to claim everything a killer does is pointless.
Weren't you the one who said yourself the game should be balanced around what each side has the potential in doing?
Funny that you reference Marth's squad, say the game should be balanced around these potentials of what each side can do, yet complain when someone uses the perfect survivor arguement?
So where's the balance?
0 -
@weirdkid5 said:
Weren't you the one who said yourself the game should be balanced around what each side has the potential in doing?
So where's the balance?
The game being unbalanced does not mean that the killers are useless.
-2 -
Wait so are you justifying nurse being absolutely busted with the fact that survivors should be scared? Billy would be pretty op as well not as op of course but still op. Like I said there’d need to be a lot of changes all round. There’d need to be some nerfs for some killers and buffs for some things on the survivor end.Tsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
Being able to look left and right doesn’t help much when you’re face first repairing a gen. Tier 1 myers or pig can legit just go up behind someone or in front of them since the gen will block the survivors view ahead and either pull them off or at least get easy hits on them. Also the nurse would absolutely dominate everybody like she’s already pretty good at killing now and survivors have third person. First person it’d be just be destruction you’d have no way of knowing where she’s blinking so all the survivors would be running around like chickens with the heads cut off which would be pretty funny though I’m not gonna lie. Billy would just snipe everyone. Would it be scarier of course would it be balanced probably not it’d take a lot of changes.
Well, its a 4vs1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.
Survivors can stop doing gens and take a look around. Or cover each others blind spot by repairing facing each other. This would make weak killers a lot stronger. While considerably nerfing loops. Spine chill would be an excellent perk for this. Devs could even add different perks to play into this new experience.-1 -
@Mc_Harty said:
The game should be balanced around the potential of what both sides can do.
Complains when someone points out how unbalanced the game truly is when people play optimally with> @Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
Weren't you the one who said yourself the game should be balanced around what each side has the potential in doing?
So where's the balance?
The game being unbalanced does not mean that the killers are useless.
Whh.. what? They are useless if Survivors play optimally, like the depip squad you happily referenced first page.
0 -
@ThePloopz said:
Tsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
Being able to look left and right doesn’t help much when you’re face first repairing a gen. Tier 1 myers or pig can legit just go up behind someone or in front of them since the gen will block the survivors view ahead and either pull them off or at least get easy hits on them. Also the nurse would absolutely dominate everybody like she’s already pretty good at killing now and survivors have third person. First person it’d be just be destruction you’d have no way of knowing where she’s blinking so all the survivors would be running around like chickens with the heads cut off which would be pretty funny though I’m not gonna lie. Billy would just snipe everyone. Would it be scarier of course would it be balanced probably not it’d take a lot of changes.
Well, its a 4vs1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.
Survivors can stop doing gens and take a look around. Or cover each others blind spot by repairing facing each other. This would make weak killers a lot stronger. While considerably nerfing loops. Spine chill would be an excellent perk for this. Devs could even add different perks to play into this new experience.
Wait so are you justifying nurse being absolutely busted with the fact that survivors should be scared? Billy would be pretty op as well not as op of course but still op. Like I said there’d need to be a lot of changes all round. There’d need to be some nerfs for some killers and buffs for some things on the survivor end.
First person for survivor isn't the answer nor is that even a viable option. I agree.
1 -
@weirdkid5 said:
Complains when someone points out how unbalanced the game truly is when people play optimally with these potentials. Hmmm
Believes the opposing team should cater to a play-style and if they don't, blame it on game balance. Hmmm.
0 -
@Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
Complains when someone points out how unbalanced the game truly is when people play optimally with these potentials. Hmmm
Believes the opposing team should cater to a play-style and if they don't, blame it on game balance. Hmmm.
Looping and DC'ing isnt a playstyle. It's utilizing broken mechanics and doing a bannable offense.
0 -
@weirdkid5 said:
@Mc_Harty said:
@weirdkid5 said:
Complains when someone points out how unbalanced the game truly is when people play optimally with these potentials. Hmmm
Believes the opposing team should cater to a play-style and if they don't, blame it on game balance. Hmmm.
Looping and DC'ing isnt a playstyle. It's utilizing broken mechanics and doing a bannable offense.
Looping isn't a playstyle. Hey, whatever helps you sleep better at night.
Also I never mentioned dcing is a play style? I certainly mentioned that it was a ban-able offence. What are you talking about?
2 -
@ThePloopz said:
Tsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
Being able to look left and right doesn’t help much when you’re face first repairing a gen. Tier 1 myers or pig can legit just go up behind someone or in front of them since the gen will block the survivors view ahead and either pull them off or at least get easy hits on them. Also the nurse would absolutely dominate everybody like she’s already pretty good at killing now and survivors have third person. First person it’d be just be destruction you’d have no way of knowing where she’s blinking so all the survivors would be running around like chickens with the heads cut off which would be pretty funny though I’m not gonna lie. Billy would just snipe everyone. Would it be scarier of course would it be balanced probably not it’d take a lot of changes.
Well, its a 4vs1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.
Survivors can stop doing gens and take a look around. Or cover each others blind spot by repairing facing each other. This would make weak killers a lot stronger. While considerably nerfing loops. Spine chill would be an excellent perk for this. Devs could even add different perks to play into this new experience.
Wait so are you justifying nurse being absolutely busted with the fact that survivors should be scared? Billy would be pretty op as well not as op of course but still op. Like I said there’d need to be a lot of changes all round. There’d need to be some nerfs for some killers and buffs for some things on the survivor end.
Where did i say anything about the nurse?
0 -
I said she’d be op then you said “Well it’s a 4v1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.” So I think I just misinterpreted that as a response instead of it’s own statement my bad on that oneTsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
Tsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
Being able to look left and right doesn’t help much when you’re face first repairing a gen. Tier 1 myers or pig can legit just go up behind someone or in front of them since the gen will block the survivors view ahead and either pull them off or at least get easy hits on them. Also the nurse would absolutely dominate everybody like she’s already pretty good at killing now and survivors have third person. First person it’d be just be destruction you’d have no way of knowing where she’s blinking so all the survivors would be running around like chickens with the heads cut off which would be pretty funny though I’m not gonna lie. Billy would just snipe everyone. Would it be scarier of course would it be balanced probably not it’d take a lot of changes.
Well, its a 4vs1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.
Survivors can stop doing gens and take a look around. Or cover each others blind spot by repairing facing each other. This would make weak killers a lot stronger. While considerably nerfing loops. Spine chill would be an excellent perk for this. Devs could even add different perks to play into this new experience.
Wait so are you justifying nurse being absolutely busted with the fact that survivors should be scared? Billy would be pretty op as well not as op of course but still op. Like I said there’d need to be a lot of changes all round. There’d need to be some nerfs for some killers and buffs for some things on the survivor end.
Where did i say anything about the nurse?
0 -
@ThePloopz said:
I said she’d be op then you said “Well it’s a 4v1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.” So I think I just misinterpreted that as a response instead of it’s own statement my bad on that oneLook, i really want a balanced game for both sides.
An exciting game that is fun for everyone. But right now, playing killer is a chore. Because the game is so terribly unbalanced towards survivors.
4 random survivors may be balanced, but 70% of the matches are SWF. Devs need to balance around that.
That means buffs for killers and nerfs for survivors. That also means that they have to cut down on the toxic player base.
I would love it, if the survivor experience would give some nice jumpscares and the overall scarried feeling. Not the bully simulator we have right now.-1 -
I think they should just give in game voice chat that way they can just balance the game and not have to specifically balance for swf. That way the advantages of swf would be minimal because swf will always be better than 4 randos so I think they should just try to minimize that advantage as much as possibleTsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
I said she’d be op then you said “Well it’s a 4v1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.” So I think I just misinterpreted that as a response instead of it’s own statement my bad on that oneLook, i really want a balanced game for both sides.
An exciting game that is fun for everyone. But right now, playing killer is a chore. Because the game is so terribly unbalanced towards survivors.
4 random survivors may be balanced, but 70% of the matches are SWF. Devs need to balance around that.
That means buffs for killers and nerfs for survivors. That also means that they have to cut down on the toxic player base.
I would love it, if the survivor experience would give some nice jumpscares and the overall scarried feeling. Not the bully simulator we have right now.-1 -
@ThePloopz said:
Tsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
I said she’d be op then you said “Well it’s a 4v1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.” So I think I just misinterpreted that as a response instead of it’s own statement my bad on that one
Look, i really want a balanced game for both sides.
An exciting game that is fun for everyone. But right now, playing killer is a chore. Because the game is so terribly unbalanced towards survivors.
4 random survivors may be balanced, but 70% of the matches are SWF. Devs need to balance around that.
That means buffs for killers and nerfs for survivors. That also means that they have to cut down on the toxic player base.
I would love it, if the survivor experience would give some nice jumpscares and the overall scarried feeling. Not the bully simulator we have right now.
I think they should just give in game voice chat that way they can just balance the game and not have to specifically balance for swf. That way the advantages of swf would be minimal because swf will always be better than 4 randos so I think they should just try to minimize that advantage as much as possible
Voice chat wouldn't do anything cause SWF use Discord anyway. So they wouldn't use voice chat. And solo players dont need it. I dont want voice chat as a solo player main. You still need to buff Killers to account for the voice communication, something the game currently does not consider.
0 -
It's just the PTB.
I'd leave too, to end the game faster. Why wait the three minutes it'll take for everyone to finish struggling/for the killer to walk around finding survivors and hooking them?
@weirdkid5 said:
Voice chat wouldn't do anything cause SWF use Discord anyway. So they wouldn't use voice chat. And solo players dont need it. I dont want voice chat as a solo player main. You still need to buff Killers to account for the voice communication, something the game currently does not consider.Voice chat wouldn't be for SWF. Solo players need it to be on par with SWF. Solo player mains do not NEED to use it. Putting solo players at the level of SWF ALLOWS the devs to balance for SWF without completely taking a dump on solo players.
1 -
@Visionmaker said:
It's just the PTB.
I'd leave too, to end the game faster. Why wait the three minutes it'll take for everyone to finish struggling/for the killer to walk around finding survivors and hooking them?@weirdkid5 said:
Voice chat wouldn't do anything cause SWF use Discord anyway. So they wouldn't use voice chat. And solo players dont need it. I dont want voice chat as a solo player main. You still need to buff Killers to account for the voice communication, something the game currently does not consider.Voice chat wouldn't be for SWF. Solo players need it to be on par with SWF. Solo player mains do not NEED to use it. Putting solo players at the level of SWF ALLOWS the devs to balance for SWF without completely taking a dump on solo players.
They don't need to bring solo players to the level of SWF. They need to nerf SWF groups or make a separate mode.
I absolutely do not agree with putting solos on the same level as SWF, and have opposed this mindset since it was first considered by the devs.
-1 -
@weirdkid5 said:
@Visionmaker said:
It's just the PTB.
I'd leave too, to end the game faster. Why wait the three minutes it'll take for everyone to finish struggling/for the killer to walk around finding survivors and hooking them?@weirdkid5 said:
Voice chat wouldn't do anything cause SWF use Discord anyway. So they wouldn't use voice chat. And solo players dont need it. I dont want voice chat as a solo player main. You still need to buff Killers to account for the voice communication, something the game currently does not consider.Voice chat wouldn't be for SWF. Solo players need it to be on par with SWF. Solo player mains do not NEED to use it. Putting solo players at the level of SWF ALLOWS the devs to balance for SWF without completely taking a dump on solo players.
They don't need to bring solo players to the level of SWF. They need to nerf SWF groups or make a separate mode.
I absolutely do not agree with putting solos on the same level as SWF, and have opposed this mindset since it was first considered by the devs.
Cripple a large chunk of the playerbase for inviting their friends to play the game together? Sure. /s
Split the already long queue and, again, punish players for inviting their friends to play (BUY) the game? Uh huh.
If you advocate for something that kills the growth and profit of the game, you will be waiting for a very long time.
1 -
@Tsulan said:
@ThePloopz said:
I said she’d be op then you said “Well it’s a 4v1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.” So I think I just misinterpreted that as a response instead of it’s own statement my bad on that one70% of the matches are SWF.
Hm? I thought 48,3%. Or maybe we should stop pulling stats out of our asses.
-3 -
@Vancold said:
@Tsulan said:
@ThePloopz said:
I said she’d be op then you said “Well it’s a 4v1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.” So I think I just misinterpreted that as a response instead of it’s own statement my bad on that one70% of the matches are SWF.
Hm? I thought 48,3%. Or maybe we should stop pulling stats out of our asses.
Devs said in a stream that 70% of all matches contain SWF.
But i´m to tired to search the stream for you, to proof you again, wrong.1 -
@Visionmaker said:
@weirdkid5 said:
@Visionmaker said:
It's just the PTB.
I'd leave too, to end the game faster. Why wait the three minutes it'll take for everyone to finish struggling/for the killer to walk around finding survivors and hooking them?@weirdkid5 said:
Voice chat wouldn't do anything cause SWF use Discord anyway. So they wouldn't use voice chat. And solo players dont need it. I dont want voice chat as a solo player main. You still need to buff Killers to account for the voice communication, something the game currently does not consider.Voice chat wouldn't be for SWF. Solo players need it to be on par with SWF. Solo player mains do not NEED to use it. Putting solo players at the level of SWF ALLOWS the devs to balance for SWF without completely taking a dump on solo players.
They don't need to bring solo players to the level of SWF. They need to nerf SWF groups or make a separate mode.
I absolutely do not agree with putting solos on the same level as SWF, and have opposed this mindset since it was first considered by the devs.
Cripple a large chunk of the playerbase for inviting their friends to play the game together? Sure. /s
Split the already long queue and, again, punish players for inviting their friends to play (BUY) the game? Uh huh.
If you advocate for something that kills the growth and profit of the game, you will be waiting for a very long time.
Sorry, but this game wasnt made or designed with the ability to play with friends in mind. SWF gives you a massive advantage, there should be a downside to it as well, as do some perks and addons. That's called balance. If you dont want the disadvantages, play within the intended balance.
I've already done the theoretical math in my petition that garnered over 3k comments on Steam. Wait times wouldn't really be affected too much and if anything, would cause the playerbase to grow by attracting old solo players and Killers alike.
Growth and profit at the expense of fun for one of the sides isn't good game design, it's shilling for the majority and dropping your initial vision for profit. This kind of artistic murder is shameful. People who bought this game to play with friends when it first came out bought the wrong game. Devs knew SWF would be unbalanced, wo they opted no to include at it first until they could figure out how to balance it.
Survivor mains whined and review bombed and made them cave. Yet when Killers review bomb and whine, they get told to get over it. Funny how these things work.
-1 -
Ok so if you don’t want to use it then don’t use it. Just because you believe they don’t need it doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be a good addition. Some solo players may want to use it and if they buff the killer to account for voice communication then it won’t be such a detriment to killers if solo players are using it. If they aren’t then that’s good for the killer. I don’t see any downsides to adding this and when/if the killer gets buffed to account for voice chat nobody has a reason to complain about things not being fair. Although we all know by now some people will complain regardless but they’re usually the unreasonable ones and nothing willweirdkid5 said:@ThePloopz said:
Tsulan said:@ThePloopz said:
I said she’d be op then you said “Well it’s a 4v1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.” So I think I just misinterpreted that as a response instead of it’s own statement my bad on that one
Look, i really want a balanced game for both sides.
An exciting game that is fun for everyone. But right now, playing killer is a chore. Because the game is so terribly unbalanced towards survivors.
4 random survivors may be balanced, but 70% of the matches are SWF. Devs need to balance around that.
That means buffs for killers and nerfs for survivors. That also means that they have to cut down on the toxic player base.
I would love it, if the survivor experience would give some nice jumpscares and the overall scarried feeling. Not the bully simulator we have right now.
I think they should just give in game voice chat that way they can just balance the game and not have to specifically balance for swf. That way the advantages of swf would be minimal because swf will always be better than 4 randos so I think they should just try to minimize that advantage as much as possible
Voice chat wouldn't do anything cause SWF use Discord anyway. So they wouldn't use voice chat. And solo players dont need it. I dont want voice chat as a solo player main. You still need to buff Killers to account for the voice communication, something the game currently does not consider.
make them happy. I also think it would make the survivors in those matches feel more like a team and more people will make friends in the community this way2 -
@Tsulan said:
@Vancold said:
@Tsulan said:
@ThePloopz said:
I said she’d be op then you said “Well it’s a 4v1 horror game. Killer should actually be strong while the survivors should be scared.” So I think I just misinterpreted that as a response instead of it’s own statement my bad on that one70% of the matches are SWF.
Hm? I thought 48,3%. Or maybe we should stop pulling stats out of our asses.
Devs said in a stream that 70% of all matches contain SWF.
But i´m to tired to search the stream for you, to proof you again, wrong.Again? Hm. Interesting.
Anyway, nice, boi. You're counting 2 men SWF in the statistics you're using to cater balance. Way to go with statistic manipulation. Meh.
-2
