Man for people thinking Freddy is bad

@Usui said:

@powerbats said:
I find it laughable that the same ones asking for proof are the some of the same ones that have commented in threads where people have posted rank 1. Both video proof and screenshot proof. Now it's back to the usual well it's easy to get to rank 1 excuse.

It's always well post proof you've gotten to rank 1, person posts proof then it's well anyone can get to rank 1 it's easy. You lot always do the same thing, move the goalposts when you get what you asked for.Oh and speaking of proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBQ6Vona0fY Oh look a top player is playing Freddy and he has a lot of videos of him doing it.

I could go on but the proof is staring you in the face. Then there's all the posters on the forums that have shown them doing it both with and without perks. They were called out for proof and when they did it got the same response.

Oh anyone can get to rank 1, rank means nothing etc, except when you use it to bash someone and call for proof it does.

I wouldn't consider true a top player, he just plays a lot. I watch him all the time and he makes a TON of mistakes.

While that's true he's also usually used as an example by some of the same ppl when he agrees with them. There's countless others out there with rank 1 Freddy video but I'm not going to post them all. But the people I responded to knew the proof was there, they just thought they'd troll me into silence.

What's funny is that when a player tries to say Freddy is fine, it's only because they versed crappy survivors since getting to rank 1 as survivor is just as easy as drawing a turkey with your hand and thus get a false representation of his balance which leads to them all of a sudden thinking Freddy is fine.

@theArashi said:
He is bare bones killer with power that helps in detecting survivors and slows survivors down(in terms of gen progression) a tiny bit.
Other then that he is just short and... that's it.
I like to play him at rank 1 but main problem is that if he goes against rank 1 pro looper team on one of the bad maps he is #########. He can't do anything.

tbh that's with any killer except a pro nurse. hes fun to play tho.

@powerbats said:
I find it laughable that the same ones asking for proof are the some of the same ones that have commented in threads where people have posted rank 1. Both video proof and screenshot proof. Now it's back to the usual well it's easy to get to rank 1 excuse.

It's always well post proof you've gotten to rank 1, person posts proof then it's well anyone can get to rank 1 it's easy. You lot always do the same thing, move the goalposts when you get what you asked for.Oh and speaking of proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBQ6Vona0fY Oh look a top player is playing Freddy and he has a lot of videos of him doing it.

I could go on but the proof is staring you in the face. Then there's all the posters on the forums that have shown them doing it both with and without perks. They were called out for proof and when they did it got the same response.

Oh anyone can get to rank 1, rank means nothing etc, except when you use it to bash someone and call for proof it does.

One person? Nah. Need actual hard data. You're the one who always wants statistically relevant data, so it's time for you to present data in an amount that you see as valid. That person is a single data point. Is a single data point enough for an extrapolation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPJ82C0Ac8E

That's 5, but hey keep changing the goalposts.

@powerbats said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPJ82C0Ac8E

That's 5, but hey keep changing the goalposts.

Is 5 enough data points for one to extrapolate to the entire game?

@Orion said:

@powerbats said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPJ82C0Ac8E

That's 5, but hey keep changing the goalposts.

Is 5 enough data points for one to extrapolate to the entire game?

So when you use Marth or Tru as examples to buttress your arguments you say they back up your claims. But when someone else does it it's oh they're just a popular streamer. If that doesn't work you say well that's only 2 people and they're not representative. So now we can assume you're like a snake oil salesman speaking out of both sides of your mouth at the same time.

We can also put you in the same category as a certain person that used the alternative facts claim to back up their argument. They're facts when you say it but not when someone else does.

@thesuicidefox said:
Just to make a point, HybridPanda posted some Freddy games today and he got bodied 1 game, and then a 3k in both other games.

His first game was a mess, he used Class Photo with no blocks or paint brush to offset it AND he didn't even use it to find his obsession for RM tokens. Had he done that he could have easily got a few kills that game. He also continuously failed at loops, didn't hug walls or optimize at all which you have to do as Freddy if you want to catch people that loop (or at least play proper mindgames, which he didn't do).

His next game he played smarter and used his CP to catch people, and he played BW really well so he got 3 kills. Had he just gone for Jake first near the gate at the end instead of Bill he could have downed Jake, then went back and got Bill, took Bill's hook first and still be able to grab Jake before he got out (plus the Kate that was down across the map). It would have been a 4k.

Last game he could have just slugged Meg for a bit to look for Claud. He had the game on lock down, 2 gens left with DL and only 2 survivors. They would play super immersed and just let the other die, so you need to drag it out. Could have still been a 3k, but he could have 4k'd. He also totally could have played the basement part way better by not downing the Meg. He almost could have lost too because he kept trying to go around the loop, but he had paint brush which makes you Hag slow. But his TR is tiny, that's how he snuck up on them so much, if he played THAT mindgame he could have had Dwight dead at 4 gens left easy.

So we have 3 games where he potentially could have 4k'd if he either 1> used a better build (his 3rd game was the strongest of the 3 which is why I keep saying Freddy is better at gen lockdown and not an end game), 2> made better decisions (chase non-obsession half the game when you can see everyone and you have RM?!?), and 3> just flat out played better and optimized. If I can point to the exact things he did wrong you can't exactly say it's the killer. Is Freddy a HARD killer to play? Yes. Is he a WEAK killer to play? Eh... depends on some things. I won't deny he has some major drawbacks, but he has potential to be crazy powerful too.

If panda had BW3 he'd have probably out played them all.

People aren't willing to put in time to practice so when they do go and play their one off matches with these killers it's obviously the survivors being toxic or lame game mechanics that stops them from pipping.

@thesuicidefox said:

@SenzuDuck said:

@thesuicidefox said:
Just to make a point, HybridPanda posted some Freddy games today and he got bodied 1 game, and then a 3k in both other games.

His first game was a mess, he used Class Photo with no blocks or paint brush to offset it AND he didn't even use it to find his obsession for RM tokens. Had he done that he could have easily got a few kills that game. He also continuously failed at loops, didn't hug walls or optimize at all which you have to do as Freddy if you want to catch people that loop (or at least play proper mindgames, which he didn't do).

His next game he played smarter and used his CP to catch people, and he played BW really well so he got 3 kills. Had he just gone for Jake first near the gate at the end instead of Bill he could have downed Jake, then went back and got Bill, took Bill's hook first and still be able to grab Jake before he got out (plus the Kate that was down across the map). It would have been a 4k.

Last game he could have just slugged Meg for a bit to look for Claud. He had the game on lock down, 2 gens left with DL and only 2 survivors. They would play super immersed and just let the other die, so you need to drag it out. Could have still been a 3k, but he could have 4k'd. He also totally could have played the basement part way better by not downing the Meg. He almost could have lost too because he kept trying to go around the loop, but he had paint brush which makes you Hag slow. But his TR is tiny, that's how he snuck up on them so much, if he played THAT mindgame he could have had Dwight dead at 4 gens left easy.

So we have 3 games where he potentially could have 4k'd if he either 1> used a better build (his 3rd game was the strongest of the 3 which is why I keep saying Freddy is better at gen lockdown and not an end game), 2> made better decisions (chase non-obsession half the game when you can see everyone and you have RM?!?), and 3> just flat out played better and optimized. If I can point to the exact things he did wrong you can't exactly say it's the killer. Is Freddy a HARD killer to play? Yes. Is he a WEAK killer to play? Eh... depends on some things. I won't deny he has some major drawbacks, but he has potential to be crazy powerful too.

If panda had BW3 he'd have probably out played them all.

People aren't willing to put in time to practice so when they do go and play their one off matches with these killers it's obviously the survivors being toxic or lame game mechanics that stops them from pipping.

Yea not having BW3 really hurt him. Funny how he uses it all the time but doesn't have it tier 3 on the killer whose perk it is. LOL

Well - I probably wouldn't use points on a killer if I disliked them as much as panda dislikes freddy.

@powerbats said:

@Orion said:

@powerbats said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPJ82C0Ac8E

That's 5, but hey keep changing the goalposts.

Is 5 enough data points for one to extrapolate to the entire game?

So when you use Marth or Tru as examples to buttress your arguments you say they back up your claims. But when someone else does it it's oh they're just a popular streamer. If that doesn't work you say well that's only 2 people and they're not representative. So now we can assume you're like a snake oil salesman speaking out of both sides of your mouth at the same time.

We can also put you in the same category as a certain person that used the alternative facts claim to back up their argument. They're facts when you say it but not when someone else does.

I'm asking you a question to figure out what you consider enough data points. You'd know that if you'd bothered to read all my replies to you. For the record, though, I've only ever mentioned marth's experiment. I can't be bothered to watch streamers, but his experiment was put "on paper" for all to see.

@RSB said:
Guess we need to start lobbying about how Nurse is ######### on high ranks...

Statistically nurse is both the best and worst killer. She has the lowest kill rate on low ranks. That clearly means she needs a buff.

@powerbats said:

@Mycroft said:
Truetalent does what he does best because he's one of the best at capitalizing against survivor mistakes. Zubat is in the same league. If you ever get the opportunity to ask him he'll tell you he does what he does based off survivor mistakes, predictability.

Both of them have a ton of patience. It pays off for them.

I, on the other hand am like most people. No time to lay in wait for mistakes to naturally happen. I employ a rushdown style to try to force mistakes, which this game is horrific at providing tools for. It;s why most people regard Nurse and Billy the top two. Both are rushdown based. Huntress is more a hybrid. You don't have to engage with Huntress. You can snipe.

This is why so many people are left wanting more. Their style is not represented by a vast majority of character offerings.

Well at least you're honest now about it, some don't like that style of play which is where you get a lot of this killer is garbage stuff from. While others have the patience to play the long game and play saya Freddy or Trapper etc. To each his or her own but to say x killer is garbage because they don't fit your play style is wrong.

The Freddy's that I've gone up against at rank 1 and gotten destroyed by are the patient ones and those that play him to his fullest. The ones I've seen get destroyed try and play him like a regular killer which doesn't work. The Nurse/Billy are meant to pressure non stop while say Hag and Trapper or more about map control. I personally prefer Trapper, Pig is a of of fun and Myers grows on you.

I'm more of the stalker style and not the charge in full bore type when playing killer the same for survivor, being sneaky and devious is my style.

Id rather be a stealth kill and be patient waiting for the right time to strike but alas stealth killers dont utilise stealth all to well

@Global said:

Id rather be a stealth kill and be patient waiting for the right time to strike but alas stealth killers dont utilise stealth all to well

Amanda is really fun to play like that and waiting until at least 1 gen is popped before putting a trap on is evil. Since right around the time you hook them that 2nd gen has popped. You'll usually get a 2 or even 3rd trap on by the time next 1 or 2 gens pop.

Even Myers is fun to play all sneaky with mirror and just stalk and terrorize that way. I've done trapper games where I just patrol a little bit with Distressing and place traps all over. I'll put some in completely abnormal spots and then go off in the distance and wait.

You'll have people slowing down and looking for traps non stop because they're scared of where the traps might be at. With Distressing and running around just out of sight like Doctor you terrorize them.