http://dbd.game/killswitch
Sooo... Matchmaking Incentives Got Nerfed,Hard
Previously they multiplied your final BP value,so if you had 32K + a Cake + 100% incentives you would have 128K BPs in your pocket.
Now it's 96K. It's additive now,despite being multiplicative at release and in the PTB for this update. Disappointing.
Comments
-
Yeah, they reported it in their fixed "bugs" section. Sadly this bug remained a bug and didn't just become a feature, but hey, they reduced bloodweb costs so I'll take it!
11 -
they also fixed the conspicuous action bug
we fixed bloodweb costs, here let us now massively delete all the ways you can earn them !!
6 -
This should be a feature. 25% additive is worthless.
0 -
I need to re-ingnite this thread,I guess.
0 -
The bonus should just stay at 100% always if it's going to be additive. No one is going to be convinced to play solo survivor by a 25% bonus.
4 -
Damn I was using it to maximise survive category even if I died.
0 -
thats a pretty big bummer. Honestly kinda sours the recent node reductions when it gets followed by a "...but we're reducing your incentive amount" chaser. Its like every grind reduction QoL needs to have an asterisk at the end that dilutes its value to some degree.
5 -
Yeah I got told on my "you haven't fixed the grind" thread that they would address BP gains... Well. They addressed them,lol.
0 -
Thatās really disappointing
0 -
Can they literally reduce the grind without increasing it in another way?
2 -
They literally just cut all the costs by 1/3 this patch (which was handy since I had 800k saved for Wesker today, got him to about 45 or so. With the old costs Iād still need 500k more.) And when I do play a game or two and get him up to Prestige 1 all my killers get all his perks automatically at level 1, another savings, and Wesker already automatically has every teachable from every killer with nothing needed at all, again a big savings.
This whole bloodweb rework has been a massive bonus for me. š
2 -
one step forward,four steps back
2 -
The shells game is the worst part. It just feels ignorant at best and deceptive at worst. I still have little doubt that these pushbacks are executive decisions that get slapped on after people on the team work things out to be directly positive. Pure speculation of course, but the fact that every positive QoL feels like it needs an asterisk at the end doesn't instill much confidence.
1 -
In the history of the game there has never been a multiplicative bonus to BPs, it was clearly a bug. The new incentives are great even if additive, I'm keeping getting double BPs as survivor today thanks to everyone playing Wesker.
1 -
I dunno how they managed to keep that bug from PTB to Live then to PTB again only to now announce it as bugged.
0 -
Why make matchmaking incentives multiplicative when we can just nerf blast mine instead
0 -
You know, the new prestige system is amazing... For new players. I, as a veteran, who didn't go past level 40 on most characters, basically have to take everything from 0. Most of the perks I had as teachables are gone. I'm lucky on the characters I had already leveled up before this change, since they have those teachables unlocked. But right now, I have to take everything from 0. I don't get why they didn't keep teachables in game. They wouldn't have the reduced the grind even further, and they would've been an alternative for old players who don't wish to take everything from 0.
0 -
I figured it was a bug but I was still disappointed when I saw they fixed it :(
0 -
So what does 25% additive mean exactly? If you earn, say, 16k bloodpoints in a match, you only get an additional 4,000 points at the end?
if that is the case then wow that is an absolute joke.
0 -
I can think of a single person who disliked the Incentives being multiplacative... why would do they do that... Extremely dissapointing
0 -
You keep all those teachables you unlocked. You just effectively dont get a reward for P1 those characters.
0 -
i wonder who was the "genius" who reported that "bug" (because something that favored THE ENTIRE playerbase needed to be adressed of course š)...
0
