Give us an option to disable which killers we do NOT want to go against.
Seriously I am so sick and tired of the SAME freaking killer constantly. At least 3 options to disable 3 killers, not much.
Comments
-
You know actual humans just like you play those killers? Why should they have long queues because of your preferences?
Post edited by Gcarrara on11 -
Ye I do play those killers chill. Why do you go in defensive mode, so you won't have survivors to kill? xd 🤭
0 -
You are projecting emotions and intent onto my post that are simply..... Not there. I'm calling you out on your entitlement in a way that hopefully makes you think about it. Apparently not.
5 -
The survivors are already at the mercy of the killer on how the killer wish to play the game meaning things like tunnel, camp, slug, patrol and even facecamp. How this is done could also be said is decided by which sort of killer the survivors are up against, like for instance speed killers like blight and wesker which I'd dare say normally don't camp since they can get to a gen typically fast however they can also get back to the hook in the same speed but uaslly by then they've already found another survivor to chew out. Killers also decides for a survivor if they should use a pallet or not for when it comes to killers like nurse, trapper or pyramid head since it can mean more danger doing so than not.
I could go on and on however I believe the post is about not wanting to play up against the same killer over and over again making the game pretty much the same almost everytime since depending on what sort of killer you're up against you will also expect a certain play pattern from that killer on which you as a survivor have to adapt to and if it is the same killer everyday every game it is going to get pretty exhausting after a bit since most people don't have that much time to play over 3 games of DBD per day.
Long queues could be avoided if BHVR added a suggestion prompt or extra bloodpoints towards killers of which the survivor community wish to play against, meaning killers which are the least disabled/blocked by survivors.
Also I do enjoy seeing the subtle insult you made with your first sentence towards the thread creator, nice touch.
Post edited by Gcarrara on1 -
what do you wanna mark here? With these "comments" people like "me" cannot complain or add a suggestion because people like "you" need to come over and talk immediately about "people like you even play these killers?". Yes, we do play these killers. You don't need to come over and be negative just because you instantly felt yourself in my post.
0 -
There are four Survivors in a game.
Four Survivors could potentially ban up to 12 Killers total.
Aside from the absurdity of one side dictating what the other one is even allowed to play (seriously, imagine you gave Killers three perk bans--think how that would go), co-ordinated blocking would mean some lobbies could lock off nearly half the roster and build to be even more immune to the rest.
6 -
I'm fine with a feature that reduces the chances of facing the same killer next game, like going from a blight match into a blight match, but not outright banning you from playing with certain killers. Though even me being fine with reducing the chances, it still is problematic especially if it's a popular killer it could increase the wait time more than it should be.
4 -
Yea so me as a blight main will NEVER get a game. Idk why people keep making a thread on this. It is completely absurd and NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. Fah-gettttt about it.
1 -
based on these comments i see most of these people are killer mains....
0 -
Co-ordinated blocking would mean it is a swf-lobby and there they could just go with what the lobby leader has blocked just like they already have how the swf get placed in the lobby leader region and if the lobby leader has a certain prefrence agains cross-play that is what is the rule as well.
One side already decide how the rest of the lobby gets to play... The killer has full control of the game like truly dictating how it will be played depening if they wish to play fair or do something like facecamp with a bubba all day.
But let's play with it that there is 4 survivors and they get to ban 3 killers to not play against and there I can agree the lobbies would be harder to find however there is solutions to that and a very simple one is jus to play it down with survivors only being able to block one or two killers meaning at tops 8 diffrent killers if all of the survivors did not go by a lobby leader, however the chance of all of them picking diffrent killers I think is slim to nothing.
Still it would mean not only the killers will get a long waiting time but also the survivors and there is still potential to solve that by giving the survivors the option to search for all killers after a longer wait time or to give the killer the option to change to a less blocked killer in exchange for extra blood points or maybe even shards.
0 -
as much as i would love to never ever see a knight/artist/hag player again this isn't a good idea.
0 -
Please elaborate?
0 -
It's just not a good idea. It's a pvp and people are free to play what they want. You are simply never going to like everything you'll face, but that's just a part of the experience.
2 -
There is soooooooooooooooooo many blight and wesker mains in every lobby it feels like you're playing against botnets of them..
0 -
it will make some killers nearly unplayable.
0 -
Survivors being at the mercy of the killer is the point of the game... Most killers, like myself, have rules for when to slug, camp tunnel, patrol, etc. Usually means a survivor was either being a dick or is a TTV/YTer.
Killers most definitely do not decide when survivors throw pallets. Don't put your bad plays on someone else.
You might not want to against the same killer over and over. Well, I don't want to go against the same tired builds over and over. Can I ban some perks and/or items? Killers would LOVE that and it is the same thing you are asking for.
"Long queues could be avoided if BHVR added a suggestion prompt or extra bloodpoints towards killers of which the survivor community wish to play against, meaning killers which are the least disabled/blocked by survivors."
You don't decide what killer people can play nor how they play them.
2 -
There’s really not. And what does that even have to do with what I said?
1 -
To Hugtechlover - My repsonse has to do with subject of this thread and maybe my region is different compared with yours but I do get a lot of blight and wesker games in mine.
To Warloard198NL - Most killers like yourself decide the game depending on their own rules.
The killers I also mentioned with the pallet drops are killers which are good at destroying pallets or still hitting you even if you use a pallet or not. You don't have to start insulting me for you not agreeing with what I write, this section of the forum is for feedback and suggestions which is exactly what my comments are, suggestions.
Edit: Also this suggestion does not remove the fact that survivors will still be at the mercy of killers.
To Steakdabait - Keyword is "some" however even there they can incentivize killers or survivors to play them or against them. They can like I've mentioned in previous comments add extra bloodpoints, shards or whatever daily or weekly to play with a certain killer or against them.
To Crowman - There is many games, gamemodes and as this pvp games that have restriction to weapons and allows for player prefrences for maps and weapons as well to try and make the game more evolved and not the same exhausting thing over and over. Even a previous commenter who seem to be against this thread even mentionned people keep making these threads.. I'm only guessing people do that because there is an actual demand for something like this.
No one is never going to enjoy everything and sure it will be part of the experience but if you play a game and everytime you load in and every game is the same... I'm just saying it gets to a point where it is kind of boring.
0 -
Exactly.
0 -
Ok
May i have the option to do not play against survivors using DH, PT, BNP, Adrenaline, OTR, toolbox and medikit ?
4 -
Based on your comments I see that you are a survivor main... and is there anything wrong about it? Your subtle insult against players that prefer a certain role is meaningless and you really shouldn't be saying that since your bias seems to be on the survivor side. And there is of course nothing wrong with being biased towards a side. But let's take your comment more serious and let me explain that your idea won't work.
There is a reason why you go against the same killers all day. It's because these killers are being picked very often. Now imagine survivors have the option to ban 3 killers. Not much as you say. Well expect painful queue times since most survivors would probably ban Nurse, Blight and a 3rd strong killer. VHS currently has the issue of insane teen queue times since like 6 months and it essentially led to it's death. That's because people don't like waiting an eternity and just move on to another game.
If you want more variety in killers you face they need to create incentives. BP bonus for playing unpopular killers and buffing the weaker killers to make them more viable
4 -
I mean, yeah, but at that point, it would be at the cost of the survivors. If a high mmr SWF locks out all killers that are capable of performing at their level, by the time they enter a game with a killer thats left who hasnt been picked for another, more competent matchup first, they would be queued for 1 hour before they get a game.
Personally, I rather give the option to only lock out a killer specifically if they have appeared more than 5 times, and have that lock persist for 3 games and have a reset every single day. Even with a 4 man swf playing, they would need to play against 12 different killers over the course of 60 matches(with roughly 4 matches per hour, would mean they would need to play 15 hours in a row) to block all 12 of them.
This way, its kinda a win win. Players who love playing against killers like Nurse would never really block them, those who hate to play against Nurse would have to play against 5 Nurses first before having 3 guaranteed matches of no Nurse. This also reduces the amount of DC's as a bonus, since players need to legitimately end the game for it to count.
2 -
You make a great point and for the problem of there might being an increased wait time on popular killers I see a good solution of offering bloodpoints bonuses for playing killers which aren't that popular in the region so atleast the survivors have something else to play against and also the killers have something more to gain but also can see a way to get a fast lobby.
Let's play with it like this instead, what if they placed an estimated search time on the killer icon or if they simpley just gave the killer who's searching for over 2 min the option to change killer to one which is not as blocked and for survivors after 2 min to give them the option to unblock a killer whilst still searching thus also giving the option to everyone to get a fast match or to wait bit extra.
Let me tell you I'd rather wait an extra 5-15 min than get my 5th game of either wesker or blight again, and it's not that i dislike them but it gets really boring getting them over and over again.
0 -
Can Killers disable Perks they don't want to face?
3 -
I do like the idea of reducing the chance of facing the same killer the next game, but banning a killer out of your queue would slow down queues for a lot of people.
I could already imagine Nurse, Blight, and Spirit being the top 3 “banned” killer picks, and as strong as they are, queues do not need to be increased again.
0 -
No and it seems you're off topic, if you'd wish for that to be an option then make that a suggestion.
0 -
I think the point they’re making is that if survivors can disable this killer, then the killer should be able to disable repetitive perks like DH, Adrenaline, etc.
3 -
I understand that point however it is off topic from this subject matter and if it dosen't add anything to this nor is relevant to this they can if they want add a new thread which is a recommendation placed in the forum rules outlining that people should not go off topic.
But if I where to add anything to that it would simply be that then why not also give that option to survivors to also block killer perks.
0 -
That’s why this whole idea is absolutely terrible. It would never stop with the boundary pushing.
Survivors just need to suck it up and play against whatever killer they get, and vice versa with survivor builds. It’s not that serious.
0 -
I don't agree with you at all. I like many others see a bigger potential in a more diverse killer selection instead of going against the same killer over and over. You can tell people to suck it up all day long but at the end of the day it is still going to end up being boring for new and current survivors players.
People making dismissive comments, going off topic or adding subtle insults in a suggestion that could improve the game if a functional solution was actually found is also very tiring. It seem like some people take offense to the fact their main killer might potentially be part of the same killer over and over again issue.
I've played dbd for some years now and I don't mind playing survivor and losing because I understand that this is a game that favors the killer but all I ask and many others is for some killer diversity cause like I've mentioned before it is boring with the same one over and over, it is almost the equivalent like playing the same map over and over and over again.
Killers sure don't have to option to pick what survivors and builds they are up against, same as survivors can't do it towards killers but they themselves have the option to change killer when they'v been bored playing one for to long, survivors only get to change their own outfit and perks but so does the killer too.
0 -
There is literally only one way to do this that couldnt be abused, it wouldnt be a ban option it would simply be a system that makes you not see the same killer 2 games in a row. Currently this is gonna be tested with maps, if it works well It could be implemented with killers faced as well.
1 -
Oh geez! This thread has a ton to unpack. With a ton of great arguments on both sides. I'm just going to not address anyone individually and share my thoughts on the matter. My apologies if any of this was already stated.
Killer bans = Bad idea
Something to increase killer diversity in matches = Great idea!
Solution should be something to encourage the killer player to choose a different killer (specifically an under picked killer). NOT, another player dictating who the killer is allowed to play.
Both sides control how the game is played, because both sides are accountable for their own actions. Saying X player controls the match is just not true. It is a pvp game, all players actions are going to influence (not control/dictate) other players actions.
If a killer is seen too much, it is up to the developer to recognize this and adjust the killer respectively. Not to give players the control (outside of a killer player choosing to play or not play said killer).
Most games with "character bans" are either symmetrical (LoL/Dota) so BOTH teams lose access to the banned character or are semi-A-symmetrical (R6 Siege) in which case BOTH sides lose access to the playable character. This is not the case with DbD.
Overall, this game is too divided to allow the side-A to "control" what side-B can bring. (Map offerings are a big enough issue already).
If players are bored or if players don't like going against blights, nurses, or any other "same killer" all the time there are some options:
- play a different game - you are playing a pvp game and asking to dictate other players access to their own content.... But seriously, the same game can get boring, it is okay to take a break and play something else.
- switch sides - maybe if you are a survivor main and not enjoying it, playing killer and even playing the killer you want banned might show you why they are so common. (Ex: blight is a ton of fun, with a high skill ceiling. All the fun of Hillbilly but you can actually get kills).
- Play a different style - if you SWF, play solo; if you play solo, try and find a SWF. Maybe stop running DH, CoH, PT, OtR, etc. and run something different. (Ex: Pebble, Distortion, Head-On, Flash Bang, etc.)
- etc.
I hope my input is well received and not taken as hostile. I tried to keep insults out of the discussion and stay on topic. If I strayed from the topic or my opinions somehow offended someone, my apologies. I do hope a "killer diversity solution" is implemented to address this and is well received by the majority of both sides of the community.
1 -
This content has been removed.
-
Personally, I think both ideas are great. Allow survivors to block 2-3 killers each (let the PTB determine what amount is best), and let the killer block 3-4 perks. Or maybe have a nerf effect on the selected perks (they only work half as well, for example).
If I have to face the same killer 5 times in a row before getting a reprieve, I'm stopping for the night...and that's assuming I like playing against that killer. Having to deal with a killer you hate for over an hour straight? Talk about ruining the fun of a game. When I play killer, I always mix it up match to match, unless I'm trying to complete a certain quest that takes longer than one game.
Thinking more on the perk blocking, the devs could set it up so that the perks are grouped together (for example, all the healing buff perks in one group), then allow only one perk per group to be blocked. This would stop certain toxic builds while still allowing some flexibility for the survivor.
Seriously....try it out in the PTB. If it works, great. If not, then we can move on to the next build. More than likely the answer will be somewhere in between the two.
0 -
When decent older killers get nerfed to oblivion, weaker killers are never buffed, new killers are designed horribly right from the get-go, and the weakest killers have the wrong parts of their kits buffed and to absurdly insufficient levels to make any difference... I mean, what do you want? People are going to keep playing the same 2-3 killers who haven't been obliterated (yet).
What they NEED to do, is to fix every killer whose power is objectively not fun for killers to use. Powers with way too much advance warning to survivors, like Pyramid Head. Powers with pathetically feeble impacts for landing them, like Pinhead. Powers with an insane number of self-nerfs, like Knight. Powers that let survivors have 100% control over them, like Sadako. Powers that have been weak from the moment the game came out, have been "buffed" to such minor degrees that they still suck, and are jokes to literally everybody who plays the game (like Trapper).
If killers had powers that were fun to use, had some kind of actual impact, and didn't punish the killer for being used as often as actually having a chance to make an impact on the game? Well, you'd see a lot more than just Nurse and Blight all the time.
Edit: Also, no. Survivors shouldn't be able to ban killers. If survivors can all play the exact same character with the exact same skin, why should they be able to ban killer selections? In what world does "I'm allowed to use my paid thing but you're not allowed to use yours" make any sense at all?
3 -
A lot of this is frankly assuming that survivors ARE going against the same killer over and over
But are they? The most popular killer is huntress and she doesn't even break 7% acc. to nightlight. You're getting really unlucky, and it'd be much easier to fix that without allowing blacklisting tbh.
3 -
i disagree with this premise. i understand the frustration of facing the same killer over and over again. it gets boring if nothing else. however, the solution isn't banning killers.
just for conversation sake - which killers would you ban?
2 -
Haha I'd be surprised if there wasnt an overlap in "most banned" and "most hated by survivors because we all know nurse would be no1 on both lists.
0
