The second iteration of 2v8 is now LIVE - find out more information here: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/480-2v8-developer-update

Have the developers ever actually stated how they want killers to play the game?

135

Comments

  • woundcowboy
    woundcowboy Member Posts: 1,994

    That isn’t in any way related to the argument I am making here. Obviously baby rage is whatever. My point is that playing to win is not ego-driven or toxic. It’s a pvp game

  • woundcowboy
    woundcowboy Member Posts: 1,994

    Not the same. The survivors can’t win the match by doing that, whereas the killer can win the match by holding a 3 gen.

  • KingFieldShipper
    KingFieldShipper Member Posts: 612

    Note I didn't say they were fun, just valid. I don't even think necessarily they are unhealthy, but I wish they weren't as viable in the game as they are now. I think most (keyword most, there are outliers!) people understand that these are just valid things that can and do happen in the match, find them unfun but just hit next. Keep in mind, people here/twitter/reddit/steam forums/wherever are just a fraction of a fraction of the playerbase.

    What I'm sort of more or less trying to say from my post though is I feel like posts like that are often over-exaggerated and people are probably not thinking about that much, and just click next. I think you should constructively criticize tactics you find unfun like those things, on either side, and post them, say, on this forums, but the post I replied to was not that, and is completely reactionary and is just as bad/ridiculous as reactionary posts of the survivors he are trying to mock.

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 20,784

    The Killer doesn't win by forcing the game server to close. That's, at best, a stalemate.

    Do people who DDoS other players win because they force them to quit? Didn't think so.

  • buffcoyote
    buffcoyote Member Posts: 120

    They are valid in specific scenarios. At endgame, I'm not bothered by those tactics. I get a Killer trying to secure kills if they can. However...

    If you are camping/tunneling at 3-5 gens, it is wholly unnecessary. You still have a bunch of time left to apply map pressure, make wise decisions concerning which generators to place as a patrolling priority over others. The only reason they are doing this is because they are either trolling or raging, which are both toxic.

  • NekoGamerX
    NekoGamerX Member Posts: 5,292

    pretty much how survivors like waiting in lobby for hours when all killers quit or those like me just play survivor but if the wait time to long I wouldn't bother.

  • KingFieldShipper
    KingFieldShipper Member Posts: 612
    edited May 2023

    Regression nerfed, so the devs cared about Survivors whining that they could not 4-man-escape all the time.

    This is missing context, of course. And not nerfed "that they could not 4-man-escape all the time.". I would really take this point when people try to say it more seriously if they weren't so over-exaggerated and hyperbolic with that. Pop/ruin being nerfed originally was to create a new meta, which became the gen kick meta eventually, and that was nerfed to try to shake up the meta again. Which, also even is lacking the context that survivors meta got changed too.

    Personally, I'd argue the gen kick meta was the unhealthiest meta this game has ever had. It was unfun on both sides, and to be honest, good riddance. I don't even think eruption's nerf was even that bad and the aura reading is STRONG still on certain killers.

    Tunneling not allowed, so BT became basekit, and Survivors started abusing it to bodyblock. Now they cry that BT did not fix tunneling, because they weaponized it.

    If tunneling "wasn't allowed", why is it still able to happen with BT basekit? That was not the point of bt basekit, nor the main benefit and you know it. And the DS nerf specifically was a detriment to anti-tunneling in general and a large deterrent on tunneling back in the day.

    Camping is soon not allowed, which will force Killers to 12 hook

    Except it still is allowed, you're just going to do it at your own risk. Just like bodyblocking with bt, you are risking being tunneled if you do that. Plus, we don't even know the finer details on how fast this bar will fill up based on distance.

    Survivors are getting a new one to replenish their purple toolbox charges after they use BNPs!

    They can do that now with built to last, plus I highly doubt this perk goes to live as is. Let's see how this pans out next month before we jump to conclusions since there have been perk changes from ptb to live.

    I fully expect something to become basekit to counter slugging, too.

    I highly doubt it, at least in the form we had on the ptb last year that tested it.

    Oh yeah, and there's the guy claiming Killer regression perks should not stack, because them being nerfed was not enough. They need to be 100% useless.

    And here's the thread where someone was saying there should be a perk to 'punish' Killres to hit Survivors on a hook: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3433908

    I feel like these are fringe opinions and not the norm. I mean, all the replies in that post are people saying no.

    My point is all of these things are still allowed. If they weren't they'd be made against game rules and completely removed. Whether or not you like how survivors deal with the tactics in game, or "cry" as you put it, that they are unfun, is really up to you.

  • トゥーリ
    トゥーリ Member Posts: 4
    edited May 2023

    Defending the 3-gene is purely according to the rules of the game, and any adjustment that denies this is a denial of the game rules.

    There is nothing but a contradiction in what development management is doing, such as the travel time between generators and the fact that the new killer is overly specialized in generator defense.

    It's easy to guess that the development management that releases a series of killers suitable for camping while saying that they will introduce camping countermeasures does not have a big idea.

  • appleas
    appleas Member Posts: 1,128
    edited May 2023

    This change is fine if they buff the less mobile Killers. Making maps smaller will still lead to 3 gens.

    Is there even a significant amount of matches been held hostage via 3 gen by the Killer in the latest patch when regression perks have been severely nerfed? I find that a bit hard to believe.

    If only a few people are pulling it off, then it seems more like a case of bad matchmaking than an issue that is affecting the playerbase as a whole.

  • Pulsar
    Pulsar Member Posts: 20,784

    It's quite literally the exact same principle.


    Does the Killer win if the game server closes?

  • woundcowboy
    woundcowboy Member Posts: 1,994

    Yea, the win goes to the killer. If you can’t tell the difference between someone literally hacking your internet and a game mechanic, idk what to say.

  • Green_Sliche
    Green_Sliche Member Posts: 678

    If stalemate is not ok because it wastes survivor's time, then how come it's ok for survivors to play permanent hide-and-seek game on some maps? How this problem will be addressed?

  • HauntedKnight
    HauntedKnight Member Posts: 388

    So if we take what was said in this thread at face value about the Devs seeing the issue as killers deliberately going into games with the intention of holding a 3 Gen for an hour (ludicrously extreme example from them but whatever)….

    Does anyone actually have any ideas on how the devs can accomplish their goal of making 3 Gen strategy less viable without actually nerfing it entirely? Because I’m struggling to think of anything.

  • Tsulan
    Tsulan Member Posts: 15,095

    Then why do we have the Skull Merchant?

    A killer whos only power is to 3 gen.

  • Adaez
    Adaez Member Posts: 1,243

    What do you mean?3genning is bad for the game and its a good thing they're trying to fix it, they released those killers but if they fix 3 genning those killers wont be a problem anymore.

  • HauntedKnight
    HauntedKnight Member Posts: 388

    So the 3 gen strategy is always bad? What if survivors inadvertently create a 3 gen scenario?

  • GoodBoyKaru
    GoodBoyKaru Member Posts: 22,809

    Actually they said several times that SWF was always intended, they just didn't have the resources to implement both SWF and KYF before the official launch, so they left it to community vote. The community voted for KYF so that's what was implemented on launch, with SWF appearing a few patches after.

  • Emoba
    Emoba Member, Alpha Surveyor Posts: 514
  • Tsulan
    Tsulan Member Posts: 15,095

    *When the solution to a hostage situation is to literally throw the game and hope the other side gives up.

    I agree. But BHVR kinda maneuvered the game into this direction for a long time. Lets see how that upcoming change will affect the game in the future.

    Tbh, i think that the Skull Merchant is a terrible killer, that should have never been in the game and that gen regression perks should have never been nuked. Game pace has been increasing in the last year and to me its no surprise that killers try to slow down the match by either camping/tunneling someone out or by 3 genning. Camping and tunneling is being adressed as of now. When 3 genning is also gone i don´t really know how killers are supposed to play anymore. Maybe by slugging. Which then leads inevitable to basekit Unbreakable.

    I don´t really look forward to this. Doesn´t sound fun at all.

  • DredgeyEdgey
    DredgeyEdgey Member Posts: 1,373

    Hopefully this means that they do something to stop 3 gens from being done in the first 2 min of the match then

  • malloymk
    malloymk Member Posts: 1,555

    Why don't you guys just put in a twenty minute time limit?

  • malloymk
    malloymk Member Posts: 1,555

    I have faced many killers that have faced the three gen right away. In the old days it was Trapper, Hag, or Doctor who primarily chose that strategy.

    In modern DBD it's most skull merchants and some knights. I actually don't mind the three gen strategy as I usually get a bunch of BP and am able to PIP. But I can definitely see why people dislike it.

  • malloymk
    malloymk Member Posts: 1,555

    You can still work to fix the three gen problem in the meantime, but still no game of DBD needs to last more than 20 minutes. F13 had the right idea with the 20 minute time limit.

    Also providing a 20 minute time limit forces killers to try to kill rather than holding a three gen.

  • Slaphappyhobbit
    Slaphappyhobbit Member Posts: 47

    Ok, I was likely mistaken about that and Mendela effected myself, my bad on that one. The point still stands that the devs have said things and backtracked due to poor testing, feed back etc.

  • Slaphappyhobbit
    Slaphappyhobbit Member Posts: 47

    You're literally not reading what I'm saying and are making your argument into something completely different than what it was. Unreal. You literally claimed that what people say doesn't matter, the devs have decided it's happening and told someone their opinion and voice on it doesn't matter. I'm telling you that isn't true. It doesn't matter what their plan is right now, that has nothing to do with what I said and the fact that you were wrong.

  • malloymk
    malloymk Member Posts: 1,555

    Yeah. The hide and do nothing strategy is also terrible and should be fixed. However, I'd be surprised if that was more common in matches than the current three gen strategy that mostly skull merchants are applying.

  • HugTheHag
    HugTheHag Member Posts: 3,140

    Pretty sure after the time limit is up survivors are all sacrificed like in endgame... So it would be all the easier to make 3gens work as a strat to kill.

    I might be wrong, though.

  • RoastedGarlic
    RoastedGarlic Member Posts: 592

    no they should come down because using an exploit to hold the game hostage is a bannable offense.