Handholding comments, from the community stream

They didnt even said clear statement what is decription of tunneling by their point of viev.

If you write down all the changes on paper and make which is plus and minus for each role you will find out this pacth will be massive survivor sided and all killers get is weak buffs for skull merchant, more blood points and 15 seconds of bloodlust that isnt that good as haste because you will loose once you use your power or interact with it so its good only for few killers that only use their power when they chase survivor and out of chase or survivor being around their power isnt usefull in anything like slinger,legion, huntress if we exclude long snipes.

I didnt watch it all but what I get was they again try to balance their game by some magic stats but looks like they dont even play it exept like maybe tesing some things in custom game but thats all which is great. Its like selling wine but you dont even drink it and yourself and claim its best in the world.

Face camping was a repetitive and boring strategy that made the game a worse experience for all sides and the game is an objectively better place without it.

If you're pretending to not understand the issues with face camping I suspect you simply do not like actually playing Dead By Daylight.

@CrypticGirl

Yeah, exactly. If an aspect isn't going the way it should or is being overly used or abused to the point where anything else is considered sub-par, you change it to even things out. If so many people hadn't crutched so hard on tunneling to secure easy wins, we wouldn't be here.

Judging by some of the more killer oriented responses here I'm not sure we weren't watching completely separate livestreams with completely different announcements.

Anti-Tunnel (If it can even be called that)

It effectively doesn't matter how they define tunneling because they're doing absolutely nothing to discourage it. There is no penalty to doing it. You get a minor buff for unique hooks but that doesn't leave killers worse off than they are now. If you use hard tunneling as a crutch now you can use that exact same crutch after the update.

They're giving survivors limited time tools to locate and avoid the killer immediately after being unhooked so that in situations where they're being tunneled they can have a bit more of a fighting chance. The horror. 😒

Anti-Face Camp

Yes, they're increasing the radius of what is considered being face camped. This just acknowledges the reality that there's little difference between face camping and standing a little bit away from face camping. They're also reducing the speed at which the self unhook meter fills by 50% but the panicked masses seem to be ignoring that part.

Anti-Slug

This one is actually going to do something compared to live right now. If you leave someone slugged for 2 solid minutes they can get themselves up. If you slug multiple people simultaneously the 2 minutes are reduced. Unless someone can explain why they would want to leave someone slugged for that long beyond just wanting to play like a dick then I don't see what the problem is here either.

Add-Ons

They're also nerfing some big scawey med-kit addons (probably into uselessness) further advancing killers' desire that all survivor items be cosmetics that have no bearing on the match.

But please, continue telling me how this is a big, unfair, survivor sided patch before it even hits the PTB.

they really didn't know why the game has the highest slug rate when can always die under a pallet with many LOS blockers where a teamate can save you from . Like are they really that unaware of how their own game works .

Yes they are that unaware we see it all the time, especially when twitch chat was literally telling them and they either purposefully or ignorantly blew it off and avoided addressing it because it would further invalidate their "data".

The stream was just a load of nonsense and contradicting themselves to justify changes to buff survivors. We really need anti-slug for 2% of games? By their own data and opinion about slugging for pressure, slugging literally isn't even a problem at all for example. It shows they are responding based on crying and not actual game balancing.

I cant remember who he was, but It felt like one of the guys on stream knew most of this was BS and was told to stay quiet. He had that kind of look on his face.

There a clear double standard where they will handhold survivors to their hearts content but then call compensation for killers "hand holding".

When I've heard about handholding I've thought they were talking about anti-tunnel systems and how they were overturned. It was surprising, hilarious and a disappointment that they were referring to killer unique hook bonuses.

Really, they've been implementing systems left and left to make more casual survivors catch up with the more experienced ones but the "hand holding" is whe killers request a bigger incentive to not tunnel.

Looks like the devs want really to have a spli in gameplay: survivor can play more casually and killers should play more sweat/aggressively.

It would be fun if it was not tragic.

Do you think they might've had community response parsed by AI?

Mathieu hasn't been involved in game design decisions for years now.

Getting to tunnel or camp someone out of the game without any resistance is by itself and according to your own logic a free "i don't have to play better" card.

This was my immediate thought when I saw the notes, particularly the use of the term "hand holding." It's such an unprofessional term but also one that was used endlessly in the arguments circling around the ptb, so it's logical they rammed everyone's complaints through AI and it regurgitated that term out.

And now they're paying for not editing the language by having everyone micro-analyze it.

Not only that they claimed its valid strategy and wil stay but all they probably want is to stop killers tunneling from the start and what they do? Nerf all killers because they can tunnel which is quite sad, I thought they would be more experienced in balancing their own game with 8 years of experience but many times they just look like they dont play their own game.

I think the question is more if the game should be that punishing.

If there's an area where dropping one pallet creates a massive deadzone, then within that area a good player would be much more careful about throwing that pallet than a bad player would be, and their results would reflect that. The more important question to ask is should there be areas where dropping one pallet creates a massive deadzone, and if that's a fair level of skill expression versus punishment for poor play to expect of every player.

I'd be fine with this logic if it went both ways but it doesn't. I can play like trash as killer, get no hooks, and still win in end game by slugging everyone. That shouldn't be possible if my whole match was bad plays. Yet it is, and survivors have no equivalent comebacks. That's the unevenness of this argument: the punishments aren't just a little unbalanced, they are severely skewed towards killer.

I'm not sure I agree. Surely if you want information about a specific topic, a survey is one of the ways you could go about collecting that information?

I mean, any survey BHVR conduct is going to be geared towards the video game Dead By Daylight, for example, no survey is truly general. Why is it a problem for it to be geared towards a specific part of Dead By Daylight?

Sorry, I should have grouped my responses but didn't refresh.

Conceptually I don't have an issue in an asym of one side having more of an onus to perform. That the killer role should have more comeback potential I don't think is inherently contradictory even if I personally don't like it.

My issue is that with such a stance survivors who are good or perform well have to win more. If killer has more comeback potential, or has an easier skill floor to skill ceiling, or has their handheld more by default, the only way such a game can possibly be balanced is for the skill balance to shift over time.

the issue was that the survey lacked questions specifically relating to the issues killers complain about. If I were looking at an ideal survey graph (with answers that were specific to either side) to answer the question 'which side has been leaving the most' I could then compare the killer specific answers to the survivor specific answers and see which category has been selected the most. I could also see what was the biggest issue selected by survivors and killers separately, I could make judgements of what should be high priority changes for both sides and generally I'd have a lot more information than 'people don't like tunnelling, slugging and camping'.

From what I've seen of this survey there was one survivor specific answer and a whole load of very general ones that killers could select but were too umbrella to really get any information from because survivor mains could also have these problems. This means the survey (intentionally or not) was biased, the information provides no room for comparison, which means there's no way to measure the severity of any of these issues.

As for the text boxes, those are impossible to accurately analyse because they cannot be graphed, and really act as filler which some poor employee is gonna have to mindlessly scan through and take a few notes on interesting quotes or what they see a lot of.

This isn't me being tribal btw, I don't mind the changes they've mentioned are coming to ptb. This is just bad data collection that provides no value other than throwaway statements. And given they take a data first approach, that is very troubling.

Isn't it an assumption that the question was "which side is leaving more"?

It's not impossible to imagine BHVR have some way of already knowing it's survivors, and so what they wanted was to answer the question "why are so many survivors leaving" instead.

Though for the record, that one specific question probably should have killer options, in my opinion. When I say that it's not really a problem for language and surveys to be geared towards survivors, I'm talking about the context of addressing tunnelling, which is a survivor problem- if BHVR are talking about it or asking questions about it, it's pretty reasonable that those comments and questions are geared more towards the side that experiences the problem.
Remember, the context here was also about a stream and comments therein that were supposedly survivor biased, not just any one survey.

Basically, TL;DR, there's no reason to assume BHVR need information about both sides here when it's a survivor problem being discussed. If they already know which side has the answers they want, it's fairly reasonable to just ask that side the questions.

Could've been handled better, definitely, but I don't think it's inherently evidence of a bias.

I specifically am talking about the uninstall survey, this is where my big data collection issue is displayed. It's meant to provide information about why people are uninstalling and as I said the survey (not necessarily bhvr) is biased because of a lack of killer specific questions.

It's also so infuriating because an uninstall survey could have yielded so much good information about both sides and how the game is for both, but in that survey tunnelling and camping are both lumped together and slugging is entirely absent (which is wild to me) and killers don't have a real identifiable specific answer to the question based on the things they frequently complain about. This is a really bad way to do that because we cannot measure the severity of each issue seperately for both sides. If the experience that made me uninstall was a continuous chain of 4 man slug matches I'd have no way of communicating that in the actual graphable question. The more I look at this the more I'm realising that maybe its not that biased just a really bad survey.

specifically I'm going off this screenshot (ignore the red stuff I took this from a different thread)

About the other data BHVR might have, I cannot respond to this because I have no idea what they have. Unless they disclose all their working and their data on what goes on around tunnelling I only have their public surveys to go on and as I've mentioned I find them to be very poor.

Just to reiterate, I don't think bhvr is 'survivor sided' like a player may be, but I think they absolutely are data sided and this is the data they're collecting. It's not great, and given that the survivor playerbase is larger (therefore more will be leaving), collecting no data on killer players is a very bad decision because you cannot compare the issues killers are facing to each other and you cannot see which are the most severe essentially stunting the information they can collect.

Hopefully I better explained what my actual issue was here because my last message was a bit nebulous.

My response to jesterkind with the screenshot might clear up my thoughts a bit better but i'll also try to respond to your points.

1. That was just an example but even if that data can be obtained somewhere else, redundancy in data is still very good. Math errors happen and in a game with as many coding errors as dbd I'd want to collect as much data from every source possible including (or maybe especially anonymous surveys). Also looking over my question, I'd be better asking 'How many people uninstalled because of experiences from either role' because a survivor main could theoretically uninstall because of a bad killer experience and vice versa.
2. When I said comparison I didn't necessarily mean against every other option possible. Say there were 2 killer specific options, BHVR could then look over those 2 options and see which one was 'more' problematic (in terms of making more people quit). This could then give them a heading for their next round of major changes.
3. as I said redundancy in data is very good to confirm and make your arguments rock solid. another issue is that the survey would have already been answered by people who were missing that option stunting the information you can possibly get from the updated one, a good survey should be built with more consideration.