wildtrapjake

True.. Nea and Meg Nea and Jake Nea and nea. Scary indeed

True it is the smartest play, but I think the question the original poster is getting at, is whether or not that makes for a good mechanic. While it sucks for the killer pov, I don't know if any valid workaround options to prevent by body blocks. And then again, does it even need a workaround?

I like the mindset, but this would be problematic to many degrees.

I feel like this is a bad stereotype. I play killer, but prefer the stealthy survivors to those who optimally run circles around pallets.

Technically.. even community feedback is considered "data". Not using data for changes would just be the action of making changes at random for no reason. The devs do a good job, they get to much backlash.

That's a good point. You could just sit in front of the jigsaw box they need.

For sure, I agree.

As always, that's an interpretation, and not a bad one. I find cheap to be an interesting description in this case though. I could've alternatively just slugged them? I feel this situation was more creative (and at least different from the norm).

So I guess if we are being really granular, I technically didn't have to ask. I was just curious of people interpretations in this specific example. I myself would've also given props if this occured to me, while on the flip side if I were stuck for like 5 mins would've been agitated.

@MandyTalk thoughts?

While I also don't agree with the way killer adepts work, sometimes escaping as a survivor is harder than double pipping. Just food for thought.

Asking the real questions.

If seconds add up and life is finite, you shouldn't play dbd.

The big issue for most replay systems is that replays aren't videos. They are realtime re-simulations with models performing the exact same prior actions as took during gameplay. For a game like dbd, this would be hefty on file storage. Not to mention each update would break past replays. So I find it unlikely though it…

On the contrary I think collision should always be apparent, but map generation should account for this to prevent body traps.

Was near end game, and just happened to realize it could occur and so decided to use it to my advantage. The survivor actually thought it was an entertaining occurrence in end game chat.

Yes. Ai is a must, and peer to peer kill your friends is a must. That way dbd can still be played once it's popularity ends.

Precisely, regarding the need for a thrill, that's more an issue of the base games mechanics. Survivors should be involved in more than just gens.

This rebuttal seems to hold no useful dialogue. Perhaps try to fit the context of the actual discussion at hand. It's not so much what NOED does for killer, but how survivors play around NOED.

I disagree with this mentality to some degree. Your fellow survivors are a tool in a sense. A means to an end. You need them to get all gens done and rescue you early on. But once escape is possible, I feel it's every man for themselves. Forfeiting your chance to survive in the end game to rescue someone else (ignoring…

In reference to perks hinting at what they are, rancor reveals aura of killer after each gen which is an early sign. Perhaps NOED could have some hint to tip off early on but keep the same mechanic? In regards to end game you can technically see NOED coming to a degree. I get a sharp thrill when I notice the killer walking…

It probably would only affect running survivors, easy counterplay to just walk through pallets if not in chase but still in the terror radius. Your comparison is extreme.

I more reference the situation where someone is unhooked at the end while gates are open but they retain ds. It's a lose lose. Take the day or they crawl out.

I'm not a fan of ds at all, but this isn't entirely bad logic. It could still be oppressive in some game situations though, especially end game unhooks. Maybe multi use, but final gen completion permanently disables it as well? Anywho I doubt it will ever get reworked again.

Twould pair nicely with distressing and doc.

Regarding evolve, you can still play with ai and peer to peer with others. There is just no public server matchmaking. There are some devoted discords out and about keeping it alive to some extent. Hopefully dbd will follow suit and keeps kill your friends as a possibility via peer to peer once it's popularity runs dry.

Just because it won't die soon, won't mean it won't die ever. My concern is that once it's gone it's gone. My hope is that devs develop ai+peer to peer matchmaking before the end.

Haven't tried resistance. I think evolve was fantastic from gameplay aspect (they just shot themselves in the foot with dlc practices). I hope dbd generates ai or peer to peer matchmaking before the end of it's run.

HSHS?

Yeah evolves dlc marketing killed it. $60 tag per season is ambitious. But the end result of the multiplayer only format was eventually a washed free to play game that only lasted a month or so. Wonder what dbds end game will be a couple years from now?

Evolve being similar to among us or fall guys? Can you elaborate as to how the comparison fits? Evolves player base died mostly due to marketing, but my main concern with dbd is the end of life game capabilities (eventually none since it's multiplayer only) being similar to evolves end of life.

Wonder why that is. What makes dbd addictive that other games of this format don't do as well?

Right, it's entirely plausible to say NOED is bad for killer in some ways. Further pushing (imo) that it definitely doesn't need a nerf.

The counterpoint here is that not all altruistic plays are good plays. Bad plays should be punished. A rescue with a NOED killer near hook is a bad play and is punished via getting downed with NOED.

This man understands.

Escaping to survive (the main objective of a "survivor") is not giving up and doing nothing. You just need to play smart based off the scenario. In my example people were running into big shack basement while a NOED killer was nearby. That is not the smart decision.

I think a somewhat valid argument could be made that only bad survivors get killed by NOED. That's obviously not a one size fits all statement though. Sure,what's your thoughts on a redesign. I myself think the same perk, with a revealed exposed indicator upon gen finish is all it needs.

I think the mori mechanic is fine as is. The only change it really needs is a bp boost. Moria shouldn't hurt your score. They should give you more bp. This would encourage it to happen more often, and we get to see the animations more often.

Good point. I usually use that by default so overlooked it.

I feel like bloodhound is just as good/will replace stridor if it gets nerfed etc ..

I recommend turning off end game chat. Then the only opinion you encounter is your own.

If on comms. Yes. If no comms. Maybe, but probably not.

I wouldn't remove powers. There wouldn't be much gameplay to be had then. Perhaps no add-ons so power is basic kit. The alternative horror mode doesn't have to be balanced. One would play it wanting a good scare while also knowing survival is slim.

Honestly no hud and no perks for both sides, no tracking for killer and no heartbeat for survivor would make for a terrifying experience. I'd be down.

I would play the mess out of this if it were scarier. I don't think this would stick though. Current gameplay would allow you to easily down survivors if no heartbeat existed.

I was today years old when I learned you can hide the chat.

The hard limit doesn't have to persay kill all survivors like egc? What if gates auto powered at 20 mins for example but all survivors get exposed? Their are plenty of creative ways to go about this.

But claudettes always lie though. I will not fall for your decietful tricks.

A man of culture I see.

For me a win is any game in which I can walk away from having had fun. Kills/hooks make no difference to me in the concept of "winning".