Best Of

Where did they say they were happy about the difference in group sizes in high elo or it fell in line with their balance?

Where did they say they weren't?

Here's the quote, bolding is in the original.

"Looking at the bigger picture, there was an average kill rate of 60% across all MMR, while that average kill rate increased to 63% for high MMR. This largely falls in line with our intended Killer balance."

They're clearly looking at overall average numbers. They even bolded it. They have ample opportunity to say something like 'we're considering ways to address the SWF disparity', but they don't, they say the numbers fall in line with their balance targets.

Unironically we USED to not have this.

But guess what happened...guess who complained and said "no"....just take a guess 🫠

The game being balanced on stacking gen proression and regression isnt great as its greatly advantages one side, the side with more people.

But one side does it way more than the other. In my survivor matches, at least half the killers bring anti-gen. In my killer matches, I pretty never bring regression and one or two people wil have Resilience, Deja Vu, or Prove Thyself, maybe. Every once in a blue moon I get a Stakeout/Hyperfocus. I've never once seen a full team of gen rushers. It's all chase and second chance, and those are way better anyway.

I used to use Streetwise with a Commodious before the rework and, according to the stat page, I have a 42.88% ER with it. I switched it for Lithe and have a 46.72% with that. A full four percent increase because I can zoom away from death. Gen perks are pretty mid compared to endless speed and Endurance.

1. It's the killer who chooses to go after the unhooked, who did nothing wrong, instead of the stupid unhooker. Killers are also capable of making choices.

2. Going after the unhooked is punishing the wrong person. No one learns something from someone else being punished. When they lose the match, they dont go "it's because I unhooked too early." The game isn't teaching them that's an issue.

3. Killers can swerve mid-chase and zoom back to the hook to tunnel even if you do everything right.

We could do something like putting slow downs on teaming up on a single objective (multiple survivors on a gen)

We could make it so the survivors have to spread out (can't just focus on one gen)

We could make it so accomplishing part of their objective makes the next stage harder (each gen completed giving the killer less gens to defend vs an elimination making the killer side easier)

We could even put unnecessary objective for the survivors, and give them strategic reasons to do them or not (say 7 gens but require 5 to be done, and make them decide whether better to spread out or focus)

Basically - we do that already. Punishing the survivors for doing their objectives, giving them pros and cons to various approaches, is already baked into the game.

Again, they're saying that it's at the intended point, but they're not saying it's balanced.

They release killers like vecna instead, also i never said they were right about all there decisions because they have all the data.

To have a discussion, you don't get to be selective about that. If you're going to argue that BHVR reached a decision based on data or their experience than that has to apply to discussion of all game elements, not just the ones where you happen to agree with them.

they said that killers having 60% kr across all MMR largely falls within their "killer balance" so 40% should be applied to all MMRs and group sizes.

Those last two words 'group sizes' are something you just tacked on. You can believe that, I don't think its feasible, but its not something BHVR has ever said.

Balance is subjective, 60/40 to the dev team is balanced. It was literally word for word stated.

This depends on what you mean by the word balance. Many people, most I think, use it in a non-subjective way

Balance can also be used with attached conditions, such as BHVR does, but that does not mean the game is balanced in the sense of being 'even'.

There's no point in being delusional about words this is literally stating 60% KR is intended

It's not news to anyone that 60% KR is what they go for.

Which is why these builds are broken in the hands of SWFs, having coms, changes the game. Communication in Dbd against a killer opens up so many doors and opportunities.

SWFs having the possibility of being stronger is again not news to anyone.

Whether they were coordinating quick heals, deliverance plays, pick ups, background player, sabo, etc. all of those are going to be stronger in the hands of a high MMR SWF with good coordination. It doesn't however address any of the points about the downsides of going all out on gen rush in comparison to the alternatives.

Hi, hope everyone is doing fine!

I was watching a video discussing how many killers could have basekit addons and it came to my mind on how so many characters on the killer roster are still dependent on addons and how some of them are weak as hell.

Would really "break" the game if Trapper could start all of his trap, Ghostface had more 6 addons as basekit, Pig had her dash addons basekit and so on? I've been playing Dracula (and some Ghoul eventually) recently and the difference between him an other lower killers is night and day. Even against toolboxes and BNPs i feel i have a chance when the Dark Lord is my choice, different from other who i really like as Legion or Wraith.

I know SoloQ has some issues but buffing weaker killers would really ""break"" DBD?

Below a tierlist from a Brazilian content creator i really like, to foster discussion:

(EDIT: This tierlist was made during the Stranger Things Vecna PTB)

Thanks for the attention!!