The release of killer statistics showed glaring problems in group think and balance.
- Perception is not always based on reality. We got hard numbers that show this game, is in fact, not killer sided. A kill ratio of almost 75 percent for most killers in no reality would make a game survivor sided, unless you think those numbers should be closer to 100 percent, which is another problem I'll detail later.
- Freddy is absolutely broken. For a forum that supposedly prays at the altar of balance, Freddy is blatantly imbalanced. He is a killer who can insta teleport to any generator on the map. Combine this with BBQ and Chili and you have a wall hack with teleportation. I could live with that though. Something that needs to be changed is fake pallets. The problem with fake pallets is that this is one the strongest defenses for a survivor. What else do they really have besides nerfed windows? So if you are a runner and try to be smart about it, something you do is plot your route to where pallets may be. Going to one of the only places with defenses and there not being a pallet, completely counteracts any "mindgames" or skill within the game. It also puts a further nail in the coffin for solo survivors.
- Many survivor perks need some love and attention. If you think the game is in a healthy state with a 75 percent kill rate and it actually needs to be more, please stop requesting increase to gen times or to more progress bar simulator. By far, the most boring thing in the entire world, is staring at a progress bars match after match. I really don't think increasing these would really make the game "fun" or "balanced", but will just make the game significantly less fun to play. With that said, many survivor perks need to be buffed. The devs need to make some perks that allow the survivor to play differently and allow more combinations that increase survival, or even just the fun factor. I feel the head on was a step in the right direction, but it still is an absolutely trash perk that takes way too long to get set.
- This is the major one. For many people who keep saying that killer is too weak, do not care about facts or balance - they only care about being able to reliably 4k every single game to be in the "power role". I said this 16 months ago and I'll say it again - many people who post on here will never be happy with the balance of the game until survivors have no defenses, no good perks, and all items are trash tier. That's not a meme, that's the reality that you can see here.
I honestly just hope the Devs try to move towards a philosophy of fun for both sides, rather than just trying to increase progress bar simulator and pad out 4k rates. Because the game is increasingly becoming less and less fun to play. Hits through pallets, wall hacks, constant insta-downs, increase in progress bar simulator, constant nerfing of perks, and not releasing perks that help to fundamentally change the way you play.
Comments
-
"Please keep in mind that numbers are not everything; there are a whole bunch of factors that could influence these numbers."
The devs themselves stated that you should not be drawing conclusions exactly like you are based on the data as it does not take into account a multitude of factors.
8 -
You're absolutely right. That's right nowhere in my argument did I say "these statistics are everything". I did make an argument how many perks for survivor are trash tier, progress bar simulator doesn't need to be increase, and how freddy's fake pallets are a terrible mechanic and need to be removed.
But when it comes to raw data and kill rates, you can't in good faith say that this game is survivor sided. How do you even make an argument that the game is survivor sided when there is a kill rate of 75 percent in game? If you're going to make that argument, then you have to somehow make that argument not using escape/kill ratio.
3 -
"That's right nowhere in my argument did I say "these statistics are everything""
I never said that you said it was everything. You are however drawing conclusions based on that data which is what they said not to do.
"I did make an argument how many perks for survivor are trash tier,"
The same thing can be said for killer perks
"But when it comes to raw data and kill rates, you can't in good faith say that this game is survivor sided"
I'm basing my opinion on many, many hours of rank 1 game play on both sides. That is all we have to go on with how flawed the data we do have is.
"How do you even make an argument that the game is survivor sided when there is a kill rate of 75 percent in game?"
This is drawing conclusions from data that is not taking a multitude of factors into account as the devs have said and it shouldn't be taken at face value as you are.
"If you're going to make that argument, then you have to somehow make that argument not using escape/kill ratio."
As the data cannot be used for determining balance alone, all we have to go on is experience. This is why I base my opinions off heavy experience at the highest rank of play as that is as close as you are going to get.
4 -
Let's also note that these stats don't include matches with DCs. Any game where a survivor DCs early is an almost instant win for the killer and lose for the survivors. If these stats actually included those I think we'd see a lot more survivors dying...
And please don't say "but my pips" as a reason that killers should be getting 4ks each match. Balance should not be based around pips. Pips should be based around balance.
4 -
@Blueberry said it best.
Also, 74% is still a 2K. That means Freddy is still killing two people on average.
Nurse has a 4X%, meaning she kills one person on average.
Oh, a 2K at Red Ranks is a de-pip, meaning those stats are wrong.
7 -
"We got hard numbers that show this game, is in fact, not killer sided."
I'm confused, I think you meant to say "survivor sided" here? Unless I misunderstood.
Also snares are better than pallets. Pallets are map dependent and won't help at the strong loops where windows exist. They are strong if survivors fall for them, but good survivors will just start using windows at which point it's going to be a lot harder.
I personally think Freddy is fine as he is. The only objection I have is giving him Oblivious in Dream World. That's too much, as it hard counters BT in every way possible. Either it doesn't proc because the guy is asleep, or it procs and Freddy can just follow them until they go down. It wasn't necessary.
I'd also say that snap-clap shouldn't increase each time it's done. Maybe if that effect was on an add-on sure, but not for base. Red Paint Brush should add 30 seconds to the delay when you use a clock, just because without skill checks it's hard to stay awake and clocks don't help as much as they should. Reduce Swing Chains to 2% per sleeping survivor, Jump Rope to 8% and Outdoor Rope to 5%.Do all that and Freddy would be in a better spot without completely ruining him.
5 -
Regardless, Killers don't win unless they pip. A 2K at Rank 1 is a de-pip.
3 -
You're coming to the conclusion that the data is flawed based on your own anecdotal evidence. I'm not going to put words in "penits" mouth, but the raw data shows that the kill ratio would make the game killer sided. When I think "killer sided", I think "how many kills on average did the killer have". You can say "well that doesn't mean everything. Maybe such and such a perk is broken", but that still doesn't fundamentally change the reality that the kill rate for most killers is above 70 percent. This data also does not include DC's, so this is data based on tens of thousands of games most likely.
If you're reading research and you see that there is a patient mortality rate of around 75 percent at the four year mark, you could research why that ratio is so high, but it doesn't fundamentally change that there is still a mortality rate of 75 percent at four years. The only thing that could fundamentally change something like that is potential intervention .
Survivors have gotten mostly meme perks over the last 16 months with constant nerfs. I don't know how you could think 16 months ago when the kill ratio was above 50 percent, that constant nerfs to survivor and buffs to killers wouldn't increase the kill rate.
0 -
The game doesn't exist solely for red rank players which means THIS statistic is what matters most to the devs. According to this statistic NO killer averages 75% / 3 kills per game so I'm not sure what the fuzz is about. Literally all killers are within the aimed 2k range.
Even if we take a look at the red rank statistic only Spirit, Freddy and Hillbilly touch the 75% / 3k average mark. That's NOT "most killers":
Literally ALL the other killers are between 60% - 74% (Hag only) which is still a 2k...
12 -
"killers don't win unless they pip"
would you consider it a win if you pipped but got 0k?
0 -
I would also like to point out, other than Billy, the two that are above the line are the two Killers people have trouble looping.
2 -
Yet those numbers is how they determine over-performers.
0 -
74 percent is closer to a 3k than to a 2k. Which would mean that more matches see a 3k kill rate than a 2k. I don't think you know how to interpret statistics, so anything further would just be a waste of time. Regardless, 74 percent is greater than 26 percent. So statistically speaking, that would make the game killer sided.
Regard
5 -
Sometimes I wonder what is the point of releasing the stats. If I am given a stats, I would totally try to analyse and extract informations from it. It seems like to me the Dev is releasing stats because people complaints that Dev been too secretive and not transparent enough regarding in-game events, so they release stats just for the sake of it.
1 -
Yes, I would. That is the system the game has put in front of me.
That being said, if I instantly 4k a team, that is also a win, just not a very competitive one.
1 -
Looping with pallets is one of the only few defenses in the game. Survivor perks are now mostly nerfed to ground. Survivors live and die based on map design. If you take out all pallets and loops, every killer would have a 100 percent kill rate, regardless of skill.
1 -
First off, I am glad you revealed your bias. Secondly, 0-24% is a 0K. 25-49% is a 1K. 50-74% is a 2K, closer to 3K, true, but a 2K average nonetheless. 75-99% is a 3K. 100% is a 4K.
About the bias, by your own admission, Killers should always be at 50%. Even if they are better players, they should be locked in at 50%.
8 -
That sill proves the game is killer sided at red ranks. lol I don't know how you look at that and see a great than 50 percent kill ratio for all killers and think "yea. This game is survivor sided". That defies all logic.
1 -
Is it a 2K average?
0 -
"You're coming to the conclusion that the data is flawed based on your own anecdotal evidence."
I am basing that on literal quotation from a mod as well...
"So just to reiterate one last time, I really would not recommend drawing any conclusions from these stats. These are averages, not specific and incredibly detailed data that you should draw any conclusions from." -Peanits
The data having flaws to where we shouldn't be solely using it for balance judgements is not my opinion, it is from BHVR.
"When I think "killer sided", I think "how many kills on average did the killer have"."
As I have said, there are many factors influencing this that are not taken into account. "Kills" are also not the sole determinant of balance in DBD as well.
"This data also does not include DC's, so this is data based on tens of thousands of games most likely."
This is a complete an utter throw in the wind with no evidence of it. We cannot use random guesses for making balance judgements.
"If you're reading research and you see that there is a patient mortality rate of around 75 percent at the four year mark, you could research why that ratio is so high, but it doesn't fundamentally change that there is still a mortality rate of 75 percent at four years."
You cannot use mortality rate as an accurate comparison as that is indeed the end all be all. Kill rates however, are not the sole determinant of balance and that is what you are solely using to draw your conclusions.
"Survivors have gotten mostly meme perks over the last 16 months"
They've actually had quite a few decent perks. Most havn't replaced the meta because their current meta perks are way too strong to where they simply overshadow everything else.
"with constant nerfs"
I'm not sure how long you've been here but survivors were insanely OP in the past years ago. These nerfs have been completely justified and trying to slowly bring the game into better balance.
"I don't know how you could think 16 months ago when the kill ratio was above 50 percent, that constant nerfs to survivor and buffs to killers wouldn't increase the kill rate."
Who would think that? I sure don't and haven't said anything of the sort.
The killers needed those buffs and survivors needed those nerfs. You are also ignoring alll the survivor buffs and killer nerfs in that time as well.
5 -
No. It would be closer to an average of 3k. 4ks are possible, which means that 4k's are also in that statistic. I don't know how you look at 74 percent and think that's closer to an average of 50 percent, rather than 75 percent.
2 -
Spine Chill, Dead Hard, Balanced, Lithe, Borrowed, DS, Prove Thyself, Adrenaline, We'll Make It ect ect.
These are all excellent Survivor perks that serve unique purposes. Certainly not "nerfed into the ground."
As for looping, absolutely, if your skill is higher than your opponents, by all means, loop them for 5 gens. However, god loops should NOT exist. Pallets should be more numerous but not safe.
3 -
Actually they stated that those stats are only one of the determinants they use among many others combined.
Not saying to what degree I believe it or not, just what they said.
0 -
Clown rounds to a 75% average at red ranks. Should we nerf him? No.
5 -
Fair enough, at least you brought math. You have my respect.
I hold my postion, until the rank system is fixed, 3K average is fine. After it is, by all means, 2K average, until then, I'd rather not de-pip.
1 -
When exactly did I say the game was survivor sided? I think the game is fairly balanced at the moment except for some maps that are clearly braindead survivor sided with double pallets and no line of sight blockers like the entrance at the Asylum map. I had a double pallet spawn there the other day and even the survivor used the "point emote" when they noticed that bs.
Other than that the balance is better than ever.
Also what I'm saying is one survivor is 25% per game as a strict number since there's no such thing as "half a survivor" so all killers are within the aimed 2k average across all ranks with a higher 3k or 4k tendency at red ranks. That's how things are supposed to be in an asymmetrical 1vs4 horror game especially when experience (red rank) comes into play.
What changes do you want?
3 -
The only way to determine over performance is through these type of statistics. To determine when and who they want to nerf/buff is anyone's guess because they won't tell their paying customers their little secret and that is what pisses me off.
0 -
No. And that's where interpretation of statistics would come in. Clown is fine, although I can't stand exhaustion bottles since exhaustion has already been nerfed into the ground and dead hard doesn't work most of the time because of dedicated servers.
With that said, you could still say "Clown is still favored against survivors at red ranks.". Which would be 100 percent true. You can't make the argument that survivor are favored against clown at this rank, generally speaking. Which seems to be the constant battlecry -that this game is survivor sided. Which facts dictate that's just not true.
1 -
Killers have a harder time ranking up than survivors. So obviously when you put killers who are skilled and experienced in the game against survivors who are pretty boosted, killers will have a higher kill rate in general.
As long as the ranking system makes it easy for survivors to pip and makes it hard for killers to pip (without a 3k), most Red Rank survivors will still be at a disadvantage against Red Rank killers.
3 -
Exhauastion perks are fine. Dead Hard works fine for me.
I heavily disagree, however, say you had control of the balancing, what would you change?
2 -
There are a lot of factors the numbers can't take into consideration.
The devs may not include matches where someone disconnected, but what about hook suicides? If someone suicides early in the game, the remaining survivors usually fall like dominoes. On top of normal suicides due to not liking the killer or the map, these numbers were taken while The Rift has been going on, and it's common for survivors to finish their challenge and suicide so they can get started on the next challenge.
Also, how many survivors play without the goal of escaping? My friends and I don't play with the goal of escaping. We go in fully intending to die. We can't be the only ones. Playing killer, I've also played against survivors who were absolutely winning and then they threw the game for unknown reasons; they basically put themselves on the hooks, I had little to do with it.
These numbers also aren't split up by platform. Console and PC are mixed together. Maybe that doesn't matter, but maybe it does.
I'm not saying the balance is fine. Survivors need certain buffs so solo survivors can be more coordinated, because coordination is how survivors survive. I think the buff to Kindred is a step in the right direction, though I think it should be base kit rather than relegated to a perk. But that's my opinion and doesn't really matter in this discussion.
The important thing is that the stats don't necessarily mean anything except that people apparently don't find Plague fun to play as. Poor Adiris needs some love.
3 -
Yeah, rip for the Plag.
Amazing design, not so fun to play.
1 -
Right. So that's still a snapshot of the overall balance of the game currently. That's going to be your average experience of a DbD game at red ranks. The average game you go into at red ranks, you are most likely not going to survive. Which brings me to my original argument
THE
GAME
IS
NOT
SURVIVOR
SIDED
1 -
But that's how it works on The Price Is Right.
0 -
Then ask yourself, why do people think it is?
I would bet it is because of the toxicity from both sides. In CoD, a loss is just a loss. In DBD, a loss is more than that. You get zero satisfaction AND often get BM'd by the opposing team after the match. That isn't a Survivor thing, I've had PLENTY of Killers do that too.
It needs to stop.
3 -
Thank you for asking.
I would do rotating events where you have a separate queue. 2 killers vs 8 survivors. Some type of event based around basement.
I would never release another perk that increases the gen time or progress bar simulator for this game. We already have enough to stare at.
I would remove the wallhack aspect of BBQ and Chili.
Billy's chainsaw has a cool down attached to it. So he can't constantly reee reee everywhere. You have to make a tactical decision when to use it.
I would remove legion.
I would decrease head on windup time from 3 seconds to 2 seconds
I would combine kindred/we're going to live forever or kindred/borrowed time.
I would increase density and objects of many dead areas in maps, so there are more opportunities for stealth.
I would remove fake pallets from the game.
I would double the cool-down of freddies teleportation.
That's it. That's what I would do.
0 -
... Dude, I said I think survivors need certain buffs to increase coordination between solos. Teams that are coordinated can eat killers alive. Uncoordinated teams will die tripping over themselves even if the killer is equipped with a Styrofoam spork.
And my average survivor game (I'm usually solo and not at red ranks) is teammates disconnecting and suiciding at the drop of a hat. My friend likes to run around the map, do totems and search chests, and then give himself up to the killer because he doesn't like skill checks. Me, I'll hang out on the map and watch myself die to the entity because I love the animation. If I know a killer has a mori, I want to die by that animation; my feelings are hurt when they don't mori me. I don't know how the devs can balance around people like me and my friends (and again, if we do it, there must be others) who basically refuse to survive most matches.
So, while the statistics may mean something, they can't adjust for the differences in playstyles. And on top of that, taking the numbers with the Rift in progress and people suiciding because they finished challenges is bad timing. Not even just suiciding, either. Survivors are throwing games to complete the Archive challenges; that's their choice and has nothing to do with the killer's strength.
3 -
Even though I disagree with the path of your logic, I agree with your conclusion.
If the game is going to be balanced around 2k that should mean a killer should be able to 2k and consistently pip at red ranks. Currently, you can 3k and still safety pip which is really dumb. I blame Gatekeeper because of how it functions and the fact that gens go so fast there's no way you can stop at least 2 in the first 4 minutes. The only way that happens is that the survivors are potatoes that spend time looking for Ruin instead of doing gens. But as you well know, on Xbox Ruin is worthless at red ranks. 2 gens will still pop in your first chase, at which point you can kiss Iri GK goodbye. If another gen pops within the next 2 minutes, that's an automatic silver unless you can lock down the game at this point, which is unlikely.
Furthermore, the fact that one shots punish your Malicious/Chaser is a problem too. And you can get robbed of Devout from DC's or hook suicides. Heck you can lose out on these emblems just because you ran over survivors too hard.
Killer emblems need a rework plain and simple. GK is the top offender, Mal/Chase just need to scale for one shots to be fine. And Devout needs more so that you can end with a 2k but still get at least gold from enough hooks.
2 -
*sighs in Legion main*
Peanits Dev∙Community Manager › Dev, Community Manager Posts: 4,382
November 25 edited November 25
I feel like I really need to stress this line from that post:
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT NUMBERS ARE NOT EVERYTHING; THERE ARE A WHOLE BUNCH OF FACTORS THAT COULD INFLUENCE THESE NUMBERS.
To use the Spirit as an example, as we've mentioned many times before, we do not balance based on stats alone. We make sure to do our research first and there's a lot of compelling arguments for why she should have been changed.
And again, there's a bunch of different factors involved. Is Freddy overpowered, or is it just a combination of perks and add-ons that make him that strong? These are all things that need to be considered.
So just to reiterate one last time, I really would not recommend drawing any conclusions from these stats. These are averages, not specific and incredibly detailed data that you should draw any conclusions from.
0 -
This is a huge problem and I 100 percent agree with you. I rarely play anymore, but when I do, I just skip after game chat. There is very high toxicity in the game, but that's more the human condition than it is the game. I think there is only so much you can do to tamp down on it, but you see that in every game. Where I think DbD stands out is that you have a very prevalent "Us vs Them" mentality. You almost have two separate communities in DbD - killer and survivor.
You also have a very vocal active killer community that started when Marth 88 did his experiment. So you have people that just absolutely hate survivor. You then have extremism where anything less than 4k is not good enough, which then pushes the overton window further and further, where someone saying "I think the game is not killer sided" is met with huge backlash because the reality that has been created in a forum is not the reality of the game. The overton window being pushed also makes it seem where someone still saying something less extreme about the balance of the game, makes that person seem like a moderate.
2 -
THIS!
0 -
I honestly think that it would be near impossible to find a target such as 50 percent kill ratio and then try to hit that, without some major problems that are also introduced. The game is asymmetrical, which means that by it's very nature, there are going to be mechanics in the game that counteract your skill, which leads to frustration for both sides.
However, I just think they went too far with the survivor nerfs and killer buffs. For me, personally, they made it where the game is not much fun with survivor. It feels like progress bar simulator, just waiting to go for a run and then get insta-downed or cheap shotted.
I really wouldn't care if that kill ratio was 100 percent, just as long as what was going on to get that 100 percent kill ratio was fun and interactive. I no longer think they look at both sides of the coin, they've pushed it too far to the killer side and sacrificed alot of fun on the survivor side. I just wish they made survivor more fun to play.
0 -
Excuse me, just one moment. THEEEEEEeeeeEEE Fanatical Legion main here to ask you, WHY do yo want to remove Legion who is considered one of the WORST Killers in Dead by Daylight and is getting nerfed soon for unknown reasons? Not only that but the rest of your changes don't seem like they'd be fun for Killers AT ALLLLLL. We gotta have fun as well! I can't think of a single Killer that wants to play "Waiting to Lost and get bullied Simulator!"
0 -
The statistics suggest that the average highrank match ends most likely with a black pip or a de-pip for the killer. (It's an assumption because of the kill rate. We would need statistics from the devs to be on the safe side.)
We also don't know how many survivors still "win" (=pip) despite getting killed. And we know nothing about the difference between solos and SWF groups.
These statistics give so limited information that they aren't really useful.
6 -
Exactly!
0 -
There's a difference between drawing conclusions based on data, and using statistical data as evidence to back an argument.
Or, if we're not even supposed to do that, then what was the point of releasing this data at all? To justify the paycheck of some intern at BHVR?
0 -
How many times do I have to say this?
NUMBERS. AREN'T. EVERYTHING.
And stop this toxic "us vs. them" mentality. It gets all of us nowhere.
2 -
These statistics lack so many information that I wouldn't draw any conclusions from them.
1 -
You could most certainly draw the conclusion that killer is favored at red ranks. I actually can't believe that people are arguing that you can't draw that conclusion.
0 -
They give a solid overview of the state of the game. They're quite valid to draw upon as evidence. It's not the level of information that you could get from a fansite like Dotabuff, and it certainly isn't everything (For example, it doesn't tell you why Freddy is performing so well), but looking at the data, one can safely conclude that every killer performs well, except for low-ranking Nurses.
Why shy away from hard evidence just because it doesn't provide every scrap of information we could want from the game? The ideal goal of any debate is to discuss a topic and find the truth of a matter, and hard evidence gives you a great way to do just that.
1
