How many kills do you consider balanced ?
How many kills do you think is balanced? some say 2, some say 3 .
Let me know what you think and why!
Comments
-
Definitely not two because I get entity displeased a majority of the times that I get two kills
3 -
I think when you say kills it kind of ruins the concept of balance. For me at least. Did you have to sweat for two kills? What happened during that game? Was it fun? I think the best way to relate to balance is how many hooks did you get where 6 hooks was a balanced matched. I had a game where I got 2 kills and hooked less than that. Is that balanced? I guess in a way it is, but it makes me feel defeated too. I didn't have fun with the match. I don't feel like the survivors struggle. So I say hooks are the best indication. That and bloodpoints.
6 -
I'd say 2 but that's before the gates are powered. Anything after the gates are powered to me doesn't count. First guy that gets hooked is getting face camped because he has nothing else to do since the doors are powered. Is that a kill because of balance? No, it's not. You get a bunch of kills at end game because of NOED. Were those because of balance? No, it was not. They all swarm the hook suiciding at end game. Are those kills because of balance? No, it was not.
The point is there are many, many scenarios after the gates get powered that give the killer kills that have nothing to do with balance or skill. This makes counting all kills very irrelevant in terms of measuring game balance.
You'd probably get a more accurate measure by looking at pips instead of kills. This is because the pip system would be taking into account things like 1st hook NOED kills rather than say someone you three hooked, which would reward you a lot more points. The pip system clearly has lots of flaws, but it is still much better than basing the balance on kills with the current system we have.
2 -
2 kills with plenty of hooks is what I call balance and what most games should look like.
4k and 4 escaped should be fringe cases and they should happen when one side makes a LOT of mistakes and the other plays almost perfectly. And by mistakes I mean all ranges of mistakes: skillwise, mindwise, decission making and adapting, IE missing an attack or a vault, failing mindgames, taking bad strategic decissions (3 genning yourself as survivor or wasting too much time on a lone gen while survivors fix the center ones) and failing to adapt to a changing enviroment like survivors finding lightflashes in chests or a killer changing his chase scheme.
I believe a lot of people screaming for massive nerfs or buffs on both sides fail at self criticism, sometimes you really have to ask yourself "it was the game that is poorly balanced or did I make too many mistakes?" because sometimes the problem is not the game but oneself.
P.D. Obviusly the game has several imbalances that need fixing for example Red Forest and The Game maps, stacking toolboxes and Ebonies.
1 -
Two kills. That's half the team.
0 -
personally i'd say 3.
i know the devs want it to be 2, but their game says thats a loss, soo...
also name me one horror movie where 50% of the survivors get out. it just doesnt feel right - imo its more fitting to have one guy live to tell the tale and the others die (unless they play better than the killer, in which case more than one should make it out, of course).
3 -
If the game was balanced around 2 kills before the gates get powered, than the game would only be balanced if the killer couldn't get any more kills once the gates have been powered, otherwise the average kill rate of matches would be above 2.
0 -
That's a problem of the ranking and emblem system, not the game's balance.
0 -
I think context around the kills matter more than the result cause you can easily secure 2 kills and get a depip, but like most people said theres no way to accurately score the game with all the variables going on
0 -
If survivors play bad, then they all deserve to die (4K). If survivors do their objective and dont mess around, then I dont mind someone escaping (2K). If I had no tbags and they respected me, I dont mind killing only one of them.
EDIT: sorry, I reached rank 1 multiple times, so I dont care about ranking up. My opinion can be ignored by competitive killers.
0 -
My point is not that it should be balanced around 2 kills before the gates are powered. My point is that you can't balance around kills period because of how many outside factors unrelated to balance or skill affect the kill rates "artificially".
1 -
2-3 kills depending on how the game went. If you 10 hooks and got 2 kills, that's balance. If you get 3 kills and 8 hooks, that's also balance.
1 -
2 maybe 3 depending on play style.
0 -
Definitely 2.
I personally don't think you can balance for a consistent 3k. Expecting a 3k basically mean you expect every match to end with the last survivor escaping hatch, because it's damn near impossible to open a door as the last person on most maps with how closely doors spawn. Planning for a 3k is basically planning for a 4k. Unless the survivor already knows where hatch is, hatch and doors are killer sided (excluding RNG because sometimes hatch spawns close to the survivor)
1
