Should be killer-sided?

kld3169

I know that responses to this will vary depending on what side many currently see AS favorited. I was wondering if I'm in the minority or majority or equal - but I think the game SHOULD be killer-sided.

Our job is to survive. There are 4 of us. If it were balanced or survivor-sided I could easily see myself getting bored escaping most of the time. I find surviving exhilarating right now because I am not that good at it and don't survive often. I think it should always be that way.

No matter how you see the game as it is now - how do you guys feel about that?

Phasmamain

Since there will always be less killer players making the harder role makes sense

Aven_Fallen

Neither. It is a Multiplayer Onlinegame not a Slaughter-Simulator where you kill 4 Bots or a Escape-Simulator where you escape a Bot.

Both sides being played by actual humans means that both sides should have the same chance to win. And while DBD can never be completely balanced, the game is not as unbalanced as some people want to claim it.

The Killrates show it that Killers dont have a bad time. I am not saying that the Killrates mean that much, but you dont get Killrates above 60 or even 70% when Killers would struggle that much. And yes, it is altered a little bit by first Hook Suicides, but people who say that the Killrates get inflated by those will hopefully not believe what they are saying themselves.

Also, I think it is totally fine that Killer is the harder role. This does not mean that playing Killer is difficult at all, but it is logical that the side where 1 player is playing against 4 players will be the role which is harder. And it has to be that way, if Killer would be the easier role, there would be exactly no reason to play Survivor when you:

• get more BPs as Killer
• have an easier time as Killer
• get more variety as Killer

But yeah, overall, the game should neither be killer- nor survivor-sided.

Lexilogo

Actually, I kinda disagree? Due to the inherent nature of asymmetric 4v1 games, the team of 4 has more opportunities to make mistakes and should have a somewhat higher allowance in that regard. Not an endorsement of the game's current state, that's just a generic statement about the nature of asymmetric PvP.

With that said, I can definitely agree that surviving should be exhilarating and I think those thrills, when they're present, is usually why people like playing Survivor.

Dead by Daylight has a serious advantage baked into it for this, thanks to the fact that a "victory" is difficult to adjudicate. Survivors can "win" while some of them die off, which allows the game to have its cake and eat it.

IWasLeft2Die

I'm inclined to think it should be at least less survivor favored than it currently is. Killers can get easily bullied by teams and survivors have way more tools to counter killers while killers don't have a whole lot which is understandable to a degree but killers need more. If the game made being killer more enjoyable waiting for games would be a lot shorter imo. The game shouldn't be killers wrecking teams left and right but killers can often feel pretty weak and miserable to play as

pseudechis

Its an odd one as from a thematic survival horror stand point the killer should be OP, making them a real threat and survival should be the exception not the norm. The game would then be really scary.

Problem is its competitive multiplayer, so if killer is very OP then nobody wants to play survivor as a massive amount of player base only have fun if they win and if the hope of winning is minimal then they won't play.

So inevitably you get calls for competitive balance which means killers tend to win one-on-one but get wrecked by coordinated teams. Making SWF broken to the point of being a joke, killer feeling really punishing for even minor mistakes and solo survivor a bit of a crap shoot in terms of outcome, which is where we are now.

This is why I was bummed out when the mori changes came in, as the ebony mori was the one thing that made killers really scary and now its basically gone (I'm well aware of why it needed changing it was very abusable).

So when killers are powerful it gets abused and the game is no fun for survivors, but very scary.

When killers are weaker then they get dumped on regularly or have to sweat to get kills and players quit killer, or reduce their playtime, because its to much effort. Resulting in long survivor queues due to lack of killer players.

You also get a survivor experience where you can taunt the killer constantly being pretty safe they can't do much to stop you and escape is all but guaranteed, making the horror survival element of the game incredibly watered down and dull. I've had many boring survivor games where you hold M1 for 2-3 gens and the killer gets one hook, this is a bad thing.

This is why I'm not a fan of red/purple ranks as killer, the gen rush can be oppressive and it really is just run around the same rock 4 times till pallet drop rinse and repeat. Mindgaming hasn't really been a thing in high ranks for a while as holding W is typically more effective and the goal is to waste time and then apply perks/mechanics to counter being caught rather than avoid and escape the killer.

I played a game last night as Myers against survivors all with DS, UB, sprint burst, adrenalin 3x BNP and 1x styptic agent. Basically 3 gens had popped by the time I'd got my first tier 3, now the end result was a 3k but only due to complete bonehead plays by the survivors. The lead time up until that snowball in the endgame had every survivor leveraging every second chance they had prolonging chase like you wouldn't believe.

If you watch a lot of "elite" killer streamers, they have great game, map sense and prediction but often leverage survivor mistakes to get the win more often than not, it shouldn't rely predominately on survivors making dumb plays for killers to be good.

After that game I logged off and changed my shirt.