Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on this and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
The real question is: do we really want a perfect MMR?
Assuming that the MMR works perfectly, wouldn't this hurt the experience of casual players by a lot? Because both sides would have to sweat their pants off to win, which works in other games like league and rainbow six, but in both of these games there are other modes besides ranked. So I wonder, if the MMR is perfect, will it actually hurt the community?
The devs specifically said that they don't like the idea of having 2 different modes in dbd, ranked and casual, so I won't include them here. But, admittedly, the randomized matchmaking is kinda fun, even tho unfair at times. Sometimes you sweat your ass off, sometimes you get destroyed, sometimes its an easy win.
So what do you think?
Comments
-
Agreed.
1 -
I think it's a good question. I've played other games that had ranked and casual modes, and the ranked mode was usually not for me.
However, I also really dislike the current DBD system where you either stomp or get stomped. The most fun matches are the ones where it feels to me like we're evenly skilled -- though maybe my feeling is wrong, and actually the matches I enjoy the most are with people who are just a hair below me on the skill ladder, so I have to work for it, but I still win.
After what the matchmaking has been like so far, though, I'm ready to try MMR.
3 -
I would like MMR to work since I think having fun matches where everyone actually tries to win while not really taking the game super seriously is good for the game, however
- MMR kills off the streamers since they will be at high MMR essentially permanently and have to deal with sweaty game after sweaty game
- we won’t know how high our MMR is
- and the biggest one, all of the times MMR was active it has been completely broken
i don’t want a MMR system in place if it just makes the occasional problems with the current matchmaking system the norm and bumped up to 11
2 -
Well if the MMR works perfectly, I'd make the assumption that casual players would be put against casual players, and the competitive people will take on the same ilk. There may be some brief cross-overs, but the system would shortly correct this. So, working optimally, it would be better than currently for me.
The trouble would be perception. If someone has a few bad games, they will complain about the MMR not being right, regardless of whether it's perfect or not. Whilst the system would take data from everywhere, the individual always sees it through their perspective. Not many like to admit they're not as good as they think they are.
For me, it wouldn't matter whether it was perfect or not, purely because the individual would use their own experience to judge how good it is, so for some of them it may never be perfect. If that's the case, would a perfect system ever be perfect for everyone?
4 -
I agree with some of that, like how there would only be 1 competitive mode and no casual mode (which they should add) but the previous ranking system was made with the intention of what MMR is doing, to match players of relative skill and it failed because the bloodpoint system is not a good system to track skill. There's always only been ranked in dbd since the beginning so I don't think just because MMR is better that means the game will be inherently different, it will just have more fair matches, which is always a good thing.
Just in general I don't like the sentiment of "this game having more fair matchmaking is a bad thing" because it's what people have been wanting since the beginning.
0 -
I agree I shouldn't have to sweat to win every match sometimes I should get crushed and other times I should win there is no true balance to match making anyway MMR has proven this and the healthiest thing for the game is to leave this kind of play up so you get a good mix of both worlds.
0 -
So you say you sometimes want matches when it is an easy win and sometimes matches where you have no chance no matter what you do?
0 -
I don't think MMR is supposed work like that. If you want to play sweaty and, because of this, you win a lot, you should very quickly get matched only with other sweaty players. Conversely, if you want to chill, you might lose to the sweat lords, but then you should start to only match with other chill players.
And then, in a game like this, the two modes wouldn't actually play any differently. You'd just be choosing whether you want fair matchmaking (so ranked, with MMR) or un-fair matchmaking (casual, no MMR). Surely everybody would prefer fair matchmaking?
1 -
So far every game with SBMM made it a sweatfest for me. You don't even notice if you getting really better or not since the better you are the better people you are matched with anyway so it feels the same.
I am talking about FPS games so not really sure if its the same for something like DBD which is...you know
0 -
I don't want to treat DBD as a competitive game. I want to treat it as a party game, a game where I can relax while playing. It's not like I'm playing Overwatch or League or something.
However I'm fine if it ends up that way, I guess.
3 -
The Game is not balanced for 4 random bad survivor with no perks or 4 good survivor in a swf group with the best perks... its not a problem you can solve by adding more perks (which new players wont have access too) or a mmr system.
MMR works in games like league cuz champions and stuff is mostly balanced (unlike DBD).
3 -
It's true. If I want to sweat, I can play on crossplay off against comp players and sweat there. Obviously I like challenging games, but I play DBD mostly to have fun with friends. A perfect MMR system would kill the game for all players.
0 -
I say that it I have to chose between this and sweating my pants out 24/7, I prefer this.
0 -
Because both sides would have to sweat their pants off to win
No, that's not how the MMR would work. In practice, a perfect MMR would place you against people who play like you do. If you play without regard for whether you win or lose, making a lot of mistakes because you're not really thinking about the most optimal plays, and so on, you'd be matched against people who do the same. If you play to win every single time, you'd be placed against people who do the same.
So yes, I do want a perfect MMR.
1 -
If sometimes I play perfectly and sweat and sometimes I chill and really don't care about the outcome of a match? Wouldn't that break the balance of the MMR?
Think of it this way: as a survivor I can tryhard and pull off long chases. But other times I wanna play hook sabo claud and come out of a bush to ruin a killer's day. Sometimes I wanna play Pokemon alongside playing dbd because I really don't care about the outcome. A player doesn't only tryhard or playing chill, a player will play according to their mood.
0 -
Then you would lose while "playing chill" after "sweating" for a prolonged period of time. My guess, however, is that you wouldn't "play chill" for very long if you were constantly losing. Not many people say they don't care about winning and mean it. When push comes to shove, they'll likely try as hard as they can to win.
1 -
That's not the point though. People don't have some kind of singular way of playing. Sometimes I want to play at the high level against high level players, other times I just want to mess around with friends and have fun in SWF without a care in the world if I escape. Despite the flaws of old matchmaking, to it's credit, it did often allow people to do this. There was at least variety in matches. For me at least, a perfect MMR system (not that it would even be possible) would be incredibly boring.
1 -
I think it depends what the devs define "good" MM as. MM around the current emblem system is a .... baaaaaaad idea considering 2k most of the time will result in a black pip at red ranks and survivors can actually DERANK vs an afk killer, if all you do is 5 gens and escape, you're loosing pips as survivor wich is kinda ass backwards on both fronts.
0 -
other times I just want to mess around with friends and have fun in SWF without a care in the world if I escape. Despite the flaws of old matchmaking, to it's credit, it did often allow people to do this.
You can still do that. If you truly don't care about escaping, then you won't care when you die.
There was at least variety in matches. For me at least, a perfect MMR system (not that it would even be possible) would be incredibly boring.
I'll take trials that are always at my skill level instead of trials that are either against people who are stupidly more (or less) skilled than I am. I don't like clubbing baby seals any more than I like being mauled by bears.
2 -
I think you'll get burnt out a ton faster.
The streaming community is also going to take a massive hit.
Personally, I think it's going to highlight balance issues at high MMR which will take at least 8 months for any changes to be implemented.
Also, I don't like that we have no visual indication of MMR, it'd make me a lot more likely to grind if I could see how good I am compared to others.
3 -
And you can still do that, you will just not escape probably, your rank will go down a bit and that's it.
How should the game know that you are playing Pokemon at the same time and therefore you should be matched up with potatoes?
1 -
I agree, that I would lose if I played chill, but here's a counterargument:
I've reached red ranks with high MMR and instead of playing sweaty ghostface that I've been playing, I wanna play a game with perks that only give info without slowdown. I won't win that game. The game will be balanced around the top 5 builds for every killer, which admittedly is already happening, but at least now I have a chance that the rng gods will give me awful survivors, or survivors that just wanna have fun.
Also if I play in the top 1% (I'm not even close to the top 1% but let's assume that I am) then I'll probably get matched with nurse or spirit. No killer in their right minds will play any other killer and expect to win in the top 1%. So since more than half of the roaster and perks are not intended for higher levels of play, wouldn't that make all of em completely useless and unplayable?
The counterargument to that I assume will be "then just don't reach the top 1%". Well if me and my friends decided to sweat for a week to prepare for a tournament, then I'm already at the top 1%. So if I wanna have fun again I'd have to lose about 30 games in a row to get to a medium MMR and have fun, which isn't great is it? Because most people don't like losing, even for a higher purpose.
1 -
I think you'll get burnt out a ton faster.
I was burned out because it was always either "get crushed by a killer", or "crush a killer", with nothing inbetween.
I think I'll do just fine if trials are actually more varied and actually allow for more diversity in gameplay.
The streaming community is also going to take a massive hit.
They can play more (or less) relaxed if they so choose. That's not really a problem for the devs, as far as I'm concerned.
Personally, I think it's going to highlight balance issues at high MMR which will take at least 8 months for any changes to be implemented.
I'll take it.
You know what's worse than waiting 8 months for changes to be implemented? Not having the issues highlighted and fixed in the first place.
Also, I don't like that we have no visual indication of MMR, it'd make me a lot more likely to grind if I could see how good I am compared to others.
As you know, people would exploit that to try to cheat the system.
0 -
Because most people don't like losing, even for a higher purpose.
And there we have the crux of the issue: you say you don't care about losing, but you actually do, which is why you don't want the MMR. You want the freedom to choose between clubbing baby seals (when you don't feel like trying as hard to win as before) or going up against people of your own skill level. That's not going to happen, and I'm honestly glad it's going away.
1 -
You're correct! There is no way for the game to know if I play Pokemon or not. But, just like in the previous example I gave to Orion, if I tryhard in a swf cuz we're preparing for a tournament, I'll probably end up in the top 1%, assuming we've been doing this for a week. After the tournament is over and after I return on playing casually, I'd have to lose more or less 30 games to get a medium MMR, not accounting the other players on my team who wanted to win and lost because I chose to play casually.
0 -
I have another question: why should the game match you with potatoes just because you're playing Pokémon? At any point, you can put down the game and crush them all, which is definitely not fun for them.
1 -
1.)
If MMR works as intended, you should be trying your hardest every game, since the players around you are of equal skill. For me, I'd have to run meta on every Killer if I wanted to have a chance to win at my current MMR. That just doesn't sound appealing to me, and many other players have expressed the same sentiments.
But, if you enjoy that, I have no room to judge.
2.)
Publicity is an issue. A game without a large content creating community is a dead game. Think about what streamers like Otz, Hexy, Cope ect do for the game. I give them 6 months before they are as burnt out as Tru3 clearly is.
3.)
The issues are already known. Anyone with a reasonable understanding of the game knows that it is not balanced and certainly not fun at high Ranks. The issues have been pointed out but nothing has been done. I see no reason why BHVR would immediately start on a fix.
As another example of that, the Optimization of this game is pretty abysmal. The game can be borderline unplayable for Console's and has been for years. BHVR said they would do something about it, but that was 2 years ago. Since then, it's only gotten worse.
BHVR does not address fundamental issues. They only bandaid them.
4.)
Not having a visual indication only makes it slightly harder for people to abuse it. If you throw 20 matches and only hit 3 people, your MMR will plummet. I don't think anyone needs a visual indicator to know that and to abuse it.
4 -
Thats a good argument xD
I love how all of you take the pokemon example seriously, even tho, to be fair, I've done that before
Long story short, a swf didn't wanna play the game cuz they were 3 of em and I had a 3gen as blight, so I completed the whole elite 4 whilst they were busy hiding in the basement.
I got a 30k bp game with bbq fully stacked a survivor pudding and a bps, so it was worth it in the end xD
0 -
This must be the only multiplayer game where people want to do nothing but troll around and win at the same time, without having to actually try and that being somehow an acceptable position.
You either can have: A game where everyone tries to actually win OR a games where some people try to actually win and others just goofing around.
The effect of the later ( which is what dbd currently is ) is people complaining about: SWF, Tunneling, Camping, Dead Hard and so on.
Because for some reason people are not expected to try their hardest, if someone does not play on the same level of try-harding as they are, they are either: trolls or sweatlords.
You can get rid of this problem by accepting that people always try to play at that best, like most online games.
"But DbD is different!!!" No it is not, just because this is currently the culture around this game, doesn't mean it has to stay this way.
1 -
"Losing" for me is mostly having little to no blood points since I need them to p3 my hag, and also cuz I need to get all perks to all characters. So, when I say that I'll lose 30 matches, I mean that I will intentionally don't get that much bloodpoints so I won't pip, which will be a waste of time and resources. That's also the main reason that I don't like nurse, I love her, but I'm extremely bad at her. Even if I 4k, I'll lose a ton more bloodpoints than if I played pig or Hag. I know that my way of "losing" and "wining" is kinda bland and lame but I basically describe it as:
Stonks!
(I wanted to add a gif here but it didn't work :( rip)
For me a perfect game is getting as many bps as possible. If I get that my bloodpoint stonks go up and I can invest on p3ing hag faster, that is my end goal. If I intentionally lose bloodpoints so I can have more chill games, the stonks will go down, which will slow down my goal.
But I admit that I might be the only one that thinks that way xD
Assuming that win is a 4k or escape, then yes, this would annoy and hurt the casual community, probably. I can't say with certainty :/
0 -
If MMR works as intended, you should be trying your hardest every game, since the players around you are of equal skill. For me, I'd have to run meta on every Killer if I wanted to have a chance to win at my current MMR. That just doesn't sound appealing to me, and many other players have expressed the same sentiments.
But, if you enjoy that, I have no room to judge.
You should only be trying your hardest to win if you actually want to rank up, though. I play casually and went up with/against others who played casually, for the most part. Win or lose, I am always relaxed. Except in that one Nurse game because survivors don't know how to loop her and never touched a single generator. That one was annoying.
Publicity is an issue. A game without a large content creating community is a dead game. Think about what streamers like Otz, Hexy, Cope ect do for the game. I give them 6 months before they are as burnt out as Tru3 clearly is.
Can we not overstate the importance of "content creators"? Games were sold long before Twitch and YouTube were a thing and they continue to be sold now, even without them.
The issues are already known. Anyone with a reasonable understanding of the game knows that it is not balanced and certainly not fun at high Ranks. The issues have been pointed out but nothing has been done. I see no reason why BHVR would immediately start on a fix.
I literally agreed with your 8 months timeline. That's not "immediately". I'm beginning to think you're not reading what I'm writing.
Not having a visual indication only makes it slightly harder for people to abuse it. If you throw 20 matches and only hit 3 people, your MMR will plummet. I don't think anyone needs a visual indicator to know that and to abuse it.
However, as OP already so helpfully demonstrated, people who like to "sweat" do care if they win or lose, so they'd never do that on purpose. They'd try to find a way to game the system so they can still crush the other player(s), but without actually ranking up.
0 -
I didn't take it seriously, I was working within your analogy. My point is that at any moment, you can stop playing casually and the other players have no way to deal with that. Since you already demonstrated you don't like to lose, I think this is how you would behave in 99% of cases.
0 -
I'll admit that I picture dbd mostly like a party game rather than a tournament game, since half the roaster of both killers and perks aren't designed for the highest level of play.
0 -
"Losing" for me is mostly having little to no blood points since I need them to p3 my hag, and also cuz I need to get all perks to all characters. So, when I say that I'll lose 30 matches, I mean that I will intentionally don't get that much bloodpoints so I won't pip, which will be a waste of time and resources. That's also the main reason that I don't like nurse, I love her, but I'm extremely bad at her. Even if I 4k, I'll lose a ton more bloodpoints than if I played pig or Hag. I know that my way of "losing" and "wining" is kinda bland and lame but I basically describe it as:
Your definition of winning/losing is not in question here, nor is it even relevant. As @Noz put it, you want to win even if you're not actually trying to, by going up against people who are below your skill level.
1 -
To be clear about this, the gaming industry did achieve everything because of both content creators and ads. Minecraft wouldn't be even close to popular if twitch wasn't a thing, would it? I could be wrong but I remember that the game became popular due to content creators.
0 -
1.)
Sure, if you play casual then MMR should be fine for you. But new players and players who try are going to have a miserable experience and I do not think that can be dismissed.
2.)
Multiplayer games have a very difficult time surviving in this day and age without content creators supporting them. Siege, OW, CoD, Battlefield, Halo, GTA ect ect all have communities that promote the game and show how fun it can be. If they all left, the games would decline dramatically. Because, like it or not, that's the world we live in.
3.)
I did read what you wrote. I'm merely clarifying that I do not believe they'll do anything at all, but if they do it won't be soon enough to prevent people from leaving.
4.)
I don't think you could do that based off of Rank alone. Just put in something like OW's SR system. It's just a visual indication of the weight bracket you are in. That's the same info you have right now.
3 -
I have stuff to do today, so I'll just leave with this:
If MMR works the way it's supposed to, you'll basically go up against people who play as hard (or casually) as you. If you only go up against people who are trying their hardest to win, then it's because you are also trying your hardest to win in most (if not all) of your trials. It's that simple. And I couldn't be happier with that.
3 -
Why is MMR considered bad for streamers? I would rather watch them playing against survivors who are actually worth going against them than seeing them destroying random solo teams at 4 gens every game...
2 -
As a killer, the current matchmaking system is an absolute shitshow. I'm in purple ranks, because it's far too easy to rank up, constantly being paired with sweaty red rank survivors. When I lose, I still black pip, so I can't get back down to where I should be.
The last MMR test and this one so far have both been a massive improvement, putting me against survivors of my skill level, and the games have never felt more fair. It's been less sweaty, less frustrating, and more fulfilling all-round.
So if this is what a 'perfect MMR system' looks like, yes please, anything would be an improvement over the current rank based matchmaking that is putting me off playing killer, and likely many others. Making killer a more enjoyable experience will get more people playing killer, and reduce queue times.
2 -
I think that the two opposing sides here are the people who are afraid that the game will turn extra competitive, which I believe it will, and will lose the feeling of "I intended to tryhard this game, but I'm having too much fun right now" and the people which believe that the MMR will actually not destroy this way of playing dbd, but it will actually include people who both wanna tryhard and people who wanna ######### around.
In this case I concede that I actually don't know on how it's going to work, and my concerns could just be something I shouldn't really worry about cuz it will work, or I could be rightfully concerned about the future of the game, because admittedly, I don't want another league of legends.
So, I think that we should give it a shot, if it works then great, if it doesn't then the devs can go back to the drawing board.
0 -
Because streamers generally need to win most of their games. Nobody really wants to watch if all they do is lose.
However, this basically means they are cursed to go up against extremely good players and other streamers constantly.
It means players on the caliber of Otz are constantly going up against each other, over and over again.
If you've ever played against a really good SWF or a really good Nurse or Spirit, you know how awful that can be.
1 -
Imagine going into a survivor stream where they only face nurses and spirits, I would really not enjoy myself in that scenario.
Or a stream where they're forced to play killers with the safe perk loadout because if they change it they will lose. So it both destroys diversity and creativity
1 -
I mean... the MMR can never work "perfectly" due to the limitations of the playerbase it pulls from. It will put together matches that are unbalanced in order to make sure that people get to play rather than wait forever in a queue. The difference will be where it originally starts looking for players and the method it uses to widen the search.
Also, when those unbalanced matches do happen, the system will recognize that it was unbalanced and adjust the MMR accordingly. Right now, ranking up is rigidly standardized; with MMR, context will matter. For example, the system isn't going to see a highly experienced player winning against total newbies as a big accomplishment.
(I'm going by what the devs have said in the past. There's always a chance they've since changed course.)
4 -
1) You only need to try your hardest every game if you want to win. So just dont try to win and you should get a lower mmr. But in most games its hard to lower your mmr bc they want to avoid people who abuse it. So with some mmr-systems you get stuck in a high mmr. And with that people will use smurfs.
Sweating without seeing your rank seems meaningless for me, too. But right now its unfair if i play against people where everything other than a 4k would be a embarrasment for me. Sometimes i want to relax and still get a win. I mean i used time to get good in the game so why shouldnt i have it easier then others? But i know thats selfish.
2) 50win-streaks will certainly vanish. But i see people in other games who do great. If you are one of the best you will still win and a lose can be entertaining, too. The problem with dbd is that its not balanced.
3) They need to balance it. MMR will just highlight the problems. I prefer 6 month of hell where i know its coming instead of another 3 years of ... i will still win bc the survivor have no brain but its meaningless bc it has nothing to do with my skill only with survivor mistakes...
4) they need to show a visual indicator. You are right if they want to stop abuser they need to do different things. Make a downrank limit in the span of a month. Show the mmr and dont make matchmaking time too long. I wonder if low mmr players would be satisfied with a match against a high mmr player if they would lose but still get a better mmr when they exceed the expectations of the mmr-system.
1 -
So just to be clear, you define a casual game where you can win without working? Wouldn't that mean it is sweaty for the other guy? :)
4 -
I see, so basically you would like to have two ranks, e.g. hard and casual, and you would always choose one of these before you queue up. You select it based on how you plan to play during the game. So basically almost like having two separate accounts, but it would apply only to the rank.
(In theory you could play sweaty on the casual setting as well, but then you would cheat only yourself, because your ranking would go up on the casual setting as well.)
That could be a cool feature.
0 -
I really don't like this MMR, I hate it in fact, I hate playing sweaty, I actually had to use pop with Billy which goes against how I play Billy, I had to use ruin with Oni because I have been trying to go for the #1 fastest 4k with Oni (top 10 as of now), when I changed to survivor today, first match was horrible, rank 20 killer, second one was also a rank 20 trickster with 30 hours in the game, 3rd match was a slug fest with a camping huntress, 3 out of 4 of us almost got bled out multiple times while the killer had pop, corrupt and ruin as her 3 main perks.
I hope this doesn't continue like that, I also want chill games for both sides, not a mandatory "use x perks to have a better chance" that isn't fun, I hate exhaustion perks as example, so I have to use one to do better? Do I have to use ruin and pop every game with nurse?
Every player will only start using what is strong because no one wants to lose, we will have the same repetitive stuff every match and it might become unfun.
This is just what I have in my mind and the day that I had with this MMR.
0 -
Indeed it would be, but the devs said they don't want two different modes. So the mmr will basically ######### me in that situation xD
So the only way to remain in my rank would be to buy a secondary account to sweat. Which, not many people have the luxury to pay for a game twice, I assume this is the case for controller players
0 -
I would defy a casual game as a game where you can equip anything as your load out and you would have a chance of winning.
Imagine league for a minute, if you don't know anything about league, I'll try to explain it. Imagine playing yuumi ad. Yuumi is a character where you literally rely on other players, since you can attach to them and make them harder to kill. If you play ad yuumi on a lane where you have no teammates (let's say the top lane) you will probably lose. You don't play yuumi ad on a ranked mode, you play her in a casual mode. Even if you play her like that in a ranked mode, there is a small chance you win, but usually you play your main. In dbd every game is a ranked game, which punishes diversity and creativity. And since we can't have a casual mode, more than half of everything we have available will be unusable for some players.
0 -
You can already do this; it is called a Custom Game. It can be as casual as you want and have all the restrictions and friendliness that you and your friends choose to setup. Don't kid a kidder.
1
