Game is perfectly balanced: prove me wrong
Sooooo many threads NERF that, BUFF that. Look, it's very simple: don't sweat and you will get opponents who don't sweat.
Comments
-
Look at DBDs competitive scene (or lack thereof compared to other major games) to answer that question.
25 -
Agree 100%. The amount of people here that complain about the other side running meta when they themselves run it is astonishing.
1 -
Game is balanced on a casual level, yeah.
30 -
Look at the other asymmetrical multiplayer games competitive scene... look, nothing!
4 -
What does that have to do with being balanced?
0 -
Casual game is balanced on casual level. Water is wet. What else is new?
4 -
The game is balanced around Survivors being bad.
Which is fine, most Survivors are.
27 -
What's your proof that it's "balanced around Survivors being bad"?
0 -
Euhm... how is that fine? Didn't you just make a post that you don't want to play killer anymore, but you claim that it is all fine? Interesting take...
1 -
He is just posting whatever. Just look at his post count. Makes it obvious.
0 -
Yep, I sure did.
Because the game is balanced at a casual level, ie, Survivors aren't efficient.
I'd say maybe 10% of the community plays at a higher level, and unfortunately, that's where balance falls apart. You either play Nurse, Spirit and Blight or you don't really have a chance. It's just mathematics at that point and unfortunately, I doubt BHVR will ever do anything about it.
I know Killer players don't like to get stomped for not running meta or playing those three Killers and I know Survivor players don't like always running meta and playing against those three Killers either. Even further, the game isn't fun at those ranks, even when you win.
19 -
No one that actually plays the game at a high level with a high amount of time thinks the game is even remotely balanced.
What the game is balanced for is low rank/bad players. At high MMR/SWF everything gets thrown out the window.
23 -
You can feasibly lose 3 gens for a single good chase at the start of the game.
20 seconds to find a Survivor, 10 seconds to get the first hit, 30 seconds for the down, 10 seconds to hook, 15 to find a new Survivor and ta-da, 3 gens pop. The Survivors have just done 60% of their objective and you've done 8.3% of yours.
The only reason this doesn't happen is because most Survivors don't play on that level, as soon as you throw good players into this game, balance falls apart.
32 -
You realize the logic flaw in your reasoning right?
If to enter the upper echelons of the community you need to play those 3 killers, therefore the solution to your issue would be to not play those killer and you would not meet those players... as by your own accord: they only face those 3 killers.
Yet you are denouncing the entire role meaning that even at lower levels where even the worst killers reside meeting far lesser survivors hit the same issues. The MMR is killer based after all and if you are facing issues on all of them... it really showcases it isn't just the top 10% of the community. Yet here you go and state; it is all good... the hypocrisy is strong.
3 -
Nobody is arguing that DBD is the exception in that genre, but don’t tell me the game is “perfectly balanced” when it inherently can’t
When (after the Spirit nerf) only Nurse and possibly Blight have a viable chance at high levels of MMR, it should be obvious that a lot more work can be done to balance things.
0 -
Except, you eventually hit a hard cap where you no longer win but no longer lose. I think I hit that with Wraith. I can reliably get 1 Kill with 5-7 hooks, but no more than that. I continue to face the same teams, wherein I get 1 Kill and it certainly isn't fun to play super campy and tunnel-y.
Likewise, you are failing to consider that MMR has been collecting data in the background. I play almost every Killer (######### off Nurse) and I've lost like 15 games since the New Year. I get long queue's and get destroyed because my MMR is so high on Killers that should not be up there. Legion? Against DS, DH, UB, BT on Badham? No way I win that.
There have also been examples given on the Forums about how MMR is not dropping fast enough. I'm not going to play 30 Legion games just so that I have a chance at winning.
13 -
The game is not balanced, the only balance in this game is its unbalanced chaotic nature, you never know what to expect because it can all change depending on what map you get, what killer you play as, who you play against. If the game was balanced there would be some semblance of balance, but this game is chaotic to a fault.
1 -
That's not a proof. You are just describing your feelings and emotions.
0 -
if master vs master survivors win but you barelly see that normally is just killer stomping at least in solo q wich are the most scenarios.
0 -
I disagree with your title, but I agree with your actual post.
0 -
And how does any of that prove that the game is not balanced?
0 -
My point is that SBMM is the balancing mechanism. If you have better idea for the title, I'd like to hear it.
0 -
If you don't want other people's thoughts then why even make this discussion in the first place, I see no point I explaining to someone with that kind of view nor is there much of a point to change your mind if you wanna be so rude so there is that lol.
3 -
Yet you claim that the top where the game is unbalanced is purely occupied by Blight, Spirit and Nurse. If you are playing all others killers... you are not facing those 'good' players by your own admission or are you claiming that unless they face you...
Your logic is showcasing major paradox elements; if the good players only face 3 killers ... that means all other killers don't face them even if played by you.
Queue times have increased and yes even I face DS, DH, UB, BT, SG, SB, meta meta meta perks with offerings on Badham, Ormond, Haddonfield and CORN CORN CORN (I even posted that I am getting fed up with map offerings) and I am nowhere near the top level of killer. Face it... your logic that it only affects the top is simply invalid.
So... how is that fine?
2 -
The title is very specific: "PROVE ME WRONG". Id doesn't say: describe me how you feel. You surely know the difference, right?
If you feel it's rude to point out that you are off topic, I don't know what to say to you.
0 -
Thank you, thank you thank you. I wish I could save this post to copy/past in the future. I'm glad this forum is not entirely devoid of people versed in logical reasoning.
0 -
If the system were perfect, then yes, the top % would only see Spirit, Blight and Nurse.
However, if you'd read, you would see that I mentioned that my MMR is boosted higher because I have lost so few games due to the failures of the old matchmaking system. This causes me to play against people who I should not be playing against. Obviously, like I said, a Legion isn't going to fair very well against a good team.
Perhaps I will adjust my logic. It should only affect the top % of players, however, due to the failings of the old matchmaking system, it affects other players who were unintentionally boosted by the system.
3 -
It's funny that you asked for someone to prove you wrong, then I did and you ignore it.
You also attack people for daring to have a different opinion than you.
2 -
Does being forced to play Nurse after reaching a certain threshold in MMR strike you as ‘perfectly balanced’?
1 -
"my MMR is boosted higher because I have lost so few games due to the failures of the old matchmaking system. " - so you are saying that it takes time for SBMM to correct faults in the old matchmaking? That's fair. No one claimed that your matches should be balanced instantly.
0 -
Nothing forces you to play Nurse. You will be matched with the survivors that are adequate to skill level that gets you 2 kills on average.
1 -
Water isn't wet
1 -
Except, it doesn't appear to be doing that.
It's unreasonable to ask someone to lose 30 games in order to get a tolerable experience, but I'm still seeing the exact same teams. Even still, it feels totally random. I get a great team full of people who are actually really good and the next game I get the Claudette who Self-Cares in a corner while I'm running Sloppy.
These are the same teams I see on Killers I do play regularly, like Blight, and they still give me trouble because they are actually good. I even had someone from the Forums take a look at one of my Blight games that I lost because I felt like I had played that as well as a Console Blight could, but I wanted to be sure I wasn't being blinded with bias, and they agreed that I had played almost perfect but I still got 4 hooks and 0 Kills.
But hey, keep denying what it so plainly obvious to anyone who has put time into the game. The better you are, the less balanced the game becomes.
3 -
If it was balanced you would have a fair chance at winning as survivor. The one player out of 5 has a substantially higher chance of winning.
0 -
I agree.
I, as a Solo Blendette with a Key, have a much higher chance of winning than my team, who is currently 3v1'ing the Killer.
6 -
How is the solution not to play those killers? The real solution is for BHVR to recognize how badly this game is balanced at even mediocre survivor skill level. This game is very survivor sided outside of average casual skill level play. As soon as the survivor players realize how to loop and that doing gens> over everything else besides unhooking = win, you are going to struggle on killer. The survivors don't even need to be that good against most of the killer roster. They can drop pallets instantly and waste tons of time while the other 3 just do gens.
2 -
Lets start by defining what you mean by "lose" 30 games in a row. What do you call a loss? Also, that could be just your feeling. Record your average kills per match to get a better picture.
Also, saying "plainly obvious" is not a proof, you know that right?
"The better you are, the less balanced the game becomes." - also not a proof. Are you claiming that you are losing games because you are just too good? How does that makes any sense? Or did I misunderstand you?
0 -
Your argument is basically “lol the game has a system of ELO ratings now so its perfectly balanced”
1 -
That's not a proof. That's an unsupported statement without a proof.
0 -
Correct. The game is balanced by SBMM.
0 -
It actually is supported with evidence. The real stats have shown killers win way more.
0 -
You can do well enough not to lower your sbmm but still lose the match. Getting beaten is not enough on its own to throw a killer out of que selection range for high tier survivors.
Chances are that sbmm lowers at a far slower rate than it takes to go up. I highly doubt it's a clear 1to1 ratio.
1 -
Survivor queued time adverage 10-15 min in asia server.
You only met baby killer or killer god in asia server.
Asia server payed attention to compete, so we knowed survivor not balance half year ago.
Killer player was abrupt decrease,that just why asia server survivor have more queue time.
1 -
North America servers are opposite. Instant survivor queue. Killer is a few minutes wait.
0 -
There are no publicly available stats after SBMM was turned on. You are welcome to post a link and prove me wrong.
0 -
The game has no concept of balance. Ignore the ranks, those had no meaning even before the changes. Look at scores, look at perks, and know that 2 hooks happened the entire time; with the added caveat that no, the crossplayer didn't play like someone experienced with any killer so their baseline average (as the starting assumption of SBMM) should have been as low as possible, and the survivors all had at least 1000 hrs, with 2 of us well over 2000.
1 -
Nurse's power is to ignore the core mechanics of the game. She is balanced in a competitive sense and in a general sense. What does that say about the state of DBD for years?
1 -
^ THIS. This is a big part of what I've been complaining about.
@tester No, this game is not balanced, because the game doesn't have anything to balance around. On the Steam page, under "Key Features," it says:
Survive Together… Or Not - Survivors can either cooperate with the others or be selfish.
How does anyone balance a game around that? This is a 4v1. In other words, the 4 working together need to equal the strength of the 1 so that there's a good back-and-forth. But apparently, this game isn't necessarily 4v1. It can also be 3v1v1. Or 2v1v1v1. Or even 1v1v1v1v1. Tell me how anyone could balance that, please. That's why there are so many people saying "buff this" and "nerf that." Because the very foundation the game is built on is broken. The killer wins in an early 3v1; any non-participating survivor is handing the killer a 3k, condemning their teammates to a miserable trial, all for a chance at the hatch. It's terrible game design that players are able to do this. Either survivors are teammates or they're competitors: the game needs to decide which and stick with it.
I don't sweat. I'm a very casual player. But the more I die the more I'm put with teammates who don't participate, which leads to crappier and crappier matches.
SBMM should put me with other players at a similar skill level who play in a similar manner. It doesn't.
1 -
I really hate this lazy "prove me wrong" type of threads. They never provide proof themselves but only denounce anything going against their opinion.
You also. You didn't give any proof in your og post and I until this comment haven't seen you proving anything from your opinion and only shot down others.
Again the laziest for of discussion.
Post edited by burt0r on5 -
Why buff and nerf patches happen if the game is "perfectly balanced"?
1
![[Deleted User]](https://forums.bhvr.com/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
