Game is perfectly balanced: prove me wrong
Comments
-
The game being asymmetrical means it's pretty much impossible to balance.
Especially with so much variety in killers, perks, maps, rng within those maps , etc...
People keep begging for balance but need to realise there is no magical balance. Not without making the game boring anyway.
Look at trapper and nurse. One a defence oriented setup killer, the other a chase monster. I can't think of a single way to make these 2 equal and balanced. But i'm still glad both of these excist for different playstyles.
Bassicly balanced is boring. Embrace the chaos of imbalance
1 -
Badham balance
5 -
"Game is totally balanced!" meanwhile they refuse to make MMR public
3 -
To appease people who like to complain.
0 -
Well its easy
The game is balanced in such à way that for low/medium ranks its fine
But for higher ranks its not, as efficient survivors will destroy killers,
Killers almost HAVE to play with meta perks lile ruin/undying or pop beczuse the base gen kick is slow and useless (2 sec animation to lose 0.25 charge/sec all stopped in one millisec of à gen tip from à survivor mid chase), hexes still have really bad spawns and can be destroyed within the 20 first seconds, and most of the other perks are nische/bad or good to use, but you need the gen regressing perks first
Killer waste à lot of time for everything and the meta perks are one of their fiew chances to really catch up higher ranks if you dont play flawlessly
And survivors pmayed their meta second chance build since what? 4 years? Because having tons of second chances are time wasting for the killer, saving for the team leading to easyer games, there aldo still are way too many perks that are bad/nische but its the same, you need one exhaustion perk and the rest is almost free.
Many survivor feel like if they dont tae DS they get tunneled, if they dont take UB thzy get slugged etc
Yet why change à build giving you changes when you reach higher ranks, where you destroy the killers while havin good mates tbh? Maybe one or two perks are changed to save time on heals or gens but thats it.
As soon as one sude starts playing meta, the other will join, MMR means competition and thus meta perks
Beside in EVERY game people will play meta perks/chars/weapons etc (LoL for champions, WoW for classes, OW for heroes, Apex for weapons, etc)
Youll never be able to stop people from abusing what is strong in the game, just lile some abuse tunnel/camp/gen rush/loops/bugs/the mechanics
4 -
Also in a system where MMR works, the "dont sweat and they wont" will never work, people want to climb the ranks, people still play to win
And sooner or later you come across that point of "loose=survivors that are too bad for you, win=stronger sweatier survivors"
And i dont see myself loosing à lot just to bully people because im on higher level, really
But its good that the MMR doesnt work that well c:
3 -
I'm so interested on proof about that being the case.
1 -
Game isn't perfectly balanced if a Myers that hasnt seen or hit me all game can come stalk me for 2 seconds and kill me from healthy.
0 -
Game balanced around kills, not your enjoyment.
0 -
I mean i dont care if i do or dont get enjoyment sometimes but that situation isnt balanced and you cant try and say it is.
0 -
There are maps in this game that are unwinnable for killer against survivors of the same skill level. That's the biggest problem with DbD balance at this point IMO. Other things are moreless fine.
1 -
How is this situation unbalanced? The game is balanced around 2 people dying and 2 escaping. How is it relevant in which way you die exactly?
0 -
There is no such map. Killers can win on any map. If you can't, that's on you. Watch any streamer and see for yourself that any map can be won on. Anyway, how do you compare survivor and killer skill level? Present your comparison formula, I'll wait.
0 -
If you really hate this type of threads, there is navigation menu at the top. Feel free to navigate to another thread. Makes sense, eh?
0 -
I earnestly believe this game is more of an attitude check than a Win/Loss check. The less time you spend in lobbies complaining at the end, the more games you play, the more points you earn, the more opportunities for good games you get. Control what you can, starting with your own emotions. Its okay to get frustrated, but the response to getting frustrated matters more than what got you frustrated in the first place.
0 -
I am not stating not to play those killers, yet if you do you will if you are good face better survivors due to their strength level.
The whole argument is that each killer will be performing at your and their highest level.
Balance in this game isn't made for decently good or great players, those that claim to roll with the top 10% and claiming it is fine for everyone else... are just not understanding the reality of the balance and now they lose, drop a bit in rating and notice no difference... and still claim it is balanced? It isn't fine for a pretty big margin, because keep in mind at the lowest levels the coin flips.
Yet the way one speaks about how amazing they are how they have months upon months of unbeatable streaks... are now not able to face good survivors and go this is unbelievable unbalanced and in the same breath states well the balance is fine?
This is not reality, you cannot have it both ways... either the balance is not good enough to play killer or it is fine and your complaints about being a killer are not actually true. Especially when they claim it isn't fun for high survivors either as they only face 3 killers, while at the same time the entire roster if they play it faces these same people.
If the survivors are beating you, they would move up and leave your bracket just the same. MMR systems are a two part system, claiming you always face the exact same survivors makes no sense at all, or you are at the higher levels without crossplay which is well known to be even more sweaty.
@Pulsar the argument you are boosted is not holding ground if part of it is based on theoretical reasoning... what you are experiencing is simply the balance of the game... yet it is fine?
Like seriously all of those responding to me claiming the balance of the game is where it should be... while complaining about their killer experience, how exactly is it balanced? I am not a thousands of hours Chad, I don't claim to even be that good and all that higher queue times, facing meta survivors, SWF teams, map offerings and having to play in the 'not nice manner' is as valid in my lower skill bracket as your claims of high one... so... how exactly do you claim it is fine? Do you smurf or something and experience the game at the lowest levels?
0 -
And this is bullshit.
First, yes, you can win on Badham IV or Haddonfield, but the chance of winning won't be 50%. It will be 15%, or something.
Second, watch any streamer yourself and count their wins on these maps. You will be surprised.
Third, right now we have MMR on. It is supposed to give you survivors of your skill level and it doesn't take maps into account as far as we know. Yes, sometimes it makes mistakes, but if you play this game a lot - you know when you are playing against people of your skill level, and when you are not.
Fourth, just play killer and count your own wins on these maps ffs. If MMR is balanced for 2k/2e, why on certain maps this is not the case?
0 -
Game is fair play for both sides ppl just need to be drama queens that's all
1 -
It is not balanced. You can say that you never reach high mmr with some killers and so they dont need to be balanced for that, but there is one problem.
Lets say the mmr is perfect and 5 people with 1200 rating are in the same lobby. Seems balanced. But now one player feels like to equip a iridescent addon or anything strong. With one click they can raise their practical rating, but their actual rating remains the same. So every player has the option to make the next game unbalanced if they dont always play with the strongest equipment.
And then there are maps. No map is unwinnable, but they have different kill rates, are better for some killer and perks (totem spots for example). But MMR-rating doesnt care for that. Some players could even have boosted MMR, bc they got lucky with maps. This doesnt affect only one playergroup. The players, which will always bring a map offering.
So MMR rating would be only balanced between player, which always bring the strongest equipment and force a map. But then theres map rng and only one map can be chosen, so one side doesnt has the map advantage.
0 -
Please feel free to present your proof that win rate on any map is 15%.
Also, I never claimed that all maps are balanced. I said that the game is balanced. It's right there in the title. This means that on some maps you may win 40% of time, on other maps 60% of time, but your average win/loss will be 50%. So, the discussion about map balance is irrelevant to discussion about game balance.
0 -
You are confusing item, map, an individual match and overall game balance. No one claimed that individual components are balanced. What I said is that the game overall is balanced, meaning that average 50/50 win/loss is the perfect balance.
"make the next game unbalanced" - match, not game. Most of your argument is based on confusing match with game.
0 -
It isn't fine. I was being facetious.
However, BHVR is likely to see it as fine. If 90% of players are meh at the game, and balance works for them but 10% are good and balance sucks for them, why would they balance for the minority?
0 -
That is such a terrible point. Allow me to illustrate.
A map has a 100% Kill Rate
B map has a 100% escape rate
By your logic, the game is balanced since it averages to 50/50
Honestly, you've got two options here. Admit your point was pretty awful or double down and look foolish.
2 -
That's wrong. When i'm at high MMR, if i don't sweat, i loose, it's ok then i derank. And then after a few MMR decrease without sweating i get a 3K/4K and go back to high MMR. It's an infinite loop...
0 -
Watch your language please. There is no need to call someone you disagree with "foolish". Forum rules link is in the top right corner.
Yes, in your scenario the game would be perfectly balanced. It wouldn't be fun, but it would be balanced.
And just to prove my argument, I'll say this that will surely make you admit that you are wrong: " Admit your point was pretty awful or double down and look..." JK. You really think that you can prove anything that way?
0 -
Pretty sure water isnt wet, if I'm not mistaken wet is when something goes from dry to wet. As water is a liquid it's not actually possible to go from dry to wet.
But no saying a game is balanced if you dont run meta is stupid, because the more you win the more unbalanced its get as your opponents are far stronger and likely using meta therefore your forced to do the same to just try be on an equal field.
If everyone was perkless who would have more strength? Survivors. With no regression and it being a 4v1 you wouldn't be able to stop gens or have perks to help certain killers in survivor favoured loops. All your end up with is a killer tunneling because they know theres no ds/bt and that wouldn't be a fun game
1 -
You confirming that your loses are balanced by wins? So you are saying the game is balanced?
0 -
You are mistaken. Water is indeed wet, believe it or not. Kind of crazy, I know, but it is the truth.
0 -
The game 'may' be balanced, but player's skill & mindset arent. A bad player with 4 second chance perhaps have equal chance vs a good player with meme build. But if you look at a newbie player without any second chance vs a Zubat level of 4men swf 16 second chance. The gaps is undeniable huge.
1 -
"because the more you win the more unbalanced its get as your opponents are far stronger and likely using meta" That's what balance is. If you win more than 50% of matches, you will be matched with sweatier opponents. What do you expect, keep winning?
0 -
Like if the OP wanted to say that the game is balanced better than it was before that'd be fine to say. But like others have said there are too many factors out of a players control at times to claim the game is balanced.
0 -
You cant exclude parts of the game and talk about game balance. And evading arguments with semantics is the laziest way. Its obvious what i mean. Doesnt matter if i call it the next game, match, round, etc.
Its pointless to argue with you. People like you never even think about changing their opinion, so its a time waste.
0 -
I, in fact, did not call you foolish. You seem to have applied that label all on your own.
You seem to believe in some supreme macro-level of balance. That works on paper, but it does not work in practice.
1 -
If it was balanced then yes I should have the chance to win. Balance is not "having to loose" or be forced to use "meta". Balance is both sides have a chance at winning no matter the level. This game does not do that, everyone knows the higher the skill/mmr then the more power the survivors have and the less viable killers and builds there are. That's a simple fact, but saying the game is balanced around players that dont even try to do their objective or loop half the time is honestly disillusion because at some point players will loop and will do gens.
I'm not going to argue, this is my last comment but I provided fact and it beats your argument. Was fun playing but bit of an easy game
0 -
I wouldn't say it's PERFECTLY balanced but I would say it's in a good place right now compared to what like two years ago or more lol.
Obviously there is flaws still that I doubt is ever getting fixed though.
1 -
Yes, you are correct. It's waste of time to argue if you are mixing up terms and can't construct your argument properly.
0 -
Lies ! Dont believe it lol. By definition only though haha
0 -
Haha. So your only argument is "everyone knows"? That's just too funny 🤣
Also, you really believe saying "that's a simple fact" turns your opinion into a fact? Nice one! Thanks for the laugh 😀
0 -
Perhaps there are flaws. That's why I asked to be proved wrong. I want to know what those flaws are.
0 -
Huge maps like haddonfield and any killer without mobility displays what's wrong with the game.
0 -
With how system works, if you win more and rank up, either you face a worse player who tryhard using 3 slowdown & Noed, or an actual better player. You cant tell which one you're facing and often you have to try hard just incase the other side is a tryhard. But it works as it should be.
But if you look at the common complain, Survivors have tunnel/camping, Killers have gen rush. These can be fixed with core gameplay (adding another objective to soft slowdown, hook work exactly like PH cage to soft prevent camp/tunnel). People will still complaining when they lose. But at least that will make the game more fun for both side.
0 -
You said "look foolish". I advise you to read forum rules again if something is not clear. I can guarantee you that you can't win any arguments by descending into name calling.
0 -
I agree, it's "wrong" as you say. But unfavorable maps are balanced by favorable maps, so the game overall is balanced.
0 -
Exactly! As killer, I had sweaty games with multiple slowdowns and then... Just for experiment... I removed all gen slowdowns... Guess what, after a few losses, I'm at the same win/loss ratio, but my games are more varied and fun now.
0 -
Do i understand correctly, u suggest players to loose on purpose so they get less skilled opponents (It's how MMR works) and stop whining about balance? Imagine u suggest same in other competitive games, u would be immediately fired. Picture this - Hi folks! I know u can't win as terran and top 70 world players are zergs, but just let it go, play for fun.
Same goes here. Spirit/Nurse/ and Blight are considered strongest killers to go against SWF, and someone like Clown, Trapper or Legion is considered as very bad to go against SWF. Since swf is common in this game and u will face it most of your games as kiiler how u can have fun with underperforming killer? Wait till u get weak enough SWF so u can get some kills or push everyone to play same 3 killers?
Dude, with all respect u can't be serious and u miss one big point: every single player no matter how good or bad he is wants to have a chance for 4k or escape against same level players. Suggesting them to take non-meta perks and loose on purpose so they could have fun beating babies is very bad advice.
0 -
Whilst I'm not sure if "perfectly balanced" is wholly accurate, it's attempts at being balanced are a lot better than some make out. With SBMM, certainly it balancing with other players of similar skill, and as you get better or worse you'll fall in line with people of similar skill. So I absolutely agree with the comment of "sweat less = less sweaty players".
I also know the meta is not a guarantee of victory. Many people have beaten "The Meta" with meme builds, as can be seen on many YouTube videos, and bless those influencers for trying to get people to realise there is more out there than a handful of perks. Skill and tactics is also a thing. I understand a few have dismissed this as a myth, but that's false due to how people use mindgames and various tactics to outwit each other, which goes beyond looping.
So yeah, I'd agree mostly it's balanced well, considering the many, many factors it takes into account. The only reason I won't say it's "perfect" is because that implies it is flawless, and I don't believe it's possible to achieve a flawlessly balanced game.
0 -
You can't even call DBD "balanced".
Hitting the right MMR as a survivor you will feel how balanced this game is...
0 -
Nah. Maps that its heavily sided on one side shouldn't exist for both. At best they should strive for a map to be slightly killer/survivor sided.
2 -
Nope, a balanced game would mean that both side, with an equal skill have both 50% chances of winning.
High MMR = loosing 80% of trials
Midd+ MMR = winning 80% of trials
It bring a 50% win rate ratio but it doesn't mean the game is balanced. It means that when the survivors are good enough, the killer has no chance.
2 -
You come on here asking for people to prove you wrong but then get all toxic and condescending when they disagree with you, funny.
2
