We have temporarily disabled The Houndmaster (Bone Chill Event queue) and Baermar Uraz's Ugly Sweater Cosmetic (all queues) due to issues affecting gameplay.

Visit the Kill Switch Master List for more information on these and other current known issues: https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/kb/articles/299-kill-switch-master-list
The Dead by Daylight team would like your feedback in a Player Satisfaction survey.

We encourage you to be as honest as possible in letting us know how you feel about the game. The information and answers provided are anonymous, not shared with any third-party, and will not be used for purposes other than survey analysis.

Access the survey HERE!

The Outcome of a Balanced Trial

Clowning
Clowning Member Posts: 886
edited September 2021 in General Discussions

Now that SBMM is fully implemented, I think it's time to talk about what the system perceives as a statistically good match and what exactly does that mean in the grand scheme of things. As far as we know, the Devs consider two escapes a desirable outcome - Yes, it's clearly more difficult than that, but that's what we have. Obviously, while some players can see past the binary nature of win/lose, for the average person winning is what defines fun, so let's work with that.

Now, while the actual definition of a victory is rather muddy, the general consensus is that an escape for a Survivor is a win, while three kills or more for the Killer is a victory. And this is where a major issue comes into play, if two escapes mean that the trial went well, then by very definition the Killer ought to lose the majority of trials. In other words, the more balanced the game becomes, the less likely it is for Killers to win a game. 

And that's without taking into account the variables that come into play when you consider just how different in terms of strength Killers are. For example, it is absolutely possible for Killers such as the Trapper to load into a game that they cannot win, no matter how hard they might try, due to the nature of Trapper's design and due to the fact that good Survivors will always be capable of buying themselves enough time to finish their objective. That's insane.  

Not only that, but it clearly leads to a great deal of frustration. Ever since the introduction of SBMM, we've seen an increase in complaints from both sides. Killer mains feel as though they have absolutely no control over some of their games, while Survivor mains have to deal with camping from Killers that are trying to get some of that control back on top of incredibly inconsistent teammates in SoloQ. And let's not forget about all the mental health posts from people that genuinely need to take a break from this game due to all the stress it is causing them.

Frustration, stress and the feeling of helplessness are at the very core of DBD's design and my question is, what to do? Is there even anything that can be done at this point? Is there perhaps a way to change the end game screen to appeal to more players? And yes, by appeal I really just mean "upset less". Should the game favor the Killer? Should it favor Survivors? It has to favor someone, as the game has to be balanced around something, right?

Few disclaimers so that we avoid debating nonsense. Yes, I am fully aware that the game will never be balanced in a way that causes the Killer to lose every game, especially when SoloQ is doomed to always be chaotic. Yes, I am aware that many of these issues are simply the nature of asymmetrical games. And no, I don't think that telling people to grow thicker skin is the solution here, clearly it isn't. Rather, I am interested in the implications behind these design choices.

I've yet to see a proper discussion on this topic and I'm greatly interested in what the community thinks, because it seems to me that we're all sort of quietly aware of these issues, yet we rarely talk about them outside of emotionally charged threads that quickly turn into "us versus them".

Comments

  • Brokenbones
    Brokenbones Member Posts: 5,214

    It feels like the developers are trying to have their cake and eat it too with the SBMM system

    they don't want people to know/want to define a 'win condition' because they probably believe that subtracts from their personal vision of the game/spirit of the game. Like that interview where I think the product manager said 'If you're having fun a 1k can be a win'. Obviously I'm paraphrasing a bit but yeah

    At the same time they also want players to be matched by their "skill" and what their internal system defines as "skill". Rumours say that the system only rates players based on how many escapes/kills they get and how long a match was. Not really the most accurate definition of skill at all really

  • Aneurysm
    Aneurysm Member Posts: 5,270

    Imo a fairly balanced trial is where both sides stood some sort of chance. Can be a 0k, a 4k or anything inbetween.

    My first match during one of the earlier MMR tests was as demo against a pretty decent 4-man swf (I did check). And they stomped me good, I got a fair amount of hooks but a 0k in the end. But thinking it back afterwards, at one point I had 2 slugged with 2 injured and I decided to just hook them instead of going on a quick hunt for the others to potentially end the match there, but if I had taken the other option I'm pretty sure I would've won. So despite getting stomped I'd consider that a balanced trial, if I had lost because I couldn't catch any of them I'd feel differently.

  • ThiccBudhha
    ThiccBudhha Member Posts: 6,987

    I think the issue is that people believe speaking facts about role balance is an "us versus them" mentality. The game is survivor favored, they want it to be that way. End of story. Nothing about that is me opposing survivors. Some take it offense to it, but instead of pretending EVERYIONE is crazy, maybe we should just ignore the actual clowns and accept that it is what it is.

  • Clowning
    Clowning Member Posts: 886
    edited October 2021

    I can definitely admit I've been feeling a bit of a... Not sure how to put it. Maybe SBMM fatigue, on one hand there's Killers that are much more likely to struggle against good Survivors and so I might be less likely to pick them, on the other hand SBMM is likely to force 50% win rate anyway, so there's this strange feeling of playing just to be playing, that personal choices and skill are sort of out of my hands. And I know that's not true, I do, but the feeling looms regardless, even though I am someone that's motivated by a personal desire to improve, rather than numbers telling me I'm a good boy.

    Post edited by Clowning on
  • Rey_512
    Rey_512 Member Posts: 1,620

    Love your post.

    Personally, I think the developers have NO CLUE what they’re doing when it comes to matchmaking. At this point, matchmaking/rankings should be scrapped and just dump everyone into one big pool. It’s obvious that this will never truly be a legit competitive game due to the RNG, so might as well embrace RNG matchmaking.

  • Bran
    Bran Member Posts: 2,096

    i would honestly prefer to know how well i am doing. like who am i going against, how good actually are they? i like winning, but is it worth it if i don't even know if i actually out-skilled or outplayed these guys? i feel bad if the survivors if i am going against are potatoes.

    also, i don't want my base to be only 2 kills. i want to be able to get 4 without that assumption of 2 is desirable for a win. i shouldn't have to settle for 2 being okay in a game where i can get 4 because that's what they say and as far as i know it wasn't built for that.

  • Artemisha
    Artemisha Member Posts: 401

    I don't feel the game balanced at all. And I am experimenting less and less fun and motivation to play.



    The higher ability you get on game (loops, flashlight, game knowledge), is becoming less and less important. As survivor your most efficient play is Hold M1 and let your tunneled mates being bullied.


    And we can't blame people for playing the most effective way (tunnel, gen rush and a 3 killers pool is all you are gonna see on any tournament without added rules.



    It's a horrible game design for rewarding people for playing the most unfun and unskilled way.


    Said that, I'm not expecting them to adress a so complex problem soon. I'd be happy woth another game mode that encourages more interaction, fun and sportmanship.


    I

  • NekoTorvic
    NekoTorvic Member Posts: 778

    I think DBD has focus problems.

    DBD seems to want to appeal to casual players, survivors need to hold M1 to win. They have a bunch of tools to negate their mistakes etc. At the same time, the devs are not shy about making killers that are ridiculously mechanically complex killers need to mind way more stuff in the game, how does that appeal to casuals?

    The survivor's main objective is to do gens. The killer's main objective is to outplay the survivors repeatedly. Especially in high MMR outplaying the killer is pretty much just optional if you have a team to mash gens and stack up enough second chances. Seems unfair and contradictory.

    The devs want to give survivors stuff to work as a team, but then they don't consider how those things can actually break the game when they do work as a team. When survivors actually work as a team with some of that stuff it creates frustrating and unwinnable scenarios.

    And also the game is terribly designed to make survivors understand they are working as a team. Survivors have a very individualistic mentality to the point that I've literally seen survivors argue that DBD isn't a team game. Survivors getting camped get no feedback from the game that they're helping their team and they get no rewards for letting their team escape. It feels frustrating to have the killer chase you all game and then you're the only one that doesn't make it out, where in reality the game should massively reward survivors that do that because they guaranteed their team's escape.

    The devs refuse to establish a clear win condition, where a team wins and the other team loses. Pips are just meh, and 2 escapes always translates to the killer struggling to hold control over the match. 3 kills or more for a win is the more obvious way to see winning. I genuinely do not give a rat's fart about the points I see and the end of the match or how many pips I get. But survivors can only see their win as them escaping because there's no incentive for them to work as a team.

    DBD also has so many scenarios that make it so that the game is pretty much unwinnable at a certain point from the survivor's perspective. Depending on the killer, you can turn a 0k to a 4k during endgame if the survivors make mistakes and you outplay them enough. From a survivor's perspective, if you have 1 person dead on hook and one person out of the game at 3 gens, the game is pretty much over. This makes the game feel very frustrating and hopeless for survivors. But at the same time, survivors can do like 60% of their objective before some killers get 3 hooks, which can feel insanely frustrating and stressful for the killer.

    I don't know how to fix any of this btw. Not without overhauling the entire game. Make it so that it's more of a back and forth between survivors and killers, that neither side is utterly hopeless at any point in the match, make it so that each side has to outplay the other instead of out-bullshitting the other, etc. Again, it feels like DBD kinda just lacks focus.

  • Clowning
    Clowning Member Posts: 886

    Yeah, that's a good point. There's also the issue that, the better both players involved in a chase are, the less likely they are to do something interesting, or showcase skill, as they both understand how the loop is supposed to be played and when the 50/50 comes into play.

    I almost wish that Survivors could do more things than mere running, dropping pallets and vaulting, as that would allow for more interactive chases that satisfy both players and encourage genuine skill. As of right now, the formula for a chase is extremely basic once fully understood.

  • cantelope
    cantelope Applicant Posts: 343

    The problem feels like the foundation of the game is meant to be about four individuals trying to quasi work together for their own benefit. However the building itself is centered around the survivors being a team. The fact survivors can't talk is my biggest reason for arguing this.

    To fix the game it has to be completely overhauled one way or another. Rework 1 is the survivors have their own objectives and criteria to escape and how they complete it can either help or hurt the other survivors, but ultimately you leave alone. Give a massive boost for both altruism and escaping. I doubt this will happen, so not much to say on it. SWF is to lucrative and I honestly don't blame them for leaning into team play...

    Rework 2 means leaning into the already existing teamwork emphasis. Survivors aren't eliminated like they are now, instead hooking survivors contributes to a Ritual meter that once filled the Ritual completes. All survivors are sacrificed as if the EGC happened, maybe spice it up with killer specific animations. The longer survivors are hooked the more Ritual Points are earned. Having multiple survivors hooked increases the rate the Ritual meter fills. The killer gains bonus RP for harassing the other survivors, to continue to discourage hard camping and rewarding defending. Hooking all survivors cause them all to scream in horror giving a massive bonus to RP, they are then placed in random lockers around the map. Hooking all four survivors in the basement is an auto win.

    When hooked survivors can Pain Walk and do things like hunt for totems, and pick up downed survivors who are at the "find help" phase and other secondary actions that can be added to the game. Their vision is heavily obscured but players glow and secondary objectives are discernable close up. If a survivor goes to help you and you are Pain Walking it takes an extra few seconds.

    Add a Killer/Survivor button with a BP bonus to shorten wait times. Make it easier for survivors to communicate things, like a button that points at the last objective you worked on. It can make a small noise or not, testing.

    I feel like this restructuring would alleviate most of the problems to sustainable levels while still being essentially the same game. None of the problems will ever truly go away though. In any game where there is any possibility of competition you will always have people on both ends of the scale. The ones that really do need a clean towel for those hardcore gamer sweats and those that will throw a fit and cry about their "fun" being ruined because the killer took the game seriously to any extent. Especially perfectly reasonable ones.

  • Artemisha
    Artemisha Member Posts: 401

    I neither care about win or lose condition. Well.... I like to scape from time to time, but I think win condition is totally subjective and arbitrary. On tournamena, win condition can be established by bloodpoints diff, or by hooks and gens system.


    But regarding to average players, it's subjective. Some killers only consider win a 4 k, or 3 k and a surv scaping through hatch. Personally, I like playing hard at the beginning and eventually play friendly and let 2, 3 or all of them scape. First war and then chill. I have fun, they have fun = win win.


    But as u mention, this game is supposed to be a 4 vs 1. We can agree SWF is a team game, but, what about solo? As u said, many survs think this is a individual game and stablish their win condition on their own scape.


    Many survs won't bodyblock u or take the chase although u are on you'd be on your 2nd hook. Many survs won't even try a risky unhook or won't even try find a noed. If they scape letting you down it means they have won? Apparently.


    And keep in mind that 90% of the people of this forum will tell you that if one fellow surv is being camped tunneled what u have to do is repair and let him die. So u can "win", as individual.


    For me, " Win" = enjoy the game. Scape not necessarily. If I can sacrifice to let somebody out I also will be pleased.


    These design problems of the game are very big and core of the game. Best thing devs could do is release a new game mode where they can experiment new rules and mechanics that they could add to the main game once propperly tested.

  • Artemisha
    Artemisha Member Posts: 401

    Not to mention than if a surv is good on chase and killer is aware of that, he probably won't even try a chase and wait for him to be on a deadzone or a vulnerable situation.


    Game don't encourage sweat and good chases. Camp tunnel is much more rewarding.

  • NekoTorvic
    NekoTorvic Member Posts: 778

    The thing is that ultimately making a game so people "have fun" or "have a good time" or "enjoying the game" is kind of a nebulous, almost useless goal when you're designing something. You need to have a more concrete vision of what you want or else you find yourself in DBD's position where you have casual stuff and hardcore stuff clashing in frustrating ways, and dissonant objectives, and mechanics that don't work with each other, and you end up making people's experience kind of miserable in general.

    Like, Imagine another type of game. Say Overwatch. If I play healer, and I die 50 times, and kill 1 person, but my team won, and I healed them, I still did my job and we still won and I still feel that victory, because the game told me what winning is, it set a specific goal, and I would either get it or I wouldn't, and the opposing team would either outplay us or they wouldn't. DBD doesn't offer that particularly well considering the type of game it is.

    You can get 0 kills and a pip, which is odd. you can get 4 kills and a depip which is even weirder, cuz you clearly outplayed your opponets. As survivors you can all escape, and you can have a lengthy chase with the killer but black pip, because somehow the game thinks you didn't do enough? And individuals in both teams can pip at the same time. It's just very obtuse.

    And yeah I agree with everything you said about teamwork, and that's the issue. DBD does a piss poor job at making survivors feel like they're working as a team for a common goal. So then survivors think about themselves, and survivors disregard the 1v4, and then we have problems of devs balancing for the 1v1, not the 1v4, or vice versa, and we have people constantly talking past each other, because nobody knows what DBD wants from them.

    A clear example of this is when survivors complain about killers with difficult counterplay and they say "eventually he'll get me", and like yeah, they'll get you because counterplaying them is hard, and your function as a survivor is not to get chased for 5 gens and escape tbagging the killer at the exit gates. Your function is to outplay the killer as much as you can to stall for your team, if you held the killer for 30 seconds, that's good, if you held them for longer, that could be game winning. But they cant see that, because all they're thinking about is "dam this inconsistent counterplay, I got downed".

    Like you said, we have issues with SWFs working as teams but solos not even considering the fact they're in a team, so then we find a bunch of people complaining about how lenient the game should be for each individual survivor, but that leniency would destroy the 1v4 balance, etc.

    Honestly if they released a PTB with a new mode that they could experiment with, or maybe even if they had a new experimental mode every weekend or something, just so they could test out new ideas that could eventually make it into the base game, i'd ######### love it.

  • Clowning
    Clowning Member Posts: 886

    That's another thing, skill isn't truly rewarded. I've often seen, what clearly was, the best player in the team die, just because the team screwed them over, be it by unhooking them in the Killer's face without BT, or by wasting all the pallets. But at the same time, the skill of a Survivor can never TRULY matter, because they ought to be doomed to go down as @NekoTorvic pointed out. Uncapping BPs for chases, while giving extra points for being camped is a band-aid solution I've seen suggested many times, yet that doesn't truly deal with the greater issue - The frustration that both parties are going to experience one way or another.

  • Tr1nity
    Tr1nity Member Posts: 5,047

    I once got ruthless killer when everyone escaped.

  • Artemisha
    Artemisha Member Posts: 401

    Exactly. Game is so confusing and unbalanced that needs a very deep redesign.



    And as you mention, experiments should be done in other game modes and when already tested and devs got feedback, consider adding it to base game. Or not, and just add a new game mode with different rules.


    This way people that like this meta can still play and ??enjoy??

  • Artemisha
    Artemisha Member Posts: 401

    With killers is the same. Why would you need to learn how to J- flick with Billy if u can just wait for someone to unhook and take him down?


    Huntress. She is powerful but very loopable at the same time as she has lowovement speed. Running into the certain loops can be very painful for her. You need lot of practise to chase propperly at the shack, u need to have good timing on hatchets when running a T-L. She is hard to play.


    But.... U can just camp tunnel on a 3 gen area. So why would u need to learn how to loop?


    I main her as killer and I'm not even a very good one huntress. But if I send someone early to the bassement eventually I'll just stop camping bassement because it's just unbearable for survivors. 1 comes to bassement, and in the best case scenario only will be able to trade hooks. But many times u can take both down.


    So u can win people much more skilled than u, just playing scummy. Which is not fair, IMO.