Do you consider the match a lost if you die but everyone else escapes?
Trying to figure out the problem with Solo Q and so I have been recording my 19 games and it's been pretty good results so far. I honestly don't see the problem with Solo Q and it's manageable even if you're not a SWF unless you're one of those unfortunate survivor that dies and everyone else escapes. There's also some unfortunate matches where there's a clear link but still the survival rate from the survivor team is pretty high regardless. So what's the problem? Sure there are instances where the rest of your team could have been better but I don't think most matches aren't damning.
Comments
-
Depends. Did I die after doing most of the work while the others escaped? Lost.
Did I die while everyone did their own part and tried to be altruistic? Win.
12 -
I thibk getting rid of the concept of winning and losing entirely is the healthiest thing a player of this game can do
2 -
no. If at least one escapes through the gate that's a win.
Same mindset as killer. If somebody escapes through gates it's a loss
0 -
No. As long as I did my best for the team and they have a higher chance of winning, it's a win for me.
Now being camped + tunneled + being held hostage in my own game feels like complete dog%&# and if I'm forced to leave earlier than anticipated, then that's a clear loss for me.
4 -
No, getting everyone else out is my priority, and my fun challenge each match.
If I die in the process it's still a win for me.
0 -
Three escapes is a win. It's kind of as simple as that for me.
Winning isn't the priority obviously, having a fun and close game is, but on a purely fundamental level three escapes is definitely a win.
1 -
No. I just make sure to contribute enough to help and get a good amount of bloodpoints while doing so.
If I die, so be it. It's not about winning and losing to me, it's about doing everything I can to ensure the whole team has the best chance to escape.
1 -
Only if my teammates are jerks. Not bad mind you, just jerks. Potatoes can be cute when they try and I find most of them do.
0 -
I consider the match won.
Why is this the only PvP game where I hear people saying "Don't think about winning or losing?"
0 -
Yes and no. Personally, I lost vs the killer because I died. Maybe I get out played, or maybe I sacrificed myself for the team, but either way I'm dead so I lost.
But if the rest of the team lives, then that's a win for our team and an overall loss for the Killer, even if I personally lost and died.
0 -
If 2 make it out, I consider it a draw. If 3 make it out, whether I am among them or not, I consider it a win.
0 -
Because game is unbalanced and you'll lose your sanity if you do
3 -
Because it's special.
Not a lot of pvp games have such a vague definition of what a win is.
Fighting games it's obvious who won. Shooter games also have very clear victory goals. Same thing with moba games.
I can't think of a single other non asymetrical pvp game where it isn't specified when you won or not.
Tf2 there is cheering if you win and booing if you lose. LoL it screams out "Victory" or "defeat" wether you win or lose. In fighting games your character will usually give a short victory speech.
This game has none of that. Closest thing is entity displeased to merciless killer. And that doesn't matter for matchmaking
If the terms of victory is so vague it's best to just forget it entirely and just play however you want to play.
If i have a good 9 hook game with 3 escaping survivors with ton of chases and back and forths why would i try to ruin that experience by saying well i lost cause i didn't kill atleast 3 of them.
2 -
Everything you are describing to me is a bad thing that needs to be rectified by actually establishing the win conditions.
1 -
You're not wrong about that.
But untill they actually do it, I find it best not to worry about it.
0 -
I will continue unfortunately because that is how I be, but I do see your point.
0 -
I actually think one big flaw in DbD is the devs sometimes try to say “well, it’s actually a semi-cooperative game and not the survivors as a team” because generally speaking semi-cooperative game design rarely works well. (I’m talking about both semi-cooperative video and board games.) Many semi-cooperative games end up having situations where a player who is losing just decides to tank the whole game for all the other players out of spite, for example, and DbD is certainly not an exception. They create a game where intuitively survivors want to actually play as a team, but then put in mechanisms that say “but hey, feel free to screw over your teammates because you’re not a team, all that matters is how you do. But not really because we’ll give you more points if you rescue people, oh but you’ll lose a lot if you save someone and die .”
Unfortunately there’s nothing that can be done about that at this point, being semi-cooperative is a core part of their scoring systems. They’d have to completely change how bloodpoints are awarded and grades earned so that all the survivors earn points and grades more equally as a team versus completely individually and there’s no way they’d do that, or even any sign they want to do that. But that underlying design decision is at the root of why the game has so many ragequitters and people doing rescues without protecting the rescued person afterward and survivors just hiding hoping for hatch, etc. Mechanisms that encourage selfish gameplay by survivors just further entice selfish behavior, it’s the bane of all semi-cooperative games.
0 -
If my sacrifice means 3 escapes. I'm chill with that.
1 -
Yo. Even if only 1 escapes because of me it is ok.
But i know i technically lost if i die.
2 -
i dont consider it a lost if it was after gates where powered and i helped people escape, i consider it a lost when i just happened to get downed and killed after the gate where powered.
0 -
No, but apparently BHVR considers it a loss even if you did a ton of stuff to help your teammates escape 🙄
0 -
Yes.
If i open the gates and could escape but decide to go back, then it is also ok with me.
Because i choose that i may die by rescuing.
1 -
I make my own win/lose conditions as survivor but the fact if other teammates died or escaped has nothing to do with it.
0 -
It's an interesting thought experiment.
I still think MMR should've been balanced on the 1v4 basis, not the 1v1x4 basis. If you want to use kills/escapes as a proxy for overall skill, great, do it in the way that incorporates the most side info.
0 -
No it's a 3-1 win for the survivor team? It's a clear win. Same as you escape but the rest dies that is 1-3 lost game.
0 -
If I did something cool during the game I consider it a win.
I once looped a killer for 3 gens and then they camped my hook. My friends tried to save me but I begged them to finish the gens and leave. They rescued me and I got tunneled out but they finished the gens before I died all the way.
I'm very casual and so are my friends. We aren't a sweat bully squad, we're just dumbasses. Cool feats like that are not common.
I lost, but I felt like a winner.
Another time after the gates were open and everyone left. I went to the pig and beckoned her to the basement. We sat together while the end game collapse finished. I gave many boops until I died.
Pig is so cool.
0 -
Nah, I consider it a win if everyone else makes it out. I'm also happy if I die guaranteeing that another person makes it out - it's a win for me if I could have escaped and I pass on the torch to someone else. Hashtag altruisticlyfe.
Not a win if the other player bungles it and we both die, though. Really obnoxious to give your life to save someone who goes down tbagging, or who doesn't use Borrowed Time at all.
The one exception to the "I die but 3 escaped" is when NOED goes off and everyone stays at the gates instead of trying to look for the totem. Or the same situation without NOED, really; multiple healthy survivors that make no attempt to go back for anyone. I totally understand playing it safe if you're injured or on death hook, but solo queue can be interesting at times.
0 -
This is the largest thing for me: It's not cooperative, but it is.
That is what I like about this game. As a Survivor, increasing the odds of Survival includes cooperation. But ultimately, in the end cooperation is not necessarily the end goal, just the most likely chance for success.
(Edit: and from a gameplay perspective, success doesn't necessarily mean a 4E)
0 -
Absolutely yes. My survival comes first and anyone who says "it's not about winning or losing" is usually the one who mocks the players in the post-game lobby for losing.
0 -
It really does depend on what everyone's role in the trial was. If I'm the only one who really did anything otherwise they would have lost, then yes it's a lost. If everyone tried and it was an "it's either you or me" kind of situation for who dies, I'd take the fall so everyone else can get out and I'd consider that a win.
0 -
According to SBMM I lost because I died, nothing else in the match matters except if I died or escaped through the exit gate. Since that is the devs definition of a loss as survivor that is what I go with.
0 -
i lost but we won
1
