Is Balancing DBD Around Kills/Escapes the Right Call?
I've been holding out hope that DBD would eventually be rebalanced around hooks.
It looks like that is never going to happen, and I'm at the end of my rope with this game as a result. I think I'm shelving it for good this time.
Curious to hear your thoughts.
I've seen content creators talk about the game's win conditions as if the community holds a unanimous opinion that playing for 12-hooks is the ideal way to play DBD, but the forum seems surprisingly quiet about this topic.
Is Balancing DBD Around Kills/Escapes the Right Call? 58 votes
14 votes
44 votes
Comments
-
Yes
The killer is not fundamentally in control of how many hooks they get, so you can't balance around that- especially not for the matchmaking system.
Balancing generally around kills/escapes is fine if you also consider how those kills and escapes are earned, which to their credit they do acknowledge some problem areas there, so it seems like they are doing that.
1 -
No
You could ask the entire survivor playerbase about what they find most annoying, and 99% of them would probably say that being camped and/or tunneled is the least fun gameplay experience for them. Balancing the game around kills/escapes ensures that killers will always be incentivized to use this playstyle and not an alternative, more fun for everyone playstyle
There are so many things BHVR could do... punish camping/tunneling by making gens go faster while within X meters of the hook (assuming another survivor isn't there), basekit DS in exchange for longer survivor objectives, gens going slower if the killer doesn't tunnel (chasing a different survivor), massive automatic gen regression for each time a survivor is hooked for the first time etc. etc. Implemented carefully (ensuring that both killer and survivor are handed out buffs evenly, and not one side at a time) these would imo make the game more fun for all involved. Killers would be incentivized to use a fun playstyle, rather than shooting themselves in the foot in order to "play fair"
Balancing the game around kills/escapes means that a braindead Bubba with NOED is 99% of the time going to win more than a skilled curve Hillbilly that made amazing plays all game but ended up with 6-8 hooks and no kills. It's like BHVR is actively trying to make killers play in the lamest way possible. I have zero faith that they'll ever do the right thing with balance
4 -
Yes
I wish I could say "maybe." I don't think it's the worst thing to balance it around. I kind of wish the system could account for team play better.
0 -
Yes
I'm not opposed to the idea of balancing for Hooks, but I also don't think balancing for Sacrifices is all that bad either.
This might sound odd but I find a Killer that won with the least amount of Hooks possible probably played better than someone else who had a higher amount of Hooks but no kills, tho this also depends on the situation
0 -
No
It is better than nothing, yet I don't think balancing the game on hooks is good either because survivors can just suicide or dc to mess the hook count.
About how bhvr looks at the kill/escapes stats, here's my though:
I feel like they are looking at the data mixed all together which looks kinda balanced, but I'm conviced that with a focus with precises parameters, some major gap would be highlighted (for instance stealthy killers are strong against new-ish survivors, and awfull against very strong survivors).
I also see too many people only looking at top players for balancing thoughs, and forget about the begginer-friendly aspect of dbd, which is currently dreadfull.
0 -
Yes
I think that yes, managing to score more kills in the end should make the difference.
But camping is awful and unfunny for both sides, so here's a crazy idea: why not make "kinship" base kit? If the killer stays idle within X meters from the hooked person, that person's timer gets paused.
I know it sounds a little extreme, but I think it would incentivize a better playstyle in the long run.
0 -
Yes
If your mmr would go up for hooks, gen time, chase time, hits, etc. then it literally becomes a farmable mmr. That's just awful for any game. Idk how that's so hard for people to understand. Your mmr would just continuously go up over time.
0 -
Yes
We all rate our killer games by how many kills we get. We are mostly disappointed when we kill nobody after 8 hooks and still pleased if we kill everyone with only 4. If I got 8 hooks and no kills then my strategy was wrong. It wasn't a win and the teabagging survivors at the exit gate clearly agree with me.
This system is designed to aim for fair matchmaking, nothing more; Preventing God tier SWF survivors being matched with a killer that just bought the game. It doesn't matter that in one match you ran the killer for 5 gens and then died, or that in another Bubba killed everyone by facecamping. Good players "win" more games than bad players.
We also now know that unfair matchmaking is caused by attempts to make quick lobbys, not by the MMR itself.
0 -
No
It should be around BP gains, nothing else.
You can play the game right and walk away with 6 health states and 2 hooks, not a garbage killer.
You can get 8 hooks and had a generally good game, no kills - still did okay.
Likewise, you can have a dull match where you don't get chased but escape after popping a couple of gens - not a bad survivor.
Or you can get killed after looping the entire game - not a bad play.
If you did good, that end game scoreboard already shows it pretty well. Escaping and kills grant bonus BP as is, so the benefits of the W/L system isn't lost. Gaining points for winning chase and touching gens as well as applying pressure and getting hooks means that the benefits of these aspects are also incorperated.
The Devs already have the perfect system to judge skill by, but they're not going to use it.
0 -
No
Isn't playing with Meta perks and using cheap, scumbag tactics exactly what is making this game a farmable MMR right now?
I'm struggling to see your point.
There's a reason high MMR survivor matches turn into the same meta killers with the same meta perks - just as playing with killer is the same OP Survivor perks with broken attachments. People are already rising to the top of the MMR scoring system either by being boosted or using dirtbag tactics - it's already a farmable MMR. At least if you quantify the means of 'victory' you'd have to achieve many feats to 'win' a match, but if it's as easy as bringing corrupt intervention, pop, Ruin, Undying on Bubba with Chilli addons while in the pre-game lobby... Congrats, you just made an easily farmed MMR system!
2 -
Yes
If you were to judge killers and balance killers around their ability to get hooks then the game would be terribly skewed. Killers who tend to snow-ball would look like they're underperforming which would cause problems when attempting to fix them. The 2 killers that come to my mind are Plague and Oni. These 2 killers in the right hands snow-ball hard but when they don't they lose hard. Either way they're not getting many hooks.
0 -
Yes
Bringing "Meta" perks and using "Cheap scumbag tactics" are not farming. People lose all the time doing both of those things. When I say farming, I mean when the killer hooks each survivor twice and allow the survivors to get 5 gens and escape after a good amount of hits, chases, healing, and hooks so everyone gets a pip and bloodpoints. If those things bring your mmr up then those players would also raise their mmr when they farm, which makes mmr farmable. Extremely easy point to see. The "farming" point that you are trying to make is more about balance than actual farming mmr. I get what you are trying to say but I personally don't believe that bringing "Meta" perks and using "Cheap scumbag tactics" are farming, especially when both sides do this and both sides win and lose.
0 -
No
There needs to be more involved than just kills. The simplest next step would be taking into account hooks as well.
0 -
No
The game's balance should be built individually based on maps, powers, add ons, items and perks
0 -
No
What you're saying is that it's 'easier' for a killer to get 8 hooks and have incredibly strong gameplay while allowing 4 escapes.
You're also insinuating that such a killer would not get HIGHER MMR with a hypothetical system like mine if they had gotten 4 kills & 4 more hook states.
You're also suggesting that it's much more difficult to bring meta perks and face camp than it is to consistently over-preform against survivors of varying skill levels.
You're also saying that 'farmers' that exist in the game as is that throw pallets and the like would hold more sway in the MMR system - as if survivors giving free kills don't exist as is, which are exponentially more common than these 'farmers'
1 -
No
Based around hooks is also not good.
The emblem system is it. It might need tweaks but that is it.
The emblems reward you for the different things you do in the match. That reflects much more skill - not all - but much more.
1 -
No
Yes, but not just that. If you do great as the killer, get all hooks but the last 4 - youre a good player. You should not get worse players the next game.
If as a survivor, you fix 4 gens and sacrifice yourself for someone else in the endgame - the killer you get shouldnt be worse than the previous one
The goal of MMR is to provide a valuable and fair experience for both sides
0 -
Yes
I am fine with using kill/escape-based MMR for matchmaking, but I don't like basing it around individual kills/escapes. I would base it around team kills/escapes.
0
