Developers did a great job with the emblem system. Why did you ask for MMR?
For a game like Dead by Daylight, having a system that counts every action you do in game and then individually rewarding the player based on that is a great. The better you do, the more you go up in rankings.
It may not be perfect but it's by far the most accurate way to calculate a player's contribution to the match.
What I don't understand is why was this community complaining about it so much and wanted MMR?
Now you are crying that MMR sucks...well, of course it sucks. it is not a system meant for a party game, why did you ask for it in the first place?
Comments
-
The emblem system isnt exactly perfect, but holy hell is it more accurate than *only* kill/survive.
They were even part of the emblem system in the first place. Its like they just stripped everything else.
12 -
Because they didn't do a good job with the emblem system, at least as far as matchmaking goes. It actually works a lot better now, just as a personal reward for how well you did in the match.
The emblem system was an atrocious matchmaking system. It categorically did not work, it wasn't fit for purpose, the amount of variance even within a rank was gigantic and it would very consistently match people of different ranks together anyway. For all this system's flaws, and there are a few, it is at least very slightly better than that.
6 -
I agree, people saying the emblem system was better for matchmaking have rose colored nostalgic glasses on. It wasn’t.
4 -
For some people. MANY people have had the matchmaking not work at all the way its supposed to, which the devs have admitted is by design. Putting aside how bad the whole survive/kills are the only metric argument, the system prioritizes wait times over actual skill based matchmaking... Meaning if you play at off hours for your region, it doesnt even exist. Rank based matchmaking had the same problem of course, but at least emblems took more into account than being a locker jockey claudette who lets everyone die so she can be the 1 survive in a 3k. Since you could still pip while dying, good players still got rewarded even if the game turned against them. Basically we went from a flawed system to an even more flawed one, which still suffers from the same issue of not-actually-doing-its-job half the time.
I think maybe the only good thing about the new system is that it doesnt reset each month. That said, the fact that killers don't have their own unique MMR like they originally planned can make that a pretty big detriment to people trying to use under-equipped or new killers.
1 -
Those people aren't necessarily saying the old system was good, just that their results from the new system are worse.
3 -
The emblem system sucked, but I have zero clue what they were thinking when they added MMR. Putting a skill-based matchmaking system (which barely even works, might I add) into DbD, a largely luck-based game, was never going to be a good idea.
4 -
Why do people like you always assume everyone that has a different opinion is bad at the game? I don't understand this logic.
This system is way worse than the previous one. I've never gone against people with 10 hours when there was no MMR. My results are much better now because i'm stomping a lot of players that are not on my level
0 -
So the worst thing you can really say about this system is that if you play at off hours, you're back to the way emblem based matchmaking worked?
I'm not defending its current implementation, I think the "speed over accuracy" thing that they explained in the QnA is probably the truth- that definitely would cause the problems that I've been seeing with it. It's very important to note that I'm not saying this system is good- I'm just pointing out that the emblem system was categorically worse.
Regarding your example, I don't see how it's better or more accurate for someone to still gain rank when they lose...? I don't think the current system is perfect, I think emblem score should be factored into how far you move up or down, but it seems pretty painfully obvious to me that the criteria the system should look at is whether you win or lose.
0 -
I don't think anyone asked for MMR.
4 -
There were two crucial issues with the emblem system.
-It was great for showing new players the ropes, elevating them when they figured out how to play the game and keeping them low if they didn't, but overall it was much too easy to gain pips by just doing stuff in the match, especially as survivor, and everyone ended up in red ranks eventually. So red ranks meant anything from 'basic competence' to 'actual god' and most players got thrown into an area above their actual skill.
-The matchmaking net was too wide and it'd often match a rank 10 killer with a full rank 1 SWF, or some green and purple solos with a rank 1 killer.
Problem #2 hasn't been fixed at all, and we swapped out problem #1 for a fresh slew of problems (as well as killing the safe zone for newbies that the emblem system was actually good at.)
2 -
I don't think people asked for MMR, just for matches to be more fair. I.E. A day old player should not be playing against a 1000 hour player. That sort of stuff.
3 -
I've literally never had it work properly, so I can only tell you based off my experience. I can only usually play between 11pm-5am EST, and while survivor I get extremely random matchups. As killer I almost exclusively get sweat squads though, which is wrong because I am not very good at killer and generally only play it for dailies/challenges.
The biggest problem then goes back to the "win" metrics. Bad survivors are terrified to do things like get chased on purpose to ruin a killers map pressure, or bring perks like kindred to actually have map knowledge while solo queue. Those same people will crouch walk around doing nothing while you do 3+ gens solo and max out boldness in a match, then let you get one hooked and saunter out the exit gates without even trying to make a save while all 3 are uninjured. The current system flat out encourages that, while punishing players who make strategic sacrifices.
4 -
I don't believe I ever implied that anyone who disagrees with me is bad at the game. I think the new system encourages bad plays while punishing good ones, but "people like me" happen to have varying views and arent the strawmen you make us out to be.
1 -
This is where the flaws do pop up- as I said, I think emblem score should be used to see how far up/down you go after the match- but it is important to note that the system does not encourage anything. It's a matchmaking system, not a ranked ladder- you're not supposed to be playing with it in mind, you're supposed to be playing with things like dailies, archive challenges, emblem score, and any other personal things in mind.
This system isn't particularly good, but the emblem system was noticeably worse.
1 -
By making MMR be based solely off of kills and escapes, they have flat out endorsed it as the win condition. With emblems win conditions were vague enough that they were more personal: my person win condition always revolved around pipping more than kills/escapes. This is where the Hooks>Kills argument for killers comes from, and explains why many killers have instead opted to go for the "facecamp and tunnel to guarantee 1-2 while being happy if you get 3 or 4" style of gameplay that has absolutely surged lately. When people are playing to win with the newly standardized definition, they are effectively making the game less engaging for every one else they play with.
3 -
I really don't know where this idea that the win condition was vague or uncertain came from. Maybe for killer since there are variable numbers, but for survivor the win condition has always been to escape and for killer the win condition has always been based around getting kills?
I always thought the discussions about what counts as a win before were more about proving personal skill, not about what the game's actual win condition is. The win condition is very straightforward and intuitive; escape, or stop them from escaping, respective to your side of the game.
As for "Hooks better than kills", sure, but you obviously can't base the matchmaking system on how many individual hooks the killer gets, so it's a bit irrelevant.
0 -
Rank was based on pips, not escapes/kills. You could pip without getting a 4k, and you could pip without escaping. You could even 2pip in either scenario (though it got less common the higher your rank got.) Likewise you could escape and not pip (or even black pip) if you contributed that little to the outcome of the game. As killer, If you got a 4 man slug and 1 hooked everyone, you would also usually depip.
This is why it had more nuance and was less binary, and actually had more to do with personal skill than the RNG that is the other 4 players. Nobody wants to have a great game and then get told they lost while other players who contributed next to nothing were told they won by exploiting your effort/skill and being carried.
3 -
We actually just asked them to improve it.
It only started massively going down hill when they reduced to reset amount each month. But apparently players who didnt play much and was good went against easier people but in reality they would of just ranked up fast anyway.
Personally I wanted a nerf to altruism or escape emblem (especially through hatch) that would of made the ranking based on chases and efficiency on gens
1 -
Nobody asked for this kind of MMR. Its just another fluke of BHVRs great ideas for improving the game. Every sane player asked for fixes on the emblem system and its correlating matchmaking system. Escpecially the matchmaking had its flaws, but it was still far superior to the actual MMR in analyzing skill levels.
1 -
I'm in the camp that both MMR and emblem systems are bad systems. The problem with the emblem system was that it treated all the killers the same rather than having a different ranking for each killer. It is not fair to punish someone who enjoys playing different killers. This happened to me more times I could count: You play one killer for a while and climb the emblem ranks as that one killer. Then you decided to try a new killer or play a different one you haven't played in a while. Well, you kinda screwed yourself now because now you have to go against better players on a killer you have hardly any exp on and have matches that are mostly one-sided because you don't know the powers of the new killer and have a harder time learning how to play that killer. The emblem system had just as many problems as the MMR system. Neither system is great and I rather see them do a better system than either one of these.
0 -
The emblems punished the killer for their efficiency and they were forced to drag out the match. In my opinion, the emblems associated with hitting survivors and protecting generators were especially affected.
The survivors in the chase suffered the emblem associated with the repair of generators. I would say that the survivor needed to repair too many generators to get a good Objectives emblem. Because of what they did not have time, for example, to participate in the pursuit. And, in my opinion, it would be nice to remake the Survival emblem, as it is quite selfish and does not approve of risk.
1 -
The emblem system was amazing or horrible depending on the killer you played
0 -
Man, the emblem bugs with killers always drove me nuts. Stuff like X killer being virtually unable to improve Y emblem if you played them correctly was a nightmare. Still kinda happens, I think if you use the Pig's iri that has everyone start with their trap on, you pretty much can't earn one of them since it was tied to placing the traps yourself.
0 -
Welp, the problem with the emblem systems were pretty obvious.
You could simply smurf. Be it killer or survivor.
Your killers didn't have different rank scaling meaning if you're a Spirit savant 360 no scope god gamer, but a Trapper lummox your trapper would end up in the same matches as your god gamer spirit. Regardless of how bad you were at Trapper.
You could literally boost your friends by creating inflated scenarios they could profit from.
You could literally just grind your way to the top as survivor while still largely playing like trash.
0 -
I never asked for MMR, so I am good.
1 -
When they tested it first everybody said it is horrible. And the last test was also horrible as i remember.
0 -
So here's the thing. When people were asking about maybe getting an MMR system... people generally thought they were asking for a system that would in fact look at an individual's actions during the match, and accurately figure out how skilled they were. The Emblem system attempted to do that but graded the outcome in such a way that it was a better indicator of how long someone played as opposed to how good they were.
What they definitely weren't asking for is a system based pretty much only kills/escapes that is ridiculously easy to game and encourages everyone to play in the most boring and unfun way possible.
At this point I legitimately think the best way forward is to reenable the ranking system as the matchmaker, add 10 additional ranks that continue the trend of making it harder and harder to pip as you go up, and make it impossible to double pip in said 10 additional ranks.
1 -
If you saw the Q&A they won´t go back.
I hope they maybe can find a working solution but i doubt it.
Same thing as kills/escapes - only the outcome counts - nothing in between.
MMR may work perfectly but the backflling ruins it - the outcome is it is bad and not working.
0 -
Which of those things is meaningfully different now? Truly?
*People openly talk about manipulating their MMR scores to stay at a preferred range of play. The thing is... smurfing was usually looked down on before, but no one can really blame them these days.
*MMR per killer seemingly doesn't exist when (1) there's a relatively small gap between what high MMR and low MMR means, (2) your highest MMR and your lowest MMR killers are tethered together pretty damn tightly anyway, and (3) the matching system goes "well ######### MMR" half the time to just match based on queue times instead.
*You don't even need to create scenarios to boost your friends. It happens whether you want it to or not. Anytime they stay alive because you looped for 5 gens, even if they didn't get any saves or chases, that's them going into a higher bracket for solo play regardless (hence more players manipulating their MMR by intentionally dying or letting people go).
*Like the above situation, you're playing even more like trash to end up at a higher MMR there since it's just surviving compared to whatever "playing like trash" means where pips at least required that interaction.
People always said "rank is just playtime" before, but that was a huge exaggeration outside of SWF... until now. (And I do mean ranks here, not MMR). When you can't really depip and the MMR means you're going against crappier players, its a recipe where everyone playing enough hits iridescent 1.
That's what they want & gained from MMR though. They're free to toss every pretense of match balancing out the window now that a player can't "see" their skill imbalance. Since anything can be paired up, everyone stops pointing out the insanity of iridescent vs ash matches they toss you. Hell, even if those players were balanced normally, it's pretty clear you're gonna get a blowout from a team on their 100th match that week versus someone that hasn't even warmed up. The whole prospect is a joke.
But I've always been a fan of emblems. They just needed more tweaking scoring events per each killer and better weight for alternative match scenarios where there's literally no gen opportunities at all or something because you're tunneling the whole time or something.
This? It doesn't even take a step forward on those problems. Not really.
Current MMR is an insane hybrid that's basically "ALL YOUR CLASSIC PROBLMES, BUT SOMEHOW EVEN WORSE!"
1 -
I actually think it's easier to smurf in the current system. You had to truly not contribute, run at the killer and suicide, or afk in order to pip down - even as killer, never hooking anyone and only hitting to slug could often give a black pip. Now you can play the whole game however you like and then intentionally die at the end or let survivors go and nothing else matters, so you can outright smurf while you play - spend the whole game trolling the other team and then die to EGC or force survivors out the gate. The only part of smurfing that's harder is instant DCing, and there was always a cap on how much you could do that anyway.
Also, the killer MMR difference is capped so low that it may as well not exist. It's not very impactful. If I have a base MMR of 1500 but I'm an actual trash heap Nurse, can't land blinks, swing at walls, survivors 4e every time, my Nurse can't go below 1300.
3 -
I only would want the old system back if and only if they make it where all the killers have different rankings instead of sharing one. My biggest complaint about the emblem system was it treated killers like survivors. All killers don't play the same so they shouldn't be ranked the same since your skill with one killer will be different than another.
0 -
The old system was far from perfect, but it took much more into account than the current one. The problem that both systems suffer from is matchmaking. It doesn't matter how great your system is if their aren't enough players of a similar skill to match up with. Behavior all but admitted this when MMR is tossed out in favor of short que times. Until Behavior finds a way to draw in new player AND retain them, any MMR system they implement is doomed to fail.
1 -
Oh thats... yeah I forgot that the Emblem system kinda screwed over certain killers... specifically the Chaser emblem with Plague and most Insta Down killers. Yeah they'd need to edit it to handle the different killers differently. That's a good point and something I forgot about because I don't play those killers.
0 -
The emblem system didn't accurately represent skill. Players, especially survivors, could rank up way to easily. This led players to thinking they were better than they actually were, and the matches would be mismatched because you could reach red ranks just from playing a lot, regardless of your skill. This, of course, led to a lot of calls for nerfs and/or buffs based on a misconception of a power imbalance.
That said, all of the information and tools were in the emblem system to create a true skill based system, they really just needed to tweak the numbers. When the devs said they were working on a skill based MMR system, everyone was excited. I don't think anyone expected them to take the route they took and give us a system that was even less based on skill.
0 -
Unpopular take: But after listening to the full Q&A, I understand why BHVR goes with kills versus no kills. The hockey analogy wasn't good, but they did succinctly explain why hooks wasn't a good metric in any scenario, and why looping for 5 gens in an isolated game isn't a good metric either.
I don't like the current MMR because it's currently not working (Game is matching me with complete potatoes, even when I'm on a very long win streak as killer), but if they fixed the issues it currently has, and implement team impacted MMR like they stated they're thinking of doing, I do think it would be the most accurate MMR they could pull off.
0
