"Was it really a skilled play to begin with?"
Comments
-
I'm well aware what his point is. Are you aware of my point? That at the end of the day, the outcome that you expect makes no sense from an algorithmic perspective. And I'm saying this as a professional in the industry for 20+ years.
If you think it makes sense, then please explain it. As yet, no-one has, and I daresay it's because you cannot explain it, and therein is the problem.
To boil it down into logic terms, he's saying X1. I'm saying X->Y (i.e. X leads to Y) and Y is undesireable. He then clarifies with X2. It's the same thing, X->Y. Y is undesireable, and X leads to Y, so how can you advocate for any flavour of X when it leads to Y which you don't want.
You can step to me with any flavour of X, but if it all leads to Y, and you don't want Y, then it's the same problem which you guys are failing to see (whilst at the same time so sure of yourselves that you see everything clearly despite clearly not being able to understand it).
If you understood what he said, then it makes sense. His point was that if you are that skilled, you'd be escaping more often and thus your ratings would rise. There's always be anomalous games for whatever reason, but for skilled players that won't buck the trend.
What an insightful observation. Did it take both of your brain cells to work that out?
The devs don't believe it works? Interesting... because the last update from the devs that I recall was that it works exactly as designed. The escape/death ratio is 50/50 which is exactly the outcome the system was designed to produce.
So please enlighten us to how this isn't working when the numbers demonstrate that it very definitely is?
aka "I can't answer your simple question because my own logic makes no sense to me, so I'll look for the first excuse to escape from having to explain myself"
Yup... common trait of the ignorant.
The pips only rank how you did in terms of objectives in the game, and has nothing to do with your correlation with your opponent, hence it makes little sense to use them to determine who your opponent should be. Should a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to escape from the same as a 2-pip vs a killer you were expected to die to be considered the same?
1 -
Seem like they went back on it and decided it work.
0 -
That was a funny comparison, because we do base hockey players on individual skill to determine their worth. You can find game statistics determining NHL stat leaders, with all contributing factors (points, goals, power play percentage, penalty minutes, ETC, and whole other factors for goal tenders).
2 -
The community is so happy about that!
Oh wait...
2 -
A killer who's power revolves around chasing, catching a survivor off guard, after they were sandbagged? After not being injured at all until Claudette had been hooked, farmed, and rehooked after having been flashlight saved too? Yeah forgive me for daring to go down at some point within a game.
This Nemesis was definitely the more skilled player.
(no exhaustion perks equipped, btw)
5 -
I’m dead over you calling Jeff Steve 😭
1 -
You cannot argue from a base position that flagrantly refuses your opposition's argument.
Karu is saying that the system is an inadequate measurer of skill.
Your counterargument is the following:
It's a simple enough question... do you believe that a killer who achieved their objective (in your case) should face easier survivors so they can continue killing them (and thus go against easier opponents again), whilst you - even though you died and failed as a survivor (in a clinical sense) - should go against more adept killers, where you'd likely continue to die?
Your argument survives only on the presupposition that the system's assessment of skill is correct. However, take this specific match into account and invert your question:
Should this Nemesis, who struggled to get 4 hooks out over the course of the entire match, despite help from a Steve and a Claudette, be made to face more challenging opponents?
Should Karu, who ran the killer for a 2 gen sprint -after- the team had been substantially slowed down, go up against easier killers?
Your argument isn't logical. It hinges on the exact point that Karu is trying to argue: The skill assessment in this system does not serve its intended purpose.
IF you go off the assumption that 'kill = good' and 'die = bad', and that that is all the nuance this game possesses, then yes, your argument holds water. But that's exactly the assumption that Karu is pulling into question here. And I think that the majority of players will side with Karu on this matter.
12 -
IN MY DEFENCE I'd played for a bit and it was like half 1 in the morning my brain was mush + I'd been sandbagged by a Steve in an earlier game so I got confused 😭💅
4 -
"Common trait of the ignorant" you're yet to make a proper point about the topic or disprove any of mine my guy I'd be very careful who you're calling ignorant. @Firellius put it very well so do us all a favour and read that since you cba to read mine 🏃
4 -
Imagine a system that really meassured skill. Since roughly downing someone at end game and killing them by facecamping doesn't take much skill, that nemmy would next be faced against worse players who are less likely to survive so it would actually reward Nemesis with an easier facecamp game.
I get karu's point and I never liked the sbmm system, but that Killer did get a 2 kills and should face survivors that make it harder the next time, something like a swf.
What really sucks is the fact that you are getting behind. Some would think that if you dealt with the killer pretty well until you died, you can do it again in the next match and survive since the killer will have lower mmr. Problem is, your teammates will have lower mmr too.
I think the old ranking system was better, it was terrible, but it was better.
1 -
When I first entered the post I thought they were making fun of the nemesis because he was "hiding" behind the tree. I thought it hilarious.
Then I realized they weren't even making fun of nemesis but of the definition of skill on this game.
But for some reason a lot of responses still seem to be fixated on whether the nemesis is right or not for camping.
It was funnier when I thought it was about the stealthy nemesis xD
2 -
They really, *really* shouldn't have used the word "skill" at any point during their MMR shenanigans...
As for the discussion, I can see both points. The current system lacks nuance and thus many skillful plays (for both killer and survivor) aren't directly taken into consideration. It's very frustrating to know that all of your effort in a game can be reduced to nothing if you don't meet the final objective (this feels worse as a survivor, to me and I think many others but it still can apply to killer too).
On the flip side, maybe looking at MMR as a win or lose isn't the right way to go about it. The way it's designed (when it works and isn't being stretched thin because of queue times) would allow you to play the way you want and eventually you'll reach a place where the odds of a "victory" are about even. The people who make risky plays should reach a level where they can make those plays and escape whereas those who play extremely safe should reach a point where they can't keep getting away with it.
Honestly I don't really know how I sit with the system anymore. I just play trials and try not to care about whether I get many kills or get through an exit gate.
1 -
I completely understood what Patrick said
I just don't think he's right
6 -
"the Devs themselves in their own quotes over the past 2 years don't even believe that it works but they invested into it so they have to play along to save face."
My guy either you're either being willfully ignorant or you're just that blind to the facts. You guys constantly try to pass this off as people 'not understanding' the formula when the formula has never been the focal point. People aren't upset because they don't understand how it works, they're upset because they waited two years for a 'complex system that will vastly improve everybody's game experience and provide more accurate results than the past prototype' yet we're literally dealing with the same exact matches we already dealt with before. If they were just going to use the SAME exact system they scrapped (Kills/Escapes) after publicly admitting that they scrapped that for being a bad idea then there shouldn't be the world Skill in the name since that's clearly not the metric being tracked.
X1 = Y is not a viable long-term system and by all means continue to justify it despite the majority not supporting what you say. No it objectively doesn't work, check the dwindling player base on steam-charts in the middle of content drops, the thousands of negative messages that pop up in Discord if you search the #gamediscussion channel for SBMM, the hundreds of comments on Facebook and these forums that don't enjoy it, the biggest content creators that don't support the system which includes players sponsored by BHVR themselves..... The title is named SKILL BASED match making and yet the majority of the player base is constantly uploading photo/video/anecdotal evidence to show how people near or at the MMR cap are not as skilled as the rest of the lobby. I guess you also missed the time BHVR was quoted directly saying right here on these very forums that the reason the system was taking long to implement is because they're working hard to make sure it uses multiple metrics unlike their previous prototype. "We had a prototype we used in the past that we didn't feel was accurate. After extensive testing we came to the realization that using Kills and Escapes to rate players led to bad results so we scrapped it". We were told to be patient as the testing day for this new system was coming soon. This was the time period where for the 3 day testing period nobody could see ranks at the end of a lobby, ques were longer than normal and each Killer started with separate values. They're using that same exact system they scrapped right now, so exactly like I said they're doubling back on their own word to save face because they've invested a lot already
If the system isn't leading to an increase in fun, population or overall positive content in the community then no, it objectively doesn't work. Its not hard to make a system that at the minimum accounts for time spent in chase, hooks obtained, downs and gens/totems completed as opposed to just X and Y. These are professionals that get paid very well to do this, perhaps if the work is 'too hard' to pull off then maybe next time don't go public talking about a grand system coming soon that'll fix the issue everybody has. We're in 2022 and I'm still here having to explain to a 'professional' of 20 years that context matters in DBD, a game dominated by RNG... The looper that mind-games tiles accurately for extended durations, gets flashlight saves, unhooks and multiple gens should be rewarded more than the Locker-hugging Dwight that did half a gen and 1 totem. You guys keep arguing this point then act surprised that people are quitting left and right over it
6 -
Careful BHVR might just take all your Quiten skins away
0 -
Oh no my 0 Quentin skins whatever will I do.
(ik this is a reference to that one content creator who I can't mention, but if they actually took away paid content I'd be pretty upset lol)
4 -
You have clearly been outskilled here, sir!
3 -
Me and I have the exact same build just removed iron will for provethyself😎
0 -
Clearly in your hockey match you missed out on the shootouts (or whatever they are called, Idk hockey enough) you needed to throw your hockey stick and beat him up.
Jokes aside, I see that what the nemesis is doing is just plain old outskill playstyle, clearly you should play with worse teammates because he facecamping you to death = you are bad, MMR working as intended...... In a horrible way.
2
