The game is survivor sided
Comments
-
He should have specified : "a perk or mechanic that wasn't utterly broken to begin with" ...
0 -
Always has been,killer is rarely fun to play.
2 -
Still more evidence than the 'game is survivor-sided' theory.
2 -
Broad data is no evidence.
For this to have any meaning, it should be split by recent game time (as experience can drop) for both sides, SWF games, solo games (and all shades between them) and MMR brackets.
Distributing the games between all these categories can change the value and meaning of these numbers significantly.
2 -
My solo q games, beg to differ, but ok.
3 -
I've always said the following, and I think anyone that has played Killer and survivor will agree:
Solo Survivor --> Killer --> SWF. In order of weakest to strongest.
No, the game isn't survivor sided, it's SWF sided. If a killer is vsing solo survivors or 2-man SWF with solos they have a decent likelihood of winning if they don't totally suck.
Killer players and solo survivors should never expect to win every single match. Find ways to have fun in the game without having to "win". Otherwise, if winning is that important to you play sweaty in a SWF (Or play Blight with ruin undying tinkerer BBQ and make every solo queue surv want to uninstall)
2 -
While I agree with this. I really wonder what's the devs plan with killers after they lifted up solos to the same information level as SWF.
Stats showed that SWF has a 15% higher escape rate. Now if solos reach the same level, the devs obviously need to do something for killers. At least when they want to continue with their 2 kills, 2 escapes balancing.
2 -
Broad data is really weak evidence, but it is still evidence.
Again, it's more than the 'game is survivor-sided' theory has, which has never presented any evidence, weak or otherwise.
Stats showed that SWF has a 15% higher escape rate. Now if solos reach the same level, the devs obviously need to do something for killers.
Not necessarily. If Swiffers are at 50% escape rate and solos are at 35% escape rate, then bringing solos up to par with Swiffers wouldn't warrant any buff for the killer side.
Swiffers having a 15% higher escape rate does not immediately indicate them as being OP, since it's not benchmarked.
1 -
I have a theory as to why they don't buff killer perks a lot. Because of Nurse, the one killer who can take something as mediocre as starstruck and turn it into a deadly threat. Those few nurse gods who are unstoppable can make the best out of any perk because of her ability to ignore everything involving pallets, walls, and windows.
2 -
Are you talking about me?
0 -
DS, Balanced Landing, Self-Care (and the additional changes around them). But like ngl I had to do some digging to find a third. Needed nerfs to the survivor side are very far in between, and even then it's to a problematic perk and game mechanics based around them.
1 -
The last stats showed kill rates of roughly 50%. Now either the amount of solos is so high, that it drags down the SWF escape rate. In which case the balancing is far off the desired levels. Or the amount of SWF is so high, that it pulls up the escape rate. Which than begs the question, why voice chat isn´t a inbuild game feature, when so many people use an external voice chat.
One way or another, we would be in for some hefty changes.
3 -
All the statistics are saying is that, in the grand scheme of things, there is some kind of balance. It may be heavily influenced by new players not staying long, or the opposite : it could mean anything and thus means nothing.
I'm not saying there were strong evidences presented for the other side of the argument. This is however the obvious conclusion anyone reaches after having played for a long time. Note that it doesn't matter to me anymore. I've given up on the game months ago. I use it as a party game while debating in Among Us (or any other game with action down-time) and that's all.
You are assuming bringing solo up to SWFs will not buff the SWFs too.
Meanwhile, the game is steadily bleeding players and the queues keep increasing. The trend will probably stop with the Ring release before resuming a month later. I doubt they'll ever fix high-MMR gameplay for killers. I don't think they can.
2 -
I mean, if we're going by that, then the nerfs he listed for killer falls into the same category.
0 -
I can't say much for their programmers, but they definitely need more testers. Honestly, that's an issue with almost every game developer out there these days. At least they let the players test out features, but they have to also be open to hearing criticism from their consumers (us) and be open to the critique we bring to the table. Can't make a game and expect the consumers to just be happy with the product.
Regardless, the game isn't balanced and it's survivor sided only because all survivors play the same. It's easier to learn survivor than it is whichever killer you choose to play as since they all play differently. Then you have 4vs1...
More testing, more ideas, collaborate with thr community, don't rush things. Those are my suggestions.
0 -
Each of those were changed for a good reason.....
DS was changed because it's a anti tunnel perk so if your doing a Gen or breaking a totem or healing a survivor your not being chased or tunneled.
The Hatch rework was done to keep players from just sitting by the hatch all game once it spawns to get it and not do objectives and also to stop full teams getting out by just doing a few Gens and have a Key.
Technically it was Boon effect stacking was removed. It was too unfair having 4 different stacks of CoH each adding thier bonus on Survivors.
Each of those changes were done to keep them from being abused.....
0 -
As are most, if not all killer perk changes, but that wasn't what was asked. 99% of balancing decisions on both sides revolve around trying to minimize abuse, or because something was released in a ridiculous state, either ridiculously powerful or ridiculously weak. However, that realization isn't nearly as much fun as claiming that the devs for some reason just have it out for a bunch of their own paying customers, be they killers or survivors.
0 -
I'm not saying there were strong evidences presented for the other side of the argument. This is however the obvious conclusion anyone reaches after having played for a long time.
It's the conclusion anyone *on this forum* reaches. But these forums will also bend over backwards to discredit any evidence to the contrary, so it's not like these people are devoid of serious bias.
0 -
I mean, killers can already deal with SWF. I don't think buffing solos is gonna hurt them much.
1 -
15% higher escape rate is hefty.
If a killer had 15% higher kill rate, then the next patch would contain some hefty nerfs.
3 -
I don't look at stats that are never accurate.
0 -
Some where, yes.
I'm not looking at this forum. I'm rarely here myself. I'm looking at the best players of the game who have played it for a long time.
0 -
So aggregate data does not qualify as evidence, but the opinion of select individuals does?
How do you know they're the best players, and why only look at that level?
0 -
I have to agree even tho I always played surv more.
All it takes is 4 decent survivors to beat a decent killer. If survivors are messing around you get kill rates we have now.
1 -
Not at low MMR no. At high MMR you'll feel like it's a SWF every game.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Oh sorry, let me get someone more tasteful:
As it's been said, you have to be more skilled as a killer than they are as a survivor to win the match, the problem is that the learning curve for killers is far higher and individual to each killer.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
I guess you dont even play the game anymore.
0 -
Yes, broad raw data doesn't mean anything. The devs have told so many times by the way. If this fact doesn't register, I cannot help you with this.
You look at the highest ranked players in the charts and listen what they say and their arguments.
Don't worry about it. You'll get it yourself in a couple thousand of hours I guess.
0 -
Again: How do you know they're the best players, since MMR is hidden?
Also again: Why only look at that level?
0 -
You don't know the DbD charts? Have you ever watched a tournament?
Do I really need to state that it would be foolish to look the game from the point of view of beginners?
0 -
That's the thing with BHVR. They don't care about how good the actual game is. They just talk about the art style, the lore, the fanbase, how satisfying the tbags look, and how good of a job they did.
0 -
We don't need beginners. But we also don't need the absolute top. Strictly top-down balancing makes for an unplayable and unlikeable mess.
Imagine a game where one side wins by default, and the other side wins if they make a number of frame-perfect inputs in sequence. At the absolute top level, side A would probably lose, but everywhere else, side B would lose.
Is it reasonable to disregard all other levels of play and state that, at complete top performance, side B wins, and thus the game, as a whole, is B-sided?
0 -
It still yes.
0 -
Yeah, it is.
0 -
Yup.
Either play the 10% of the killer roster that can compete, or lose if the survivors have any skill.
0
