Perk amounts and tier difference between opposing players is a BALANCE ISSUE!

Incarnate

As I have made known at many occasions, is that perks amounts and tier differences between opposing players is a balance issue, on a FUNDAMENTAL level.

@Janick - I'd like you and others from the team to review this, consider it and provide some feedback on it.

First of all, I'd like to point out that Dave Richards on devstream #59 said that addons, equipment and perks affect performance hugely, so obviously this means that it can affect game balance hugely. This also means that perk amounts and the tier differences between opposing players will affect the game balance hugely. Now, every character is fundamentally limited by character level how many perks slots they have unlocked and thus available for them to use. This means already here at this point the game becomes imbalanced in regards to perk amounts, because the perk slots that are unlocked and available for use, is defined by character levels.

Well..., why is perk amount differences between opposing players a problem? Glad you asked, that is a problem because it directly affects how many perks a player can bring into a trial, and thus it's directly contributing to the players performance, but at the same time also the imbalance in regards to perk amount differences between opposing players. Which also why we see players only bringing only one or few perks, because they cannot bring any more, but still can be matched against players that have brought the full amount of perks. If ALL the players in a trial bring an equal amount of what they each can bring, then it's much closer to being balanced.

I also mentioned perk tier differences is an issue, which does not take a genius to figure out that if there is problem with the amounts between opposing players, then there also is a problem between the opposing players perk tiers. But why is that specifically? The various tiers can be considered as the strength/power of which they can impact the intended game balance in any given trial with. So with the three different tiers, each progressively more powerful than the one before, then with each tier level it will affect progressively affect the power of which they impact the game balance with in any given trial.

So..., why is the perk tier differences between opposing players a problem? Glad you asked, this is a problem because it just as with the perk amounts, it too directly contributes to the performance of a player, so when there is a difference between the perk tiers that inherently creates an imbalance, the greater the perk tier difference the greater the imbalance.

The perk amounts and tier differences both further aggravates the problem with imbalance between opposing players.
So how can this be solved to create a somewhat closer and balance? To fix this several things needs to be done, and is of high importance for the games overall balance.

I've also attempted to debunk this with actual numbers in the post here: https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/15380/an-attempt-to-debunk-why-matchmaking-is-broken-or-so-it-seems-in-my-opinion

1st Fix
Remove the character slot limitations - unlock all slots from level 1 - this will solve the perk tier amount difference between opposing players. If players don't bring a full amount of perks, the game balance will not be to blame for it but is the respective player's own fault.

2nd Fix
Remove the perk tiers, which solves the perks tier differences between opposing players. This means that every perk will now in relation to each other be able to impact the trials with a somewhat equal power. I suggest using the tier 3 version of each perk as the only perk for each perk.

How will removing the perk tiers impact the rarity system and how can it be fixed?
Removing the perk tiers will affect the rarity system, so it will need to be adjusted to better reflect the new amount of perks and their rarity. It's also very likely that you can add variance to the perks, so that they will exist in different variations, which in turn could be used to great effect with the rarity system.

Another alternative instead of doing the two above fixes would be to have perk amounts and tier differences also be made so it affects matchmaking, which I suspect would be a great deal more difficult to and would most certainly also affect queue times negatively.

Master

Its a design issue.
I still dont know why BHVR believes that this is sth they wanna achieve

Incarnate

@Master said:
Its a design issue.
I still dont know why BHVR believes that this is sth they wanna achieve

It's an issue created by bad design. But I guess you could say it's both a design issue and a game balance issue, as they're tied with one another. The weird thing is that it was stated on devstream #59, and in stating it they're acknowledging that it affects this way, and yet they haven't done anything to try and fix this. Bandaid solutions isn't enough, as it is a fundamental issue, so to solve it they have to make fundamental changes that directly affects the issue, changes like those I suggested.

Master

@Incarnate said:

@Master said:
Its a design issue.
I still dont know why BHVR believes that this is sth they wanna achieve

It's an issue created by bad design. But I guess you could say it's both a design issue and a game balance issue, as they're tied with one another. The weird thing is that it was stated on devstream #59, and in stating it they're acknowledging that it affects this way, and yet they haven't done anything to try and fix this. Bandaid solutions isn't enough, as it is a fundamental issue, so to solve it they have to make fundamental changes that directly affects the issue, changes like those I suggested.

In the stream "playing with devs" where they mentioned that not all killers are meant to be viable (repeated during the legion disaster) I realized that I can give up when it comes to proper balancing in DBD. Its simply not gonna happen

powerbats

@Incarnate said:

@Master said:
Its a design issue.
I still dont know why BHVR believes that this is sth they wanna achieve

It's an issue created by bad design. But I guess you could say it's both a design issue and a game balance issue, as they're tied with one another. The weird thing is that it was stated on devstream #59, and in stating it they're acknowledging that it affects this way, and yet they haven't done anything to try and fix this. Bandaid solutions isn't enough, as it is a fundamental issue, so to solve it they have to make fundamental changes that directly affects the issue, changes like those I suggested.

Well they've also acknowledged that they want to make those changes but that's not going to happen quickly though since if everything gets changed at once it'd be too great an upheaval. Think of it not as band aid fixes but as gradual changes to fix things without breaking other things.

You also have the code changes due to the ahem spaghetti code which is why they've went to the new Unreal Engine. That allows them to do more coding related stuff and change more stuff at the same time without breaking too many things at once.

The issue with perk tiers is if you change them t just 1 tier you take away the power of leveling and advancement. The bloodweb at that point becomes kinda meaningless as a gate because now you've got no way to burn off that excess bp that has any real meaning.

If you keep tiers but lower the difference between them too much you risk homogenization too much to where it becomes stale. You could probably tweak addons power with certain perks easier probably but then you've got the other issues.The ones player level difference, experience, familiarity with the character they're playing and their perks etc.

Fix 1 is a great idea you'd still have the issue with tier levels.which you address in fix 2.

Fix 2 is also good but if you go full tier III to say a level 20 character level I they get the power and benefit of a top of the line perk but without the knowledge. The advantage to the tier levels now is that they get to level up as the player does in game knowledge.

As you realized fixing the issues with 1 and 2 might either be impossible or just really difficult which leads to a cost benefit analysis. It might end up being that instead of the current system with tweak like you suggest a new and improved system in it's place is better.

Incarnate

@powerbats said:
Well they've also acknowledged that they want to make those changes but that's not going to happen quickly though since if everything gets changed at once it'd be too great an upheaval. Think of it not as band aid fixes but as gradual changes to fix things without breaking other things.

I know, but this devstream was over 1½ year ago, and they haven't done anything remotely to alleviate the issue, instead they've just made it worse by piling more onto it. They could easily have done fix #2, and that wouldn't even need to have been done gradually they could pretty much just make the change and roll it out.

@powerbats said:
You also have the code changes due to the ahem spaghetti code which is why they've went to the new Unreal Engine. That allows them to do more coding related stuff and change more stuff at the same time without breaking too many things at once.

Just because they went from the unreal engine to the newest unreal engine, doesn't mean that the code was bad because of the engine, or they lacked various features to fix these issues - if the code was bad it was because they had made bad code, nothing else. In fact I know enough about code to know, that they could quite easily have fixed this without having to shift a to a newer game engine to get features that would allow them to fix it, because they made it this way, so they could most definitely change it. You see this was more a question of if they wanted to change it, which I think they did not want to, and there could be several reasons. One them could quite easily be because they didn't want to change the game too much as that might actually piss off a lot of the players, even if it was to make it more balanced.

@powerbats said:
The issue with perk tiers is if you change them t just 1 tier you take away the power of leveling and advancement. The bloodweb at that point becomes kinda meaningless as a gate because now you've got no way to burn off that excess bp that has any real meaning.

Maybe so in regards to levelling, however they could just as easily have made different variations of the same perk, WITHOUT making it progressingly more powerful, but instead make perks that were variants of the primary perk that were equally strong and viable in their own right. This would also open up for more diversity in perk builds, strategies and playstyles.

@powerbats said:
If you keep tiers but lower the difference between them too much you risk homogenization too much to where it becomes stale. You could probably tweak addons power with certain perks easier probably but then you've got the other issues.The ones player level difference, experience, familiarity with the character they're playing and their perks etc.

It would still be imbalanced, just less imbalanced, so it wouldn't solve the problem.

@powerbats said:
Fix 1 is a great idea you'd still have the issue with tier levels.which you address in fix 2.

Glad you find it to be a great idea.

@powerbats said:
Fix 2 is also good but if you go full tier III to say a level 20 character level I they get the power and benefit of a top of the line perk but without the knowledge. The advantage to the tier levels now is that they get to level up as the player does in game knowledge.

First of all, the primary difference between perk tiers is that they become progressively better and stronger with each tier, which primarily is reflected in changes in its values - which means there is no real difference in HOW you use the perk, but there is a difference in HOW WELL it performs. Furthermore, you could be getting the next tiers for the same perks as you within a few bloodwebs, where especially on the low levels you could be getting tier 3 relatively quick WITHOUT the knowledge in HOW to use them and how to use them most efficiently. Also it's quite irrelevant when they get it from the bloodweb as it should be their skill and knowledge of the game, that should be dictating how well they perform, not the tiers of the perks they use.
Furthermore, as I explained above, instead of making the perks progressively stronger (which creates imbalance), they could and should in my opinion be making variants of the primary perks that are equally strong and viable in their own right for already mentioned reasons.

@powerbats said:
As you realized fixing the issues with 1 and 2 might either be impossible or just really difficult which leads to a cost benefit analysis. It might end up being that instead of the current system with tweak like you suggest a new and improved system in it's place is better.

You're assuming something here, because I never said or implied that, I even pointed something out that would imply that I think what I suggested in fix #1 and #2 would be the best fixes overall than the alternative. The reason I gave the alternative was IF they don't want to go with the suggested route of fixing it, which it seems like considering this is something that has been pointed out early on and that they've made statements that indicates they acknowledge this issue, and quite clearly have done nothing to fix it - so I suggested an alternative which is actually much harder , difficult and complicated to do, and will affect queue times detrimentally.

powerbats

@Incarnate said:

You're assuming something here, because I never said or implied that, I even pointed something out that would imply that I think what I suggested in fix #1 and #2 would be the best fixes overall than the alternative. The reason I gave the alternative was IF they don't want to go with the suggested route of fixing it, which it seems like considering this is something that has been pointed out early on and that they've made statements that indicates they acknowledge this issue, and quite clearly have done nothing to fix it - so I suggested an alternative which is actually much harder , difficult and complicated to do, and will affect queue times detrimentally.

I'm not assuming or implying anything merely pointing out the issues that may arise if they went with the last option.

As i said they're aware of the issues but the problems aren't going to be easy ones to fix and they're going to take the slow approach now to avoid problems like with the Clown release and store launch as well as with the latest changes.

They stated this am that they intend to slow down the major releases but do updates more often but in smaller sizes to minimize disruptions.

DemonDaddy

The fact that any power/perk/tier/item/addon can be brought in almost randomly creates a balanced match. By not knowing the variables before a match, everyone starts with knowledge equivalent to one anothers. Your loadout is a measure of effort and skill with a limited resource which expands as you invest bp. Its all part of progression & prestige. If you don't spend the time & points to maximize your loadout options, your not playing with a full deck. People had to earn the high tiers and slots, taking out the grind only reduces the game to even fewer elements by issuing impatient players a handout.

Incarnate

@DemonDaddy said:
The fact that any power/perk/tier/item/addon can be brought in almost randomly creates a balanced match. By not knowing the variables before a match, everyone starts with knowledge equivalent to one anothers. Your loadout is a measure of effort and skill with a limited resource which expands as you invest bp. Its all part of progression & prestige. If you don't spend the time & points to maximize your loadout options, your not playing with a full deck. People had to earn the high tiers and slots, taking out the grind only reduces the game to even fewer elements by issuing impatient players a handout.

That doesn't make balance in any way, just because you don't know what others have doesn't make it balanced, and starting with the same knowledge equivalent to one another still doesn't make it balanced either.

The whole part about having to progress to higher tiers and more slots, is EXACTLY one of the reasons why it's imbalanced. You can only get more blood points by playing, so you're forced to play with less than a full deck against others who're very likely to have a full deck, and might even be fully tiered, and this is exactly where it's imbalanced, when there is a difference between opposing players perk amounts and tiers. Again you can only gain blood points by playing so you will be for the most part be playing at a disadvantage in terms of game balance.

This is isn't a matter of patience or lack thereof, but a matter of actual game imbalance.

DemonDaddy

@Incarnate
For a ranked setting, I think having to use only what you have earned is the best method of balance. Player are required to gain skill prior to relying on perks to solve issues. A win is possible without perks, much harder, but possible. Guard railing based on limitations is a feature for the matching system not the base aspects of competitive play.
If the difference is to much;
To that I would have to say, yes the learning curve is steep for new players. Having to learn different tactics while working with less adds to the difficulty,  but thats a reason the game needs a more solid matching system. Newer players need more time to learn and earn points before being tossed in with the vets & their full loadouts. I want them to get what they need, but at the same time not flip the bird to everyone that had to seriously invest time to get those decked loadouts.

Side note: I know its tough, I have eight Killers level 50 and have horrible perk loadouts most average no higher than tier 2. It sucks but just means I have to rely on skill and not my loadouts to apply pressure