Game balance conclusion
When you enter a match there are 2 options given to you :
Either you will suck the whole match or you will be too good for the match
There is no in-between... If the killer doesn't put pressure on him, it's you thats put pressure on him.
And I don't unerstand how in a horror gae you are allowed as a victim to put pressure on the killers/villains/"the personne you are supposed to be scared off"
Comments
-
That's not much of a conclusion. What are your arguments?
And what do you mean by put pressure on? It's absolutely in line with the genre for survivors to be doing everything they can to get away from the killer. If you mean bullying, you just need to get better at killer. Once you get to be a decent killer, survivors trying to bully you turns into survivors throwing pretty quickly.
0 -
You actually nailed it already: If the killer is not able to put pressure on the survivor, they get the oportunity to do that on the killer. The nature of the game is designed that way.
And I don't unerstand how in a horror gae you are allowed as a victim to put pressure on the killers/villains/"the personne you are supposed to be scared off"
Because there would not be any game if that was not the case? Imagine survivors would die all the time it would be super frustrating for survivors and boring for the killer. DBD would not have survived more then 3 months.
0 -
From my experience in solo queue, it generally feels like there's two more skilled survivors and two less skilled survivors in each team. The killer will match with either pairing - so they'll either be too strong for half the team and on par with the other half, or too weak for half and on par with the rest. That's how it feels anyway. Not sure if it's actually accurate.
0 -
There is an in-between. It's just very rare. Every so often you will have a pretty close game. But honestly I think this is better than the alternative for most players. When MMR was first introduced many players were extremely unhappy with how their matches felt (myself among them). The devs have done a lot fine tuning since and I think it's very much comparable to the old emblem system now.
You could face either the sweaty Blight main with 4 meta perks and C33 and Alch Ring or play against a Padded Jaws Trapper. This makes the game a lot less stale and repetitive than the alternative. Most of us don't like it when we only have the option to sweat or to get stomped by default, so having a more unpredictable matchmaking at least makes it feel like you don't know the outcome before the match even starts.
With that being said, I reckon it would feel a lot better, if the game didn't currently pace at break neck speed. I don't think there was a time over the last 3 years, when matches where overall shorter. This makes the whole "stomp or get stomped" experience feel even worse. I have had some matches before where one side seemingly achieved very little but could have easily turned it around, if the game had went on for a few more minutes. If these game weren't quite that short, it would result in less "stompy" games.
0 -
According to Peanits (https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3591596#Comment_3591596) whatever metric the developers use to judge a match to be "balanced" is giving them the statistics that enough matches are balanced to where they believe that SBMM is working. Not sure how it is possible to prove them wrong without the data. Sure, every high level player knows that the overwhelming vast majority of trials played are super one-sided either for the killer or the survivors, but that's not the proof that we need right now.
0
