How would you define a balanced match?

Beatricks

Hey everyone, looking for your input!

I'm going to do some stat collecting for a 100 SoloQ games and besides the obvious stuff (killers, perks etc) I wanted to find some method to judge whether a particular trial was balanced or if it was a completely one-sided demolition. Obviously, the SBMM algorithm is only concerned with escapes and kills where a 2k would be the most balanced that you can possibly get. Still, with killers that can snowball and capitalize on a mistake that can potentially win them a game that they would have otherwise lost is a rather tricky subject to handle.

I can track hook states and gens completed and I can evaluate the trial based on my 3k hours in the game to give as objective of a look at it as possible, but I wanted to hear what other people thought in case they can suggest something I didn't think of.

With the Chucky hype slowly dying down, tome challenges getting completed and the winter event not yet starting, I feel like now is the perfect time to get a feel of how good of a job SBMM does under normal circumstances.

rha

For me personally, a balanced match would be one where both sides make steady progress without the match becoming pointless for one side early on because you're going to lose. In that sense, hook states and gens completed would probably be a good indicator already (at least I can't think of anything better right now).

I wonder if SBMM would be a little bit better if it would also include this in its calculations. I'm fine with escape/kill determining whether MMR goes up or down, but currently a killer who wrecks the survivors at 5 gens leaving them absolutely no chance is the same to the MMR system as a killer who the survivors are running circles around and when he gets his first hook of the match because of NOED a while into EGC he gets a 4k thanks to Bloodwarden.

If a killer gets only a single kill but had a lot of pressure and got everyone else on death hook, I'd say it was balanced enough so don't let the killer lose as much MMR as if he face camped his first hook in endgame. Similarly for survivors, if they got all gens done but got unlucky in the endgame, then maybe the match wasn't as bad as when they got wrecked instantly and another match with the same players would end up with the survivors winning.

Would be interesting to know if they had experimented with that and found it didn't lead to better games.

egg_

If I win (3/4 out or 4k depending on the side I was on), it was balanced

Otherwise game's clearly broken

Grigerbest

For me it can be even 0k with 8 hooks.

I define a match as balanced when both sides has a pretty close and tough game. Such games for me are MOST FUN!

I mean, it's pretty obvious tbh. If you "stomp" or you got "stomped" for various reasons aside from your skill (map or killer) - it's not what you can call - "Balanced match".

With recent MMR changes, I'm started to get more of those tough games. But I'm not complaining even slightest, unless I played against legit subtle cheaters.

Marc_go_solo

Balance is a great deal to do with hook states, gens, kills and such. However, another sign of balance is something you can't easily measure and that's the performance in things such as chases, tactics and enjoyment.

I would say to add how much you enjoyed the game alongside everything else.

Nazzzak

I guess maybe the death/escape count, hook count, and how many gens completed? If it's a 4k at 5 gens or a 4e with little to no hooks then I wouldn't consider those to be balanced games. There's obviously other smaller factors at play but it'd be difficult or even impossible to accurately track them all, so..

Xernoton

Easy 4k at 5 gens sounds pretty balanced to me. 😈

Seriously though, that's something I don't think you can define by numbers alone. It can be a perfectly balanced match until one tiny slip up happens and the game just ends.

I'd say it's a balanced match when there are a lot of back and forths with both sides playing similarly effective. That doesn't necessarily mean, that a match in which 4 gens pop by the time the killer gets their 2nd hook is unbalanced, because after that it can still very much turn around with all survivors dying before the last gen is completed. Ideally both sides should progress their objectives to at least 50%-60% before the other wins. DBD is a bit finicky that way because even when the killer still has 3 gens left, the survivors could very well all escape in the next 30 seconds. Just as a killer that has only 5-6 hooks can make a sudden comeback late in the game and kill all survivors.

I consider pretty much every match that doesn't end overly one-sided balanced. The Nurse that ends the game in 2 minutes with all 4 survivors on the ground and the comp SWF that break a Padded Jaws Trapper's will to live, don't count.

RaSavage42

I mean bring up which Killer, Map, Perks, Items and Addons obviously

But also saying the amount of Hooks and Gens done (even if you die)

And chase times... which would mean recording the games and watching them back

zarr

There is too much to account for to generally say what a balanced match is, even the mere starting conditions can wildly change the balance expectation of the game, i. e. perks, items, add-ons, offerings, maps, killers. I think given this, for a general statement it is much more appropriate to simply numerically evaluate the game, and say 2 kills and 2 escapes make for a balanced match, or 6 out of 12 hook stages. That doesn't mean a match with more or less stages or kills can't have been a decently balanced experience, especially depending again on the starting conditions, but still, in general these are good indicators. And they absolutely are what an MMR system has to go by, as they are the only objective, functional way to measure balance.

Personally I would maybe say that in a balanced match, by the time all gens are done, the killer should have 6 stages, with at most 1 survivor dead. The endgame can then go any which way, but the match will have felt fairly balanced. This would then maybe come out to an average expectation of 2.4 kills to 1.6 escapes (~60% kill rate), or an average of 8 stages.

To consider: In a balanced match, all gens are supposed to get done. That already is quite difficult to fathom for quite a few players, I think. Also, at least 3 survivors have to still be alive and kicking by the time the last gen pops, because killers can regularly all but guarantee at least 1 kill in the endgame, and survivors escaping is also intended in a balanced match. An endgame with just 2 people left alive is very unlikely not to end in both of them dying. Similarly, in a balanced match, some survivors are expected to die. One of those survivors can be you yourself. The match is not lost just because you did not escape, even if from your perspective it may be over. A shift in mentality can be beneficial, where you realize that your contributions to a round still allowed others to survive and succeed against the killer. Any time you occupied the killer in chase, any progress you've made or valuable plays, they are still worth just as much. After all, we play the game to do those things, we would not play the game if we could simply get an endgame screen that says "escaped" without any of that gameplay.

solarjin1

https://forums.bhvr.com/dead-by-daylight/discussion/comment/3603483#Comment_3603483

hahaha

Donkeybqlls

Yep, this is a hard one because it's such a personal subject. So here's me 2cents, I'm not saying this is the correct answer because there isn't any:

I'd say the killer should have at least 6 hooks with min one on each survivor or 2/3 kills if the escapee didn't got through hatch.

For survivors I'd base myself on the points in endgame evaluation, best players should have max the double of the weakest (keeping escapes in mind). I think an average of 20k is about right. And at least 1 should get out through the gates.

Nothing against hatch-escapes, but they can be a big sign the match was unbalanced