Soloq win rate 40%, for now.

Options
2»

Comments

  • DBD78
    DBD78 Member Posts: 3,454
    Options

    The mangled nerf is stronger than a few weak killers being buffed. And you think it will lead to 5% less escapes? Come on.

  • coco_shotz
    coco_shotz Member Posts: 249
    Options

    They don't have to be balanced to each other. They have to be balanced to the survivors

  • xEa
    xEa Member Posts: 4,105
    edited February 21
    Options

    The last update (Billy, Grim Embrace, gen tap) boosted NL overage killrates quite a bit (3% and still rising within a relativly short period of time). We are now (NL) at exactly 57%, which is usually pretty close to -5% of reality.

    Right now, i am pretty certaint, we surpassed the 60%, getting close to 62% killrate. And then this set of buffs? No way this is going to be 70% or above, but for sure pretty close to 64-65%. Huntress buff alone will be insane, big promise.

  • kit_mason
    kit_mason Member Posts: 247
    edited February 21
    Options

    7.5.0 was 9th January 2024.

    NL reports that prior to the update (29th Nov - 27th Dec) Average NL Kill Rate was at 55.96% (meaning escape rate was at 44.04%, slightly higher than BHVR's reports.) Hillbilly's personal Kill Rate was at 49.49%.

    Compare to now, where our most recent NL data (24th Jan-21st Feb) shows 56.98% (meaning average escape rate was at 43.02%), with Hillbilly's personal Kill Rate having jumped over 10% to 63.25%.

    Not only do I think this set of changes is significantly less drastic than Billy's were, but you are arguing we are going to see an unprecedented jump in kill rates off of it (again, we would need all of the six killers changed to hit a 70% kill rate to push a 40% to 35%).

    UPDATE: I did the math wrong, they'd actually all need to jump to 87.5% kill rates to push the average escape rate all the way down to 35%. So it's even more unprecedented as no killer in the game has ever even come close to this value to my knowledge.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,357
    edited February 21
    Options

    Yeah we should definitely look into the problem of "I got downed earlier than I liked". Oh, what about "I don't understand this killer and I don't want to learn how to play against them so I'll just give up". Maybe "my team isn't playing how I like, good luck everyone else".

    We know the main reasons why they give up. It's childish and entitled in the majority of cases. You also can't "fix" a mindset, the survivors need to do that themselves.

    Giving up just because things didn't go your way is already kinda immature, so that's not too surprising that the reasons follow suit.

  • woundcowboy
    woundcowboy Member Posts: 1,994
    Options

    Not really. I’ve played many asyms over the years, and all except death garden were insanely survivor-favored, mostly because those whiners are the loudest. TCM has been nice because the survivor community doesn’t dominate the narrative. Death garden is the exception, not the rule.

  • C3Tooth
    C3Tooth Member Posts: 8,073
    edited February 22
    Options

    Everything have gray zones, suicide on first hook when down early is stupid.

    But I dont blame teammates suicide on hook if killers get 5-6 hooks or 1 death and only 1-2 Gens done. Killer already win at that point, Gens would never be done, I will just die and go next for my last teammate to get hatch. These cases happen far alot of times, is what Im talking about.

  • Sandt1985
    Sandt1985 Member Posts: 226
    Options

    I agree with you that the game needs to be balanced, but I think your confusing balance with survivors and killers being 50/50. The power role should ALWAYS have an advantage. Otherwise it itsn't the power role. So, for games like this, 60/40 IS balanced

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,357
    edited February 22
    Options

    So we should look into "I'm losing so I'm leaving"?

    What is there to look into there? Survivors don't like losing or attempting to make a comeback?

    Yeah at a certain point the games basically lost. But that's not what's being talked about when we're talking about "the self sacrifice problem" running rampant atm. That's not what's happening most of the time nor do most people have a problem with it in those cases.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on
  • C3Tooth
    C3Tooth Member Posts: 8,073
    Options

    How many times in your DBD years of playing, able to complete 3-4 remaining Gens after a teammate is death, or killers having 6 hooks and 1 Gen done?

    Is the number at least 50%? For me, its not even 5%.

    You dont work a job that having 5% chance of getting paid. Survivors stop doing Gens if the chance to complete 5 Gens is 5%.


    There are 2 cases.

    1. Survivors quit match when down early, playing against killers they dont like.
    2. Survivors quit match when they have no chance to power Gates.

    Assume you're okay with survivors hook suicide / DC in the second case. But not with the first one.

    To my pov playing killer, most of the time its toxic survivors fail to "toxic" me, they DC. Which those matches kill count do not affect the kill rate. Survivors suicide on first hook early game happen less me. Could be equal to that teammate getting tunneled at 5 Gens then DC and get 3 kills after that not counted to the kill rate.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,357
    edited February 22
    Options

    Well like I said the match is basically over in those cases. But no one has a problem with those and it wouldn't be seen as a big problem were that all that were happening most of the time.

    But its not. More often than not people just want to get out the match for whatever reason they choose. I do have killer game where survivors fail to "toxic me" as you put it. Yeah sometimes they DC, but more often they'll just self sacrifice to avoid the DC penalty.

    If a survivor is DCing a ton, they will get penalties and eventually have a very long time out where they can't play. But the survivors who self sacrifice do not and they are free to do it over and over and over.

    More people self sacrifice because they know it gets around the penalties and they are also able to do it back to back to back. There's no way these things are equal. Self sacrificing is definitely more impactful than DC's can ever hope to be in the current iteration.

    I'm happy that's not your experience, but afaik it is for most.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on
  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    Options

    I too have played many asyms over the years. Evolve didn’t favor hunters, TCM doesn’t favor victims, and TED was decently balanced.

  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    Options

    The only time I’ve ever seen survivors make a comeback was when I played killer and allowed it. I killed off one player early and saw the other three struggling. I felt guilty, so I basically meme’d so they stood a chance. I allowed them finish three gens so the game at least felt more balanced for them. But in the end I still won with a 4K. 🤷🏽‍♀️ By themselves survivors don’t recover from a rough start the way killers do.

  • sinkra
    sinkra Member Posts: 287
    edited February 23
    Options

    This is why the 60% kill rate is actually understated. Many escapes are only because the killer allowed it or was just messing around. I think the real kill rate when killers are trying to win is around 70%.

  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    Options

    It’s presumably higher than 60% at low to mid MMR. Eliminating one survivor at 4-5 gens is pretty much game over for survivors. The killer really has to throw to lose.

  • BlightedDolphin
    BlightedDolphin Member Posts: 1,676
    Options

    Looks at survivors giving up just because I marked them as Ghostface

    Please don’t take my Ghostface away :(

  • woundcowboy
    woundcowboy Member Posts: 1,994
    Options

    If you think TED was decently balanced, there’s nothing else to say. There are tons of exploits that gave the survivor side huge advantages. The game died because those devs listened to the survivor majority and people stopped playing demon. TCM definitely favors victims, but it is overall much better balanced than most asyms.

  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    Options

    I stand by my statement: TED was fairly balanced between roles especially near the middle and end of its life. I will however add that micro play was a large component of what it took to succeed in the Demon role. And micro-gameplay in a DM-type role isn’t an easy skill to learn. That wasn’t a skill required to play the survivor role. But its presence doesn’t mean the game favored survivors.

    TCM does not favor victims, especially since one has a team as killer oneself with powers diametrically opposed to everything the victims can do. I would agree it’s balanced.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,357
    edited February 23
    Options

    Again, yes there are times when the games basically over like someone dead at 5 gens with little progress, but there's also plenty of times where the game is well within winnable and survivors just nope out.

    Like 1-2 hooks and 3 gens are about to pop or only 1 gen is left.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on
  • BlightedDolphin
    BlightedDolphin Member Posts: 1,676
    Options

    Maybe he just thought you looked tired and wanted to make sure you were getting your 8 hours of sleep???

  • xltechno
    xltechno Member Posts: 1,026
    Options

    The biggest question on this forum is the attitude of asking killers to have top-notch play skills, while telling survivors to value the casual player. People who say that you should always work hard against killer players, or that a certain live streamer has won 100 games in a row, should also talk about the survival probability of survivors based on top-level live streamers.

    As I may have mentioned earlier, one live streamer has achieved a 60% survivor survival rate using SoloQ, and his acquaintance, a streamer who is famous for his DBD commentary videos and live commentary, also has a 70% probability of energizing the gate. He said.

    Although this is a statement based on personal experience, it is mostly true. In fact, they have achieved similar results in the stream. However, when faced with inconvenient facts, many survivors either dismiss them as exceptions or ignore them altogether.

    In reality, if you are an intermediate soloQ player, your actual escape rate will not deviate much from 40%. There is a gap between intermediate and beginner players in terms of how they can utilize the information obtained from the HUD. The HUD shows survivors entering the Asylum repairing generators, but in reality, too many Survivors enter the Asylum because they don't want to be killed by the Killer. If this action is repeated, all survivors will be wiped out before the generator can be repaired. But they don't realize they made a mistake.

  • Murgleïs
    Murgleïs Member Posts: 1,046
    edited February 24
    Options

    I play both sides I very rarely see killers give up, even when they are in a bad state (no hooks, lot of gens done).

    Same with farming, maybe in low MMR it happens ? I don’t see it anymore.

    If you want to go back to the old meta with god survivors I am all for it, but don’t complain about the 15min survivor queue time during the evening for a 5min game. Considering you need only 1 killer for 4 survivors, that much queue time showed how bad the state of the game was.

  • Seraphor
    Seraphor Member Posts: 8,907
    edited February 24
    Options

    The reason it was present in each of those asymmetrical games, is because it is an inherent property of asymmetrical games that win rate does not equal kill rate.

    You're mistaking correlation for causation. Just becsuse "all asym games have an unbalanced kill rate, doesn't mean that's the reason why "all asym games besides DbD have died".

    It may however be a factor that "asym games are less appealing because they're inherently imbalanced".

  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    Options

    I’m sure they happen, but I personally never see these situations. They seem really far flung. What I more often encounter is that if one gives survivors even the slightest opportunity to turn a game around, they will pounce on it. Survivors are not merciful toward killer mistakes (nor should they be). But they don’t really give up immediately as much as people claim, either.

  • Ayodam
    Ayodam Member Posts: 2,353
    Options

    The difference with those games and this one is that their kill rates were generally much higher than what would have been permissible for a win rate (however they defined that) of 50/50. The setup works for DBD because a 60% kill rate still averages out to like a 50% win rate (approximately).

    But with games like Evolve and Death Garden, their ‘kill’ rates were much higher than 60%.

    This led gamers to avoid playing the survivor & hunter roles respectively, which killed those games. I believe BHVR works to keep DBD as balanced as they can but it’s a tough job. I also think the kill rate needs to be around where it is now so that the win rate is near even between sides.

  • MrPenguin
    MrPenguin Member Posts: 2,357
    edited February 25
    Options

    Well that's just differences in experience I guess.

    I'm glad you don't see it much but I see it all the time. Honestly really annoying to then have to waste time with the rest of the match frequently just waiting for the loss you know is coming because of some self-centered entitled survivor who doesn't like Legion or whoever or went down faster than they would like.

    Like I don't care that we lost, I'm bothered they're wasting everyone's time. I came to play the game, not complain and quit because I can't cherry pick my experience. Hard to do the first while others are doing the second.

    Post edited by MrPenguin on