(Hot topic): MMR, Matchmaking, Ranks and general improvements
Disclaimer: This will be a long post.
The current issues:
It should come to no one's surprise that the matchmaking system we have today is fundamentally flawed, where matches can wildly vary from game to game. i.e. No consistency whatsoever. Points of interest below:
- The algorithm prioritizes speed over quality, therefore being inconsistent.
- MMR is being determined by a single factor per side; Kills vs. Escapes. No incentives to do anything but the main objectives in the match, by any means necessary.
- The highest MMR group (or bracket) has a very wide span, causing players who are in the bottom-end of the group to be matched against players way beyond their own skill level.
JRM made some good points in his video, talking about matchmaking, and the aspects of ping, facing the same killer/or people over and over again, and so on.
Potential ways to fix the player experience:
Firstly: Adding a ranked mode, where players are sorted by their ranks
This is like the old matchmaking system, where players were actually ranked based on their in-game performance. Emblems earned contributed to this. This promoted varied playstyles on both sides, making matches much more enjoyable.
Having multiple factors determine the way you rank up or down is a much better way than just going off of kills or escapes.
Now, I will go more into detail about how the ranking system would work further down.
Second: Add a quickplay mode without MMR brackets
This mode is just for players wishing to play a quick match, without having to worry about ranks or longer queue times. Granted, you will face completely random people of any rank, but for just a chill, no stakes mode, I have a feeling that players would not sweat their balls off, and instead just trying silly stuff, without the reprecussions of MMR.
Third: Weekly game-modes
As the title suggests, since there has been experiments with new game mode modifiers in the game, why not have a weekly game mode on a rotating basis, i.e. one week of the pitch black mode, one week of My Little Oni, one week of the upcoming random perks mode and so on, with more new modes being added down the line.
This can work well when combined with the quickplay mode, and all you have to do is to select the modifier before finding a game.
Ranks. How they work, and ways to prevent de-ranking abuse:
How the ranks work.
- When starting out, you will need to play 10 placement games. At first, you start out at zero, being equal to every other player out there.
- Placements work off of the pip system. The more pips you earn (up to 2 per match), the higher your placement rank will be.
0-1 pip = Rank 20 (ash/brown)
5 pips = Rank 16 (bronze/yellow)
9 pips = Rank 12 (silver/green)
13 pips = Rank 8 (gold/purple)
17 pips = Rank 4 (Iridescent/Red)
20 pips = Rank 1
This will make it easier to place players into their respective skill brackets. - Skill brackets work in a tier of 4. Once you get placed in your skill bracket, you would rank up and down as normal, but a soft-cap on deranking would be set at one skill-bracket lower than you currently are. So for example, if you are rank 2 (red), you can not de-rank past rank 8 (purple). This needs to be in place to protect newer and less skilled players from higher ranked players looking for an easy stomp.
- Also, in order to protect lesser skilled killer players, SWF groups with a wide variety of ranks will have a biased search parameter based on the highest ranked player, and an average of the rest.
If said group consist of 1 iridescent rank (between 4 and 1), 2 green and one brown, the likely opponent would be a killer in the purple ranked bracket (between 8 and 5). - Rank resets happens on the 13th of every month. Though, this would need to be a soft reset, where players are moved down one single bracket, also to prevent higher skilled players from abusing rank reset as a way to stomp on lesser skilled players. Bloodpoint tiers are awarded based on the highest achieved rank.
Ranks 20-17 = 100k BP
Ranks 16-13 = 250k BP
Ranks 12-9 = 500k BP
Ranks 8-5 = 750k BP
Ranks 4-1 = 1M BP
Rank 1 also gets a free item or cosmetic, as an award for doing well.
How to rank up.
Survivor:
- Teamwork - How well are you able to work as a team. Bonus points towards emblems for co-operative actions, such as working on generators, altruistic healing, taking chases and/or protection hits for other survivors.
- Individual skill - This could be a culmination of a percentage between skillchecks (good vs. great vs. missed), and how well you do objectives that helps towards winning the round, such as doing totems, setting up boons, how long you can last in chases, pallet stuns, flashlight/flashbang saves and so on.
Excessive generator progression does not grant you any points. - Survival - How long you last before ending up on a hook. Did you escape or not, did you open a door, or did you escape via the hatch?
- Wasting the killer's time - If you are chased and hooked early, before any generators are done, and if you are also being proxy-camped by the killer, you will earn points that your teammates get, whether it being generator progress, healing or cleansing totems. This also applies if you are immediately being chased upon being saved from the hook. This will lessen the impact of being the first person hooked, or being the victim of tunneling, since you were being beneficial for the team's success. - Extra points awarded after the match ends for every other survivor you helped escape. - This will also feel more rewarding, especially if you were tunneled out after bringing a hard-earned Bloody Party Streamer.
Killer:
- Chases - How good are you at ending chases with survivors. Bonus points awarded for shorter chases and out-smarting survivors.
- Power usage - How well can you utilize the killer's power to secure takedowns, or injure survivors. - Bonus points, and higher amounts are given for securing takedowns with weaker killer powers - This could work as an incentive to use lesser used killers, such as the Trapper.
- Pressure - How good you are at applying pressure on the survivors, i.e. patrolling generators, regressing progress and interrupting actions. - The longer you can prevent the first generator to be finished, the more points awarded, with diminishing returns awarded for each subsequent generator finished. - This is a measure to prevent games being held hostage by 3-genning.
- Hook stages - How many hook stages you get throughout the match. 6 or more grants more points. You gain much less points for hooking the same survivor twice in a row. This is one measure to prevent excessive tunneling. If you get 8 hook stages, and even if all the survivors escaped, you still get a fair amount of points in this category. If you also did well in the other categories, this could prevent a de-rank and even earn you a pip. - Massive bonus points awarded for sacrificing/killing survivors after 8 hook stages.
To also prevent excessive camping, no hook stages or points are awarded if you are within 16 meters of the hooked survivor when they reach the struggle phase after 45 seconds, or when they are sacrificed from the struggle phase. - To prevent survivors abusing this mechanic, escape attempts during the first stage, or letting go during the struggle phase will automatically award the killer with hook stages and points, regardless of distance.
Server-side improvements, implementing more choices, and matchmaking quality.
As JRM pointed out in his video, on how to improve the server-side of things.
- Matchmaking should prioritize the best ping available.
- Hit validation should also be based on ping. If your connection is good, you should not be punished for it.
- Give players the ability to select regions, instead of automatically assigning players to the "best" region closest to them.
- More servers in general, but have it so that regions will have a main "pool" to matchmake from, if that makes sense, and the server chosen is based upon the players location with the best possible average ping within the selected server region.
- Give players "protection" from facing the same killer twice in a row, and disable map offerings if it sends players to the same realm twice in a row. This will greatly improve the quality of the matches, since no back to back matches will be the exact same.
Quickplay, the random game modes and general improvements that could be done.
- Quickplay is unranked, and does not have any pips in the end-game lobby. This is just a chill mode where players of any rank could face off against one another, without the fear of losing pips or anything.
A dynamic point system could be implemented to help players of lesser skill gain more bloodpoints from playing, if they were to be matched up against someone of much greater skill. A fresh player queueing for quickplay could earn 4x bloodpoints for instance if they matched against someone who was in the red ranks. The inverse would be true for higher ranked players, where a deduction in points would be present, if they were to completely stomp the new player. Since most players play the game to unlock and prestige up their characters, it would be fair to new players if they got more in the beginning to help them get going. - Random rotating game modes on a weekly basis could work well. One example being Overwatch 2, where the "arcade" section has rotating game modes that change daily, as well as limited time modes. League of Legends has a similar feature as well, but these modes are up for around 4 weeks, or every two patches, with a pause in between.
- Per now, we have had two "modifiers" in DBD, with a third one on the way. This could be a good starting point for a more permanent feature with a rotating game modifier, that could be selected in the quickplay mode.
- Light's Out
- My Little Oni
- Perk Randomizer.
- Plus any future modes that the devs has planned. - For general improvements, I would highly suggest adding rewards to players who prestiges a character all the way to P100. The most accepted award would be a special character skin, akin to the legacy skins, but with an iridescent glow to it. There should definitely be rewards for putting so much time and effort into a single character. Maybe as a permanent reward for spending so much time, using a P100 character could also increase the bloodpoint gains by a moderate amount (50% or so).
Comments
-
So we're going to do this piece meal and please keep in mind this is just our (3 ppl 1 account) thoughts:
POI:
- Your correct, but due to the fact the majority do not wish to wait 15+ minutes for a match that may end in 5 or less for them is why its like that. You get either "quality" (subjective) or time and the majority chose time.
- We agree that the way MMR is determined is flawed as it doesn't give a full picture. However it doesn't incentivize anything really. It gives just as much incentive to focus on objectives as it does to do rift quests (probably less since rift quests give something) and so on. MMR is supposed to make sure newbies don't get matched with veterans normally (we can debate the effectiveness and lack of it all ya want). At best, it riles the ones who think MMR is some form of actual ranking.
- Now we could be wrong, but we heard that the highest bracket is a very small percentage (don't remember exact thread, not going digging atm). Tying into the above, killers who's actual skill level is high can easily drop down to where they can absolutely stomp survivors by simply letting people go.
- Don't know who JRM is and don't particularly care so we'll leave this alone.
Adding Ranked Mode
The old match making gave us rainbow ranks…that aside it didn't really promote variation, at least on the survivor end. Its our own conspiracy that 4 slowdowns became common cause we got so more of them that were better that the old ones (Pain res and Deadman's vs thanatophobia and overcharge for example).
"Having multiple factors determine the way you rank up or down is a much better way than just going off of kills or escapes."
This however is something we all fully agree upon. There's so many factors in a trial that should affect the way match making works beyond kills and escapes.
How Ranks Work and How to Rank Up
Were adding this here for convenience.
The first thing we see is that eventually everyone who steadily plays this game would pretty much be at rank 1. Which ends up we suppose to the past which was your intention. We do not see it solving how killers making matches unfun or vise versa.
Survivors:
"Individual skill" Some of this doesn't seem like skill to us (but thats by our definition)
"Wasting the killer's time" This is the block we have the most concern about. What defines proxy camp? Why is being on the hook effectively more in-game rewarding than actually playing? We like the idea of lessening the blow of "first caught, first dead" but it does seem excessive.
Killer:
"Bonus points awarded for shorter chases and out-smarting survivors." Define out-smarting survivors. Survivors seem to think outsmarting us is to run around the same rock 5 times…against and Artist…
"Power usage" How would T1 Meyers or Sadako work? Plague? Its kinda vague (alot if it is if we're being honest but thats also us just being prickish).
"The longer you can prevent the first generator to be finished, the more points awarded" ….sooo rarely will a majority get full value this without either running slowdowns or being something like Billy, Bleet, or Nurse. Guess whos gonna show in droves in this mode.
"To also prevent excessive camping, no hook stages or points are awarded if you are within 16 meters of the hooked survivor when they reach the struggle phase after 45 seconds, or when they are sacrificed from the struggle phase." So if a survivor comes for a last second rescue and the killer, who has been patrolling and found nothin of note, thwarts it but is within 16 meters because they thwarted the rescue…they're punished?…Why?
Quick Play Bracketless
"Granted, you will face completely random people of any rank, but for just a chill, no stakes mode, I have a feeling that players would not sweat their balls off, and instead just trying silly stuff, without the reprecussions of MMR."
Its your feeling vs our feeling and our feeling says that a GOOD amount would still sweat like their lives depended on it. It would at best lessen the number but not an overtly amount. It doesn't stop those who want to stop from joining. Also on the flip side it doesn't stop those wanting to goof off (or technically piss off the people in) ranked mode. So far the best deterrent to that is the longer que times funny enough. And this is us bashing our heads on the wall but MMR doesn't have repercussions.
Weekly Gamemodes
…Nothin to say here, wholly approve.
Server side implementations and other things
- ok
- If your connection is bad you should not be punished for it. See how this works?
- In fairness you kinda already can if you go out of your way to do it.
- More servers is a company thing to which idk how much control they have over, especially with things like servers in other countries. And we think it already does the pooling. Could be wrong though so shrug
- Protection from the same player? We can agree. Protection from the same killer character? Disagree. As much as we loath seeing Billy almost every game, players should play who they wish without worrying about longer Qs. Besides that, it could go something like Billy, Bleet, Billy, Bleet, Billy….that aint much better (one of us apparently had something like this happen too).
"disable map offerings if it sends players to the same realm twice in a row" To clarify, it disables in Lobby correct? Meaning you can't throw it in period if 1 of the other 5 players have been to that realm? Doable, but we feel if anything it'd be easier to remove them period…not sure we actually want that but food for thought.
General Improvements
- As pointed before, quick play won't solve the major issues (or the POIs now that we thought about it).
- We agree
- As above
- This is a mixed bag…On the one claw we agree that some kinda reward for hitting 100 would be nice. On the other, its known that people will lobby dodge or target the p100 in lobby. And an iridescent glowing skin would probably paint a neon target on said survivor…but thats us being picky.
1 -
Well, a good and detailed breakdown comment I might say.
JRM is a highly experienced player with over 8000 hours of playtime, who happens to do Youtube content, often alongside other "titans" such as Hens, SupaAlf and Ayrun.
"Wasting the killer's time" This is the block we have the most concern about. What defines proxy camp? Why is being on the hook effectively more in-game rewarding than actually playing? We like the idea of lessening the blow of "first caught, first dead" but it does seem excessive.
- Proxy-camping would be to stay within the 16 meter radius of the hooked survivor, or just outside of it, preventing the anti-camp measure from working. This does not mean that a killer who is in chase with another survivor within the radius is actively camping.
- The idea was to lessen the blow of the first player subjected to camping/tunneling, to actually GIVE them something for their trouble. As in a way to reward them for wasting the killer's time focusing on them, I think it is only fair that the affected player gets at least a portion of the points earned for doing other objectives, so that their hard-earned offering doesn't go to waste. Just my two cents, really."Bonus points awarded for shorter chases and out-smarting survivors." Define out-smarting survivors. Survivors seem to think outsmarting us is to run around the same rock 5 times…against and Artist…
- Haha, that is just survivors being silly. But actually outsmarting them, making an otherwise long chase short is what I meant about it. - More points for less time in chase.
"To also prevent excessive camping, no hook stages or points are awarded if you are within 16 meters of the hooked survivor when they reach the struggle phase after 45 seconds, or when they are sacrificed from the struggle phase." So if a survivor comes for a last second rescue and the killer, who has been patrolling and found nothin of note, thwarts it but is within 16 meters because they thwarted the rescue…they're punished?…Why?
- I probably didn't phrase it correctly, but the idea was that if a killer was actively camping the hooked survivor, as in staying inside the radius for a majority of the time the survivor was hooked during the first or second stage, then the punishment factor came into play. A better anti-camp measure if that makes sense. I was especially targeting basement-dwelling Bubbas with this in mind, since that is the definition of anti-fun. You can't outrun his chainsaw sweeps, even with basekit BT.
Its your feeling vs our feeling and our feeling says that a GOOD amount would still sweat like their lives depended on it. It would at best lessen the number but not an overtly amount. It doesn't stop those who want to stop from joining. Also on the flip side it doesn't stop those wanting to goof off (or technically piss off the people in) ranked mode. So far the best deterrent to that is the longer que times funny enough. And this is us bashing our heads on the wall but MMR doesn't have repercussions.
The idea, and the intentions are good. I believe that a quickplay feature like this would actually encourage more silly stuff, than the tryhard BS we see today. Like the hardcore tryharding we see today is a direct snowball effect that came with the introduction of SBMM, where literally everyone plays like they are at rank 1, or in a tournament with a huge jackpot at stake.
Example point: A group of casual survivor friends enters a game, only to be completely thrashed by the killer, who runs full meta build, with steam pouring out of his ears. This in turn makes the survivor team run meta builds, and genrush the living daylights out of the next casual killer who just wanted to have some silly fun. Then that killer goes full tryhard mode in the next game, and you see where this is going. It's a snowball effect. But it can also work the other way around, where players don't feel the need to play in the most sweaty way possible, since no one else is doing it, like what was the case in old DBD for the majority of players.This is a mixed bag…On the one claw we agree that some kinda reward for hitting 100 would be nice. On the other, its known that people will lobby dodge or target the p100 in lobby. And an iridescent glowing skin would probably paint a neon target on said survivor…but thats us being picky.
Well, It was just a suggestion really. But I do think that some unique reward should come with reaching P100 on a character.
0 -
I am really curious to hear what other people have to say about this, so don't be shy, and leave some comments.
0 -
"- Proxy-camping would be to stay within the 16 meter radius of the hooked survivor, or just outside of it, preventing the anti-camp measure from working. This does not mean that a killer who is in chase with another survivor within the radius is actively camping."
tying into
"I probably didn't phrase it correctly, but the idea was that if a killer was actively camping the hooked survivor, as in staying inside the radius for a majority of the time the survivor was hooked during the first or second stage, then the punishment factor came into play. A better anti-camp measure if that makes sense. I was especially targeting basement-dwelling Bubbas with this in mind, since that is the definition of anti-fun. You can't outrun his chainsaw sweeps, even with basekit BT."
—
Killers like Huntress, Bleet, and Nurse can effectively bypass anti-camp by simply staying out of the effective range while "guarding" the hook. They can avoid said punishment relatively easy [map depending] while denying the first found any sort of compensation. As we said, we do like making "first down, first dead" less harsh so please don't take this the wrong way but we are going to try to poke as many holes as we can so that when theres one we can't do that to, then thats probably good enough to work.
Side note though, true basement bubbas cant exist atm due to the anti face camp (had a clown [yes not actually bubba but the point stands] try and camp basement, and got the anti-facecamp bar to fill.) and you can try out smarting the bubba to escape basement (trying to simply bolt is rarely going to end well).
—
"Haha, that is just survivors being silly. But actually outsmarting them, making an otherwise long chase short is what I meant about it. - More points for less time in chase."
The problem with that is its kinda vague. How would the game be able to determine the difference between someone at a strong loop who go outplayed bad from someone at a strong loop running at the killer to die?
—
The road to hell is paved with good intentions…
We can agree the intentions are good. We'd argue the results not as well. We think there would be a few more non sweats, but in the end theres those who would want to straight up ruin the match for the other side and they'd more than likely join the quickplay. At best dividing the Q into ranked vs unranked would be "Almost all sweats" to "effectively what we already have now" but the Q times increased due to having the player base divided this way.
"But it can also work the other way around, where players don't feel the need to play in the most sweaty way possible, since no one else is doing it, like what was the case in old DBD for the majority of players."
Hate to break it to ya, but in the past it still had a majority (defined as over half for these purposes) were running sweaty. The difference is that in the past there was alot more busted things to…combat?…the sweaty builds. Survivors often ran DS, DH, UB, and Borrowed time (especially when it protected the user as well as the rescuee) or someone (or 3) had keys. While killers didn't have the full slowdown meta (or atleast as strong a version) there would often be a mori (which was alot more lethal than current versions)
"Like the hardcore tryharding we see today is a direct snowball effect that came with the introduction of SBMM, where literally everyone plays like they are at rank 1, or in a tournament with a huge jackpot at stake."
We still genuinely don't get how or why SBMM is causing people to play like actual lives are at stake…like its there to try and make sure you don't get thrown into a match over your head or with newbies… but we digress.
Don't worry we'll help keep it by the top :}
2 -
A good point indeed. Now some counter-arguments to be made (I like how this is going).
We still genuinely don't get how or why SBMM is causing people to play like actual lives are at stake…like its there to try and make sure you don't get thrown into a match over your head or with newbies… but we digress.
The problem with SBMM in this particular game, is that the algorithm is too lenient, so the gap between skill level can be quite substantial. This is deliberately done to reduce queue times. Backfilling is another problem, where you often end up on the receiving end of a 4-man SWF, with way more playtime than you.
And with the current algorithm, you are pretty much forced to play the meta (and as sweaty as possible) to have a good time against those groups. - This is from a killer's point of view. And that is why many killers adapt to scummy tactics like tunneling, proxying and slugging, to slow the game down to a crawl for the survivors.
And like I said in my previous comment, it creates a snowball effect where everyone adapts to the scummiest playstyles, and only play meta builds on top of that.
Either that, or the underlying issue is that most of the playerbase has a too competitive mindset, with SBMM amplifying this to the extreme, since no one likes getting stomped, over and over again due to their MMR gaining too much from winning one game compared to decaying from several losses in a row.
Anyways, I could continue rambling about this all day long, but I have to stop it somewhereHate to break it to ya, but in the past it still had a majority (defined as over half for these purposes) were running sweaty. The difference is that in the past there was alot more busted things to…combat?…the sweaty builds. Survivors often ran DS, DH, UB, and Borrowed time (especially when it protected the user as well as the rescuee) or someone (or 3) had keys. While killers didn't have the full slowdown meta (or atleast as strong a version) there would often be a mori (which was alot more lethal than current versions)
Well, that really depended on the rank you were in. I have good memories of both killers and survivors running all kinds of builds in the past. While I did get into the red ranks myself, I was more than often playing in the purple and green ranks, since I did not play all that much, to garner ranking up constantly. And I would rarely see people sweating their socks off like we do today. Even if there was ranks, people played the game in a more casual way.
And to be fair. I'd much rather wait longer in the queue, if that means better quality matches. IMO, people are getting spoiled these days, with instant queues.
Personally, I'd also take the old moris over all the BS we have today.We can agree the intentions are good. We'd argue the results not as well. We think there would be a few more non sweats, but in the end theres those who would want to straight up ruin the match for the other side and they'd more than likely join the quickplay. At best dividing the Q into ranked vs unranked would be "Almost all sweats" to "effectively what we already have now" but the Q times increased due to having the player base divided this way.
There were definitely trolls in the past too, but much more uncommon from my experience.
But yes, bully squads were definitely a thing then as now.0 -
- The problem with SBMM in this particular game, is that the algorithm is too lenient, so the gap between skill level can be quite substantial. This is deliberately done to reduce queue times. Backfilling is another problem, where you often end up on the receiving end of a 4-man SWF, with way more playtime than you.
- We wouldn't call it to lenient, but that may be down to word choice. The algorithm doesn't properly match, discounting things like lobby dodge and people purposefully throwing, people due to "skill" being defined by kills and escapes as previously mentioned. Then you add in the aforementioned other factors and its little wonder why it "works so well". [Incase of emergency, please notice the sarcasm button on "works so well"]. Again, this may be down to word choice so apologies if we're just restating somethin.
And with the current algorithm, you are pretty much forced to play the meta (and as sweaty as possible) to have a good time against those groups. - This is from a killer's point of view. And that is why many killers adapt to scummy tactics like tunneling, proxying and slugging, to slow the game down to a crawl for the survivor
We disagree. Even against a 4-man you do not need to run full meta to win (hell some 4 mans are super weak even with more hrs than us and 4.5k~ a pop is already a decent amount). We do not deny it will be harder, but your not forced to play meta to beat or have a good time against them. Though "good time" is abit subjective so for clarity's sake we're defining it as "Have a reasonable chance to win/7+ hookstages" as bully squads probably won't be a good time, regardless of stomping them or not. (admittedly stomping them is SO satisfying to us though). Most seem to adopt (adapt seems a poor choice of words to us…) those tactics cause many want a quick and easy "win" of a 3+k. Which leads to….
Either that, or the underlying issue is that most of the playerbase has a too competitive mindset, with SBMM amplifying this to the extreme, since no one likes getting stomped, over and over again due to their MMR gaining too much from winning one game compared to decaying from several losses in a row.
That underlying issue is more in line to what we think. People take this game way way to seriously. We do not see how MMR is getting them stomped again and again as they should be improving or adapting (actual adapting) to the opponents their getting. Eventually it would level out (we say would cause it doesn't work well as is due to the above points) to where they're matched with people their current "skill" level. A tibit from the wiki:
- If the opponent team has a lower MMR, but they win, their gains towards their MMR are increased and the Player's losses towards their MMR are also increased.
they only gain increased rating if they beat a team with higher rating already…maybe because they won relying on said meta and tactics perhaps? Again, just our thoughts but kinda have to admit it has some merit.
Well, that really depended on the rank you were in. I have good memories of both killers and survivors running all kinds of builds in the past. While I did get into the red ranks myself, I was more than often playing in the purple and green ranks, since I did not play all that much, to garner ranking up constantly. And I would rarely see people sweating their socks off like we do today. Even if there was ranks, people played the game in a more casual way.
And
There were definitely trolls in the past too, but much more uncommon from my experience.
But yes, bully squads were definitely a thing then as now.While admittedly it wasn't as bad it still was bad at pretty much all ranks sans maybe green, but at this point its a "your experience vs ours" scenario. Theres also a specific part of that paragraph that realy confuses our mind on the player base mentality. "Even if there was ranks, people played the game in a more casual way" which begs the question of ######### SBMM would be causing anything in people…but thats just us.
And to be fair. I'd much rather wait longer in the queue, if that means better quality matches. IMO, people are getting spoiled these days, with instant queues.
Personally, I'd also take the old moris over all the BS we have today.Ignoring that "better quality" differs from person to person, the majority wanted quicker matches. We do agree people are getting spoiled in this game, though we wouldn't say from instant qs. As to the old moris to each their own.
0 -
To base the matchmaking of in any other way, could be harmful to the player base. bHVR has metrics on exactly how long it takes the average dbd player to quit when looking for a match. So any suggestions made this way is going to look real bad when it reduces the global player numbers.
Splitting the player base is two and trying to queue them will much more likely make queue take longer and then people quitting cause it takes too long. Also you are forgetting the fact that even though most prioritize speed, they also like a match that is within rank range. So your suggestions would absolutely be detrimental to my enjoyment of the game.
The problems you cite is not the general problems of your average dbd player, its much more likely they are the problems of the top 1% and I think its pretty bad idea to ruin the game for the rest of us to cater to 1% of the player base.
I honestly don't care much about the players in our community who play to push the boundaries of gameplay to reach the top mmr and then complain that their matches are horrible, You made the bed you get to lie in it. This JRM fella seems to be having that issue, by taking the game too seriously and then wanting to change the game's entire matchmaking system to fit himself.That's a no from me.
3 -
@Rulebreaker A well sorted selection, and many good counter-points to be made there.
We wouldn't call it to lenient, but that may be down to word choice. The algorithm doesn't properly match, discounting things like lobby dodge and people purposefully throwing, people due to "skill" being defined by kills and escapes as previously mentioned. Then you add in the aforementioned other factors and its little wonder why it "works so well". [Incase of emergency, please notice the sarcasm button on "works so well"]. Again, this may be down to word choice so apologies if we're just restating somethin.
Exactly. And I do understand sarcasm, so no worries there.
The main problem is that, if lobby-dodging does occur, I don't think the matchmaking really cares about who takes the free spot afterwards, and therefore giving the SWF an easy opponent, as opposed to someone of their actual skill. I know that has happened to myself, many, many times. Even when playing as a killer I haven't played before.
Granted, this can work the other way around as well. If a killer of a similar skill as the survivors dodges the lobby, chances are that a much higher skilled killer shows up in the lobby instead.
This is one reason why I think the matchmaking needs to be looked at in depth.
Maybe a solution would be to add a search parameter for player hours as well. I really don't know a better way to solve the underlying problem.We disagree. Even against a 4-man you do not need to run full meta to win (hell some 4 mans are super weak even with more hrs than us and 4.5k~ a pop is already a decent amount). We do not deny it will be harder, but your not forced to play meta to beat or have a good time against them. Though "good time" is abit subjective so for clarity's sake we're defining it as "Have a reasonable chance to win/7+ hookstages" as bully squads probably won't be a good time, regardless of stomping them or not. (admittedly stomping them is SO satisfying to us though). Most seem to adopt (adapt seems a poor choice of words to us…) those tactics cause many want a quick and easy "win" of a 3+k. Which leads to….
I do agree that it is really satisfying to 4K a bully squad. Been there, done that myself.
Well, English is not my main language, although I can certainly say that I am 98.5% fluent in it.
Yes, way too many wants to take the easy route, much to the dismay of the opposing side.That underlying issue is more in line to what we think. People take this game way way to seriously. We do not see how MMR is getting them stomped again and again as they should be improving or adapting (actual adapting) to the opponents their getting. Eventually it would level out (we say would cause it doesn't work well as is due to the above points) to where they're matched with people their current "skill" level.
Yes, it has been evolving towards "sweat, or be sweated on" at this point - Or in other terms: Play the meta, or be at a major disadvantage. This is one big problem, where the meta is way too defined to have variety, thus leading to incredibly stale and boring gameplay on both sides. - I prefer a more casual anti-meta style of play, where you can just have fun, trying different things, and joking around, but in the current state of the game, that is near impossible to do.
I do wonder how long "eventually" would ultimately mean, since it has been a mess, ever since the introduction of SBMM. Now, for some, it might work in their favor, but for others, we have been stuck in this "in-between-zone" ever since it got introduced. Either getting a match that is way too easy, or getting stomped at 4-5 gens. That is really not fun, to be completely honest.
Consistently inconsistent, if you want to call it that.@Emeal - Interesting read, and take on the situation.
To base the matchmaking of in any other way, could be harmful to the player base. bHVR has metrics on exactly how long it takes the average dbd player to quit when looking for a match. So any suggestions made this way is going to look real bad when it reduces the global player numbers.
Splitting the player base is two and trying to queue them will much more likely make queue take longer and then people quitting cause it takes too long. Also you are forgetting the fact that even though most prioritize speed, they also like a match that is within rank range. So your suggestions would absolutely be detrimental to my enjoyment of the game.
Personally, I don't think that splitting the playerbase would have much of an impact, since the game has enough active players to be sustainable in this manner. - Case in point: DBD usually hovers around 30,000-50,000 concurrent players, with big spikes in June and during Halloween. With a sample size this big, it would not be too much of an issue to separate players into ranks, or have an unranked + a ranked matchmaking system in place. At least, have a way to keep the influx of players interested enough to stay with the game.
I mean, separate playlists does work well in other games with similar player counts. - Overwatch 2 (Steam) being a good example here, with almost the same player stats as DBD (28,000 - 53,000 players). Not only are there quickplay and ranked modes, but also arcade playlists (random game modes + event game modes) and custom workshop servers. And you always tend to find players around the same skill level as yourself, in any of these modes - Usually within a minute or two.
So I see no issues in DBD doing the same thing as Overwatch does, when it comes to matchmaking.The problems you cite is not the general problems of your average dbd player, its much more likely they are the problems of the top 1% and I think its pretty bad idea to ruin the game for the rest of us to cater to 1% of the player base.
I am not a top 1% of players. On the contrary, I am more the average Joe, just looking for a more casual care-free experience, which is not the case in the current gameplay loop.
I honestly don't care much about the players in our community who play to push the boundaries of gameplay to reach the top mmr and then complain that their matches are horrible, You made the bed you get to lie in it. This JRM fella seems to be having that issue, by taking the game too seriously and then wanting to change the game's entire matchmaking system to fit himself.
JRM is certainly not taking the game too seriously, based on the content he makes. But that's not the point, as I only used his latest video as an example. I see more content creators making similar arguments about the current state of the game. Now I don't fully agree with his statements in the video, but some are actually very representative of the average playerbase.
But as I stated in an earlier comment, the grand issue is more down to players being way too competitive when it comes to the game, since the MMR system is solely based on wins/losses, and not the aspects of gameplay itself.0 -
Dont think the @ worked
The main problem is that, if lobby-dodging does occur, I don't think the matchmaking really cares about who takes the free spot afterwards, and therefore giving the SWF an easy opponent, as opposed to someone of their actual skill.
To an extent it kinda does, the one whos been waiting longest (could be wrong, but its what we think and coulda sworn saw somewhere). It could be an easier or harder opponent as you said depending on who Qs when. Adding a serch based on hrs also might backfire (though admittedly this is a less harmful backfire) as you'd need 5 players with roughly equivalent hrs Queing at a similar time or its going to either search longer or quicker with less accuracy (like we currently have).
This is one big problem, where the meta is way too defined to have variety, thus leading to incredibly stale and boring gameplay on both sides. - I prefer a more casual anti-meta style of play, where you can just have fun, trying different things, and joking around, but in the current state of the game, that is near impossible to do.
This we disagree with. We atleast are able to play thematic/restricted builds and still do well (as survivor, we can still do this, but since we rely on a team results vary….) Its more of a matter of the meta for both has become such a crutch that people forgot how to actually play with anything other than meta. One example is windows, where we run something with blindness and their looping skills seem to drop by atleast half. They lost the ability to chain loops or bother to memorize whats been used when windows isn't helping (we're not trying to trash windows, its a crutch to us but undeniably useful, but this is a common sight we see). Anything thats not meta from atleast a semi skilled player throws meta slaves for a loop. Atleast from wherever the 3 of us are (no, we aint at the top of the hill, but we suuuuure aint at the bottom of the barrel either).
I do wonder how long "eventually" would ultimately mean, since it has been a mess, ever since the introduction of SBMM. Now, for some, it might work in their favor, but for others, we have been stuck in this "in-between-zone" ever since it got introduced. Either getting a match that is way too easy, or getting stomped at 4-5 gens. That is really not fun, to be completely honest.
Consistently inconsistent, if you want to call it that.Way to long for our tastes. And again, its been a mess, even before SBMM. We're tired of people thinking SBMM is to blame. Its the frickin ppl to blame. And each has their own opinion but we do like things inconsistent. People are already trying to be too consistent as is (and you've seen this with the constant meta sheeple. They're consistent in how they play and build are they not?).
We also want to poke a point by Emeal:
The problems you cite is not the general problems of your average dbd player, its much more likely they are the problems of the top 1% and I think its pretty bad idea to ruin the game for the rest of us to cater to 1% of the player base.
We agree with this. The main points in the original post under "The Current Issues" isn't truely a problem for the average dbd player. They are problems (and we've been happily debating) but not something the "average" player [defined by us as "people who play often but not consistently playing something like 6+ hrs daily" if you got a different definition feel free to share] has to much of a problem with. The general population (atleast from what we've seen and experienced) is concerned bout meta slaves bringing 4 slowdowns to stall the game while tunneling to narnia and things along those lines.
1
