Why everything you believe about Rank in DBD is WRONG

AlwaysInAGoodShape · January 2019

Why everything you believe about Rank in DBD is WRONG

In this discussion we will go in depth on the topic of Rank in Dead By Daylight.

We will explain why the Ranking system is not what you think it is, why so many people have trouble explaining it, some possible solutions and why it might be that the current rank system is a work of genius.

This post aims to give you a full picture of all the concepts surrounding the topic of Rank in Dead By Daylight and is inspired by the increasing disillusionment of players with the current ranking system as they reject it as a valid one.

For every individual Subject, check the;

Chapter 1: Rank in DBD is not a rank

Section 1: How the current ranking system works

Press this link to visit the Official Emblem System

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1B_L4P_JlU&t=238s
As long as there is still incorrect information on the Page, watch this video instead.

In order to Rank up in DBD, you need to score points in 4 different categories. Although killers and survivors have different categories, they have close similarities;

Lightbringer/Gatekeeper: Concerned with generator progression. (1st Emblem)
Unbroken/Devout: Concerned with the Death of survivors and the killer's ability to kill them.
Benevolent/Malicious: Deals with hitting and hooking, healing and unhooking.
Evader/Chaser: Concerned with chases.

In each of these categories you can score up to 4 points, up to a total of 16.

As shown in the image; if you reach
6 = "Safety PIP".
9 = "PIP"
14 = "Double PIP"

(PIP stands for Point in Progress.)

It's these PIPs that will increase your rank, with each rank requiring you to have scored a certain amount of PIPs before moving on to the next rank.

Press the link above the image above for the exact details.

Section 2: What classifies as a rank?

As the overarching idea behind this post is the conclusion that DBD does not have a real ranking system, this section is attributed to defining what a real rank system would look like.

There are 2 types of rank that are worth talking about;

The Versus-Rank.

The VERSUS ranking system is a system in which a team/individual competes with another individual during a match. Only 1 team/individual can win, simultaneously meaning the loss of their opponent(s).

The competitive-axis
Their win doesn't have to be black-and-white; if 1 represents a win and 0 represents a loss, then this rank could perfectly have matches in which teams try to higher their number at the COST of yours;

If you have 1, they have 0. If you have 0.75, they have 0.25, etc.

It doesn't matter what direction things are rotating to; they are always rotating one direction at the cost of going the other.

The Score-Rank

In the Score-Rank, you don't really play against an opponent. You play the same game and your game is not influenced by your opponents, but in the end all scores will be compared and the players with the highest scores win.

Rank is scarce

What remains consistent between the 2 systems is that RANK is Scarce and players are COMPETING in one way or another, meaning that only 1 person goes home with the Golden Medal.

A rank domain

Ranks are (but don't always have to be) split up into "Rank Domains". A Rank Domain is a identifier for a certain range of ranks, representing a certain X percentile of the player-base;

Bronze = 15.09%
Silver = 47.08%
Gold = 27.52%
Platinum = 8.32%
Diamond = 1.95%
Master = 0.03%
Chalanger = 0.02%

The x percentile is what decides how many % of the players can be classed under said rank-domain.

Section 3: Why DBD does not have a ranking system

There are 2 points where the Dead By Daylight Ranking System fails at being a ranking system;

You aren't in a real competition

As explained in Section 1, both the killer and the survivors have a different emblem system. Conceptually they are opposite of each other, but technically they aren't;

Emblem 1: Lightbringer/Gatekeeper

A killer can get 4 gate-keeper points through the regression of generators and the survivors could infinitely gain lightbringer points by working on the regressed generators.

(+4 points survivors, +4 points killer)

Emblem 2: Unbroken/Devout

If a game lasts long enough (about 9+ minutes) a survivor can get 2 PIPs in this category and the Killer can get 4 by the hands of teamwork.

(+2 points survivor + 4 points killer)

Emblem 3: Benevolent/Malicious

2 hooking and hitting every survivor 3 times in total (without it being healed back up. 2 times in the beginning and 1 time after . a hook) gives a killer a minimum of 2 points and 4 points if the killer 4k's, which is beneficial net, for both sides.

Survivors can infinitely farm Benevolence points by getting points for healing, meaning they can always guarantee to have 4 points.

(+4 points survivor, +4 killer)

Emblem 4: Evader/Chaser

Both can be farmed to 4 points for both factions through triggering the chase mechanic and deliberately letting the points stack up.

(+4 points survivor, +4 killer)

Total

This means that in EVERY GAME, through teamwork of the so called "opponent(s)", survivors can guaranteed get 14 points and killer can get a guaranteed 16 points.

With those amount of Emblems, they BOTH double PIP every match!

Being aware of this, this means that everyone in the community has been playing the game wrong and can be called a game-thrower; A killer for randomly killing survivors and survivors for the act of escaping.

Is this the model of a VS-ranking system? I think the answer is clear by now; no, you're teammates instead.

Rank in DBD is NOT SCARCE

Everyone in Dead By Daylight can be Rank 1 SIMULTANEOUSLY.

That should say enough; there simply is no rank domain. If players start scoring more PIPs than you do, then you are not affected by it; you'll still be rank 1.

Or even consider this; if DBD had a functioning rank domain, then all of those players would be farming, as they would get scores higher then you do, thus pushing you out of the top x percentile.

Section 4: You are not the only one that got it wrong

The word Rank tells people either their exact spot in the list of ranks (as shown in the Score-Rank) or they fall under a rank domain; top x percentile of the player-base in which their rank is typically hidden unless they reach the highest domain. (As is the challanger tier in in League of Legends)

When you realise you managed to get to rank 1 in Dead By Daylight you are filled with self-competence; after all, you're now one of the best!

Where as a mobile phone is the most abused form of technology, Rank in DBD is the most misused fake credential that players have given to justify their mathematically wrong ideas about balance.

Seeing through the delusion

"Why did it take so long for people to realise this form of rank is fake?" Well, in order for it to NOT be a rank, it should be something else. Then... what is Rank in DBD really?

My first instinct is to call it a grind that is reset per season, or in other words; a seasonal grind.
But that is also partly untrue; you are matched up against players who also grind just as much as you do, and god forbid, they keep treating each other as enemies! Instead of cooperating they randomly fight, where their competitive-axis rotate both ways simultaneously, where as normally impossible in a VS-ranking system, their win-axis rotates in whatever direction it pleases;

Where 1 would mean 0 and 0.75 would mean 0.25 for the other, we now see 0.4 meaning 0.8 instead (for a total of 1.2?!), while both keep increasing!

It's this competitive-axis concept that added a fake-sense of competitiveness. An uncontrolled type of competitiveness that prevented us from properly calling DBD's ranking system a seasonal grind.

"So what is the DBD's ranking system?"

The DBD's ranking system is an Orwellian use of the work "Rank", on a Non-Competitive-Axis Seasonal Grinding system that pertains the illusion of being an top x percentile of the player-base Ranking system.

Youtubers have tried to say it

"Rank doesn't matter, but rank DOES MATTER!"

We've all heard those statements countless of times. They didn't know how to;
1. Communicate the fact that players in a seasonal grinding system generally are better than players not having met their targets in a purely seasonal grind.
2. Communicate that there is a (false) degree of competitiveness caused by the non-competitive-axis produced by the emblem system, meaning that if you are REALLY BAD, you'll still not be able to reach rank 1, thus distinguishing it from a purely seasonal grind.
3. That because of the non-competitive-axis, Rank 1 is home for a lot of terrible players. Or to put it to League of Legends' ranking system: DBD is as if you're being matched from Gold to Challanger under one banner called rank 1.
4. That rank X doesn't represent a rank-domain. (And obviously not your exact rank either, as otherwise there could only be 20 players).

and all that in .1 sentence... but who can blame them?

Well now you have the definition.

If you didn't belong to the group that kind of understood that ranking didn't matter but always pointed out that lower ranks are still worse on average, then you might have belonged to the group that (unconsciously) believed that Rank in DBD represents a top x percentile of the player-base (rank domain);

Fallacious statistics

This caused you to (falsely) cite:

As a credible source of of information.
These statistics would be valid if we were indeed dealing with a rank-domain. Until we have it, the only thing that produces reliable results is the best killers and survivors manually inviting each other and keeping track of the results.

We can also look at how often THE BEST killers in rank 1 beat strangers versus how often THE BEST survivors beat killers in rank 1.
With this, our statistics would be much closer to Marth88's experiment, where a 5% pip-rate for their killer opponent is not matched with a very skilled killer's ability to reduce survivor pipping to a 5%.

We'd see a slightly less extreme version of:

If didn't already understand what was wrong with the ranking system and all the claims made about it, then you do now.
So let's fix it:

Chapter 2: What fixing a ranking system in an asymmetrical game looks like

There are 2 very important steps to making a ranking system work in an asymmetrical game like this;

Section 1: Killer vs Survivor

In order for a rank system to work, we need to eliminate the non-competitive-axis and restore the competitive-axis, meaning that everything that scores 1 side points, costs the other.
They do not have to be exact opposites of each other; they just should never allow for any teamwork, because as it currently stands; people who in DBD do not side with the killer are in fact game-throwing and deliberately avoiding to achieve their maximum guaranteed PIP, which makes it the soft version of the deliberate (DC) de-pipping, but this time, we're all guilty of it.

Lightbringer&Gatekeeper

Lightbringer

0: Requires 0.000 points
1: Requires 10.000 points
2: Requires 25.000 points
3: Requires 35.000 points
4: Requires 50.000 points

Gain 5.000 points for each exit gate opened.

Gain 5.000 points for each completed generator.

Gain 10.000 points for every generator that you have completed (80 seconds of generator time).
In case of the generator being regressed, all players have every charge they put into that generator decreased proportionally to how much % they put into it.

(If 2 ppl do a generator for both 85% and 5% and it regresses back to 9%, then player 1 would only get 8.5% and player 2 only 0.5% of the 10.000 points if a 3rd player were to finish it.)

Gatekeeper
0: 0.000 points both exit gates are open
1: 0.000 points
2: 10.000 points
3: 20.000 points
4: More than or equal to 30.000 points

Starting value: 50.000 points.
For every generator that has been finished, lose 10.000 points.

Unbroken&Malicious

Unbroken
0: You were the first or second to die
1: You were the third to die
2: You were the last to die
3: You survived
4: You survived and you have never been downed/grabbed

Malicious
0: 0 Survivors have been sacrificed
1: 1 Survivor has been sacrificed
2: 2 Survivors have been sacrificed
3: 3 Survivors have been sacrificed
4; 4 Survivors have been sacrificed

Benevolent&Devout

Benevolent
0: 0.000 points (Every teammate has died)
1: 15.000 points
2: 55.000 points
3: 80.000 points
4: 100.000 points

Starting value = 60.000

Healing others grants you 5.000 points for every OTHER survivor still alive.
For every time a teammate gets hit, lose 5.500 points.

Whenever a survivor enters the next hooking state after the previous hooking stage, lose 5000 points.

For every other survivor alive and not-hooked when you escape, gain 30.000 points (escaped does not count as still being alive)
For every other survivor who escaped while you are alive (even if hooked), gain 30.000 points

Devout
0: 0
1: 8 (Everyone has been hooked once and has been healed up/1 person is dead)
2: 13 (2 People are dead or 1 person is dead and 2 people have been 2 hooked)
3: 20 (2 people are dead and 2 people have been 2 hooked/3 people are dead)
4: 28 (Everyone is dead)

Whenever you hit and bring the survivor down 1 health-state, gain 1 point.
(Insta down +2)(A grab against an injured survivor gives +1. A grab against a healthy survivor gives + 2.)

A survivor escaping your grasp gives -1 points.
Whenever a survivor is healed, get -1 points.
Whenever you hook a survivor, gain +1.
Whenever a survivor goes from the 1st hooking phase to the 2nd or the 2nd to death, gain +2.

(This is to account for the 1 hit the killer won't be able to get as a result from the automatic heal a survivor gets from the dying state to the injured state after being unhooked. To not force the killer to let people off the hook, they get that 1 hit built in... and regarding anti-tunnel; this is not the place to solve it and there are better solutions to address that.)

Evader&Chaser

Evader
0:
1:
2:
3:
4:

Chaser
0:
1:
2:
3:
4:

I left out the Evader&Chaser example Emblem, which is not needed for the sakes of this example and is hard to implement due to it's contradictory nature, but if there's a lot of interest in this emblem, I'll create it or use a good suggestion.

Preferably...

Preferably we wouldn't have the Emblem system at all. We'd have a simple direct contrary win condition: A killer kills and a survivor survives (whether at a team or alone).

The emblems often try to tell the same story.

What is important in an asymmetrical game like DBD is that we set up the killer-against the survivor in their struggle for points, but we DO NOT make them compete against each other when it comes to rank. Thus in other words;

We want to create a rank system that allows both killers and survivors to climb to rank 1, even if the game was as unbalanced as a 10% win-rate for killers and a 90% survival rate for survivors.

So how do we do this? How do we create a ranking system that makes the Balance-Across-Factions irrelevant?

By making the killer not the true enemy of survivors and the other way around;

Section 2: Killers against killers, survivors against survivors

Now we created an emblem system (or we did away with it completely) that turns the non-competitive-axis into a competitive one, where little teamwork is possible, we separate the scores of killers from that of survivors and remove the PIP system all together:

The death of the PIP

There are no more PIP that can be used to RANK UP.

Instead, every rank X now becomes a rank domain for a certain ELO range.
The amount of ELO you get is decided by whether you SCORED a higher amount than the average player within that rank, while taking into consideration the total elo of teammates and the (separate) elo of killers.

Since there are 2 different Elo's: A survivor ELO and a killer ELO, the 2 don't compete against one another.

So let's look at this picture again:

Y is the total amount of emblems. (Average of all recently accumulated points)

X is the lowest to highest rank. With 0 being rank 20 and 10 representing our current Rank 1.

In order to rank up in this system, you have achieve more emblems then your teammates do in order to rank up.

(the red line) A survivor playing with survivors of exactly the same rank against a killer of that same rank would need:

11+ Emblems on average to leave rank 0.
12.2+ Emblems on average to leave rank 4.
14+ Emblems on average to leave rank 9.

"I'm confused"

You may look confused for 2 reasons; "But the killer needs less emblems on average when ranking up... doesn't that make it easier for the killer as they go along the way?".

Simple answer = No.

Long answer; Nope.

Here's why: In this theoretical example of balance in the game, you see that the game is survivor favoured... but that is not a problem for our ranking system!

Let's say you are only worthy of Rank 6 and you are able to score 14 emblems on average as killer and you'd only need 13 at rank 7, the reason why you won't be able to score 13 Emblems is because (in this example) the game is SO SURVIVOR FAVOURED that the rank above you will be so much better at utilising that strength, that if you play with the same skills under rank 6 and get 14 emblems, that skill would AMOUNT TO LESS THAN 13 emblems in rank 7. Perhaps you can't even make it to 12.

And that is why our ranking system is immune to imbalance. (It still doesn't mean that imbalance is fun)

"I'm still confused"

Did you notice in my example that killers had a perfect score? How would you rank up if killers always played perfectly?

It's y occasionally matching them against a player of a better rank, which will lower their score, or if they remain gaining the right amount of emblems, they'd move up a rank eventually as loser now have their perfect 16 pip ruined.

An introduction to ELO

Now ideally, we want to be able to match people up against each other, even if they are not exactly the same rank or 1 up or 1 down, as sometimes this may cause queue issues.

If we'd allow for such ranking up, then our system wouldn't make sense if it'd match a killer of Rank 8 who needs 12 emblems normally, against Rank 6 survivors who needs 14 emblems, as that survivor will probably not be able to reach that, since players AT that rank are expected to reach 12.

This is where ELO comes in. ELO here is the idea that when matching better players against worst players, the better player is "expected" to win;

Normally:
Survivor win-worth = 100%
Killer win-worth = 100%

If we match a killer of Rank 8 against survivors of Rank 6 on average and we'd expect the survivor to lose more likely then exactly to the degree that they are more likely to lose, their win becomes worth more in ELO:

If we'd expect a killer to earn 30% more because of this unequal matching and the survivors to lose 30% more, then the worth of their score =

Normally:
Survivor win-worth = 130%
Killer win-worth = 70%

Wair for it...

ELO can also be used to SOLVE SWF's disproportional power! Based on how much strength each extra team-player is likely to add in power in their current rank, we can compensate the killer with a disproportional reward IF they win!

For example:

Solo's:
Survivor win-worth = 100% normal-winrate for said rank
Killer win-worth = 100% normal-winrate for said rank

SWF's (x = amount of premades)
Survivor win-worth = 100% - x15%
Killer win-worth = 100% + x37.5%

In this example we'd conclude that 4 man SWF's win 60% harder than solo's among the same rank, meaning that if they'd win, they would only get 40% of their effort, and if they'd lose, they'd lose 250% as hard.

Of course, just as the story of general balance among factions, this system only eliminates the problem of Balance among factions and SWF's in relation to rank.
It'd still be un fun if the game was so unbalanced that, say, killers would only kill a player once every 5 games, while still being the highest rank, as anyone scoring lower than 1 kill every 5 games would be a lower rank.

ELO Value

Your ELO has a starting value, say 1500.
Based on your emblems in relation to the players who you play with and are matched up against and/or if they are SWF's will determine how much ELO you win or you lose.

So, we completely solved rank related imbalances for the most part... so... let's implement it!

Wait a minute there;

Let me first give you a reason on how a functional ranking system could destroy Dead By Daylight in it's current state, so that you think twice before supporting a fixed ranking system;

Chapter 3: Why you should think twice before fixing the ranking system

Section 1: The effects of a real ranking system on DBD

The idea seems perverse that, when having a system at hand-sight that would solve all rank-related balance issues, we'd discard it and stick to the currently non-competitive-axis seasonal grind system?

Don't be fooled by what the meaning of a ranking system is, because in a game like Dead By Daylight, there are a lot of reason why you wouldn't want a functional ranking system:

Pre-established communication

Ranking players with a similar skill-level as them has a great impact on anonymous team gameplay.
Normally when players play alone in an unranked play-style, they adopt a "solo-playstyle". The solo playstyle is the optimised playstyle in which you have to rely MINIMALLY on your teammates.

Because some-times your teammates are good and otherwise they are the worst, you can never rely on them exhibiting a certain play-style;

Wait for the killer to pass

Imagine this: You play DBD, you start working on a generator and a killer finds you very quickly.
Now someone tells you; "Why don't you all wait for the killer to pass? If you start working on the generator then, the killer will likely have walked past every other generator before turning to you and you'll already have about 30+ seconds of progress done!"

Well, the problem with this is that with strangers in an unranked system, you cannot rely on them doing the same, which breaks most of its charm.

This example would fall apart if the killer was aware of it, but in any play in which the killer's knowledge of such information was irrelevant, the survivors, within a really tight ranking structure could establish Trust-based gameplay in which they expect the other to adhere to META strategy:

It's this established Pre-communcation only possible through Trust-based gameplay enabled by a real ranking system that allows anonymous League of Legends' players to perform highly cooperative actions, like Jungle-Invades, ADC + Support plays and Ganks, without the need of ever having talked to the other player with whom they are cooperating.

If we give DBD a functional ranking system with a top rank domain TIGHT ENOUGH to establish trust-based gameplay, then we give birth to a whole new era of pre-established communication previously unavailable.

The not talked about issue of stealth

With the rise of pre-established communication and mandated behaviour, we might possibly see the rise of Stealth-Abusive play-styles of survivors that we have never even talked about;

Infinite Value

When it comes to actions, there's a "cost" attached to it.

When you want to open the exit gates, you need to have finished 400 seconds of generator time split over 4 people.

Now let's look at something like a heal:

If you are injured, a teamheal/selfcare-heal will both cost you 32 seconds (teamheal = 16x2) that could otherwise have translated into generator time. So why heal? You heal because you believe that you can buy more time for your team by getting injured instead of dying than is the cost of your heal:

4 survivors alive = 32/3 = 10.67 seconds.
3 survivors alive = 32/2 = 16 seconds.
2 survivors alive = 32/1 = 32 seconds.

Because a heal costs your team 32 seconds, your ability to survive a chase for 10.67 seconds longer while there are 4 survivors alive allows your team to put the 32 seconds of cost of your heal back into a generator. For every second you prolong the chase longer than that, your heal was beneficial.

It seems to be fair for a killer that there is a cost to being hit, doesn't it?

There is a problem: Those 32 seconds DO NOT HAVE TO BE A COST. 32 seconds of healing time is only a cost when the game is progressing for the killer. If no generator is regressing and all players are hidden, then the 32 seconds heal will have costed you 0 of missed generator time, leveraged by other players.

The state in which nobody is hooked and nobody is found is what we'll refer to as The State of Stealth.

Because survivors are only paying a price when throwing down pallets, being hit, being hooked or when generators are regressing more than they are progressing (which is a price that will ultimately cost them), being in the State of Stealth allows survivors to have an INFINITE window of value in which the game can progress.

With all survivors being in the State of Stealth and knowing how to react to this power, they will know that they don't have to progress generators fast. They can afford to work on a generator, hide, have the killer check while on the other side of the map other generators are progressing.

Suddenly previously ignored perk-combinations like:
-Premonition
-Bond
-Openhanded
-Lightweight

when equipped by everybody through pre-established communication, may suddenly become incredibly powerful and allow for perhaps unintended gameplay:

This is a picture showing 4 survivors using Premonition and Bond with Open handed to (unfairly?) extend the range of Premonition, allowing the players to disappear from generators and forcing the killer in Hide-And-Seek games that they cannot afford to have.
Through pre-communication they have developed signs to signal that the killer is coming in their direction.)

If survivors would have the trust system to start using the INFINITE VALUE provided by the State of Stealth, perks like Whispers, discordance, etc al, would become very important, and may be; obligatory, which brings us to the following problem:

Mono-behaviour

Because only the strongest strategies survive, we have effectively killed off the concept of choice, if you take it that your goal is to achieve a higher rank.

We have effectively killed "Rank 1 NO PERK" videos as they are impossible to make. If you limit yourself, you are simply not playing towards your highest potential, meaning that you are pushed out by players that do, since they set the standard in our strict rank-domain.

If killers do not have a separate ELO system PER UNIQUE KILLER, then there will only be 1 killer in rank 1; the strongest one.

In other words:

Every problem regarding balance gets highlighted and becomes painfully frequent; not balance regarding ranking-up but balance regarding your ability TO CHOOSE and still be competitive.

As our rank system would deliver us true statistics and allowing us to objectively see what is truly overpowered (relative to tools within a faction), then we also have it easier agreeing on what truly is strong, but at the cost of players having to endure it until the time these broken things that will start to reappear in every one of your games has been nerfed(/buffed).

So the question is, will the game be balanced (among factions itself predominantly)? Or will we see 1 mono-behaviour at the this time REAL rank 1?

Section 2: Our current system: The works of Genius or a Blunder?

Because the game is not balanced among factions(Perks playstyles and items among themselves),
Because the game is not balanced across factions (killer-vs-survivor),
Because the game doesn't match based on rank domains, but on Frequent play with a non-competitive-axis,
We have a game in which you can enjoy the delusion of being "Rank 1" and by the psychology of it are not forced to mimic mono-behaviour playstyles in a game that does not have enough variables, routes, strategies and dynamic gameplay mechanics to justify a highly competitive scene.

So do we really want rank fixed? I'll leave that up to you.

End note

Give me your opinions regarding;

-the proposal of the Emblem system that I quickly set-up as an example.
-whether the 4 Emblems per emblems should be removed entirely and make it a 0-100% progression per emblem (with 400% being the max)
-Whether the ranking system should not use a custom emblem system and allow your ability to survive and a killers ability to kill being the sole win-condition.
-Do you have any own suggestions regarding the emblem system, specifics or variables that you want to change?
-Do we want a rank reward to make things worth it? Do we want the ability to hide it? A lot has come form the recent deliberate De-pipping debate.

I hope I've covered all you need to know in order to understand the full picture of the DBD Pseudo-ranking issue.

If you have anything to add, feel free to do so down below!

Milord · January 2019

TL;DR we can replace the current pseudo-rank system to something that's actually rank system (i.e. something that more resembles online competitive games), but in the process will bring a community that goes "YOUR BUILD IS SLIGHTLY LESS THAN OPTIMAL, GTFO!!!".

Milord · January 2019

On the side note, when Legion was out, the first thing I thought (ignoring the moonwalk problem) was that "he's bad at killing but good at farming, then doesn't this make him a win-win killer?". But apparently most people play this game not to win-win. :P

Attackfrog · January 2019

I read all of it. The current rank system has always seemed absolutely silly and arbritrary. The addition of swf makes it even more so (due to "high" ranks being placed with "low" ranks....so stupid, which completely negates the rank system purpose)

Your idea makes sense...And might actually make rank mean something in this game.

Until then, I won't pay attention to it because it is absolutely stupid.

AlwaysInAGoodShape · January 2019

Is Mark Desmarais a beacon of hope?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnFD5yAVV_M&feature=youtu.be

Mark Desmarais correctly applied the principle from Chapter 2, Section 1 for the creation of the upcoming event!
The mechanic used to gain Event-Points (lunar vessels) will have a competitive axis!

We are making progress (:

Why everything you believe about Rank in DBD is WRONG