Why do killers think this game is survivior sided?
Comments
-
If the game is designed to be so unfun that people are Kobing themselves out of matches to go next, then you have to include that. The game being so poorly designed that people have 0 desire to play out a match, means the match itself was going to be so painfully unfun, the alternative was preferable.
Nurse skips half the rules of the game and arguably deserves her own launcher. Because she is such a free win (when piloted competently), Killers become overconfident and tank her winrate. Also isn't it suspicious that DCs don't count towards the stats, and Nurse has among the top 3 DC rate (IME)? That tells me that most Nurse matches that include a DC are deflating her killrate, but since they don't tell us the rate of DCs, we can't tell for sure. Freddy and the like are kind of the opposite, Survivors go in expecting an easy match and lose from their overconfidence (and never DCing).
12 -
I did the math. Its important what you leave out. 20% Killer winrate has 0% Survivor winrate, because it has an 80% draw/tie rate. The average among all permutations is 22%S/28%D/50%K. If you (favorably) split draws 50-50, that still yields 36%S/64%K. If you throw out draws, it comes to ~31%S/~69%K. So Survivor loses about a 20% multiplicative expected winrate and Killer gains it. Draws/Ties existing always shows the flaw of the sub 60% winrate discussion. I shorthand to 60% killrate = 60% winrate because it is the argument most favorable to what I am arguing against. The reality is Survivor winrates are much more dire ATM.
Now technically, the flaw of simply using all permutations is that some are rarer, and some are more common. This treats all with equal merit. IME, 2K+2E is the most rare result, and 3K is the most common result. If we look at the permutation with most 2K+2Es, that is the 20K/80D subset. If we look at the permutation with most 3Ks, that is the 20S/80K subset. If these were the only 2 subsets, we would have an average 10%S/40%D/50%K, which still means Survivors only win 10% of the time, or 16.6% if we throw out Draws/Ties. So while Killer's winrate can range from 20-80%, Survivor's winrate can similarly only range from 0-40%.
TL:DR Survivor winrate isn't (100%-Killer winrate), because Draws/Ties exist (2K+2E). Killer's winrate may range from 20-80%, but Survivor's winrate can only range from 0-40% within the same conditions.
8 -
It more or less is, but not for that reason.
Killers are winning more in every bracket.
11 -
People have always DC’d because things didn’t go exactly how they wanted, even when survivors were at their most powerful. Leading to the implementation of the DC penalty, and people Kobe because it’s a way to circumvent the punishment system and needs to go.
If people have zero desire to play then they shouldn’t be queuing up when they know what they are queueing up for.If killers could walk out the exit gates and go next as soon as their first down got flashlight saved then there would be as many that do that as those who DC because they got found first or Kobe because they got downed first and their DC timer is already too high.
It’s a player problem not a game problem, except the fact they still have a system in place to allow survivors to leave on a whim because they feel entitled to do so and screw over the other 4 players who just want to play the game.
3 -
That is the part that always seems to get ignored by people arguing that a 50 percent Killer win rate means the game is balanced. Draws exist. If the Killer has a 50 percent win rate then any draws have to come out of the other 50 percent which, by definition, means survivors have less than a 50 percent win rate.
It's not 2021 anymore; it's 2024. The game is Killer sided now and Killer is the easier role. BHVR literally balances for the game to be Killer sided. I'm not arguing that's a bad thing; I'm pretty ambivalent about DbD being a bit sided towards either role as long as it's still possible to have fun. However, the mental gymnastics from some people arguing that DbD isn't Killer sided right now is amazing.
And, instead of acknowledging that being the underdog role which is currently Survivor may come with issues that need to be investigated because a game needs to be fun for both sides, some people try to argue that Killer is the underdog instead of the game being literally balanced by intention towards favouring the Killer and Killer being at it's strongest point and easiest ever since the game was released.
13 -
Removing unhook won't keep people playing. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make em drink. A stick is for donkeys.
It's a player problem? Uhhh okay not gonna touch that one.
2 -
My personal take is in this game, the team that wins is the team that makes the fewest mistakes… but the side whose game it is to lose changes wildly based on the killer play, and is determined by how much of the killer is mechanics vs. mind games…
Survivors have mostly only mind games to play with to keep alive. There is a mechanical skill requirement yes, but that's not the main decider, it's mostly all about out positioning and/or out smarting the other player. The top killers however have mechanics based abilities that if they play perfectly can make hits an m1 killer can never make… but with penalties that slow them down substantially if they do misplay/regularly miss.
Against a basic Killer like Trapper, Pig, Sadako or Myers, if the Survivors make no mistakes, makes every read and plays perfectly, then there is little the killer can do about it to catch them, create pressure and even get a foot in the game, let alone win it…. these killers rely almost exclusively on mind games to put a survivor in a bad position; there is no mechanical skill these killers can call upon to subvert loops and level the playing field if the Survivor never makes a mistake.
Against a mechanics Killer like Huntress, Hillbilly, Blight or Nurse however, even if a survivor makes no mistakes, a sufficiently skilled killer who aims correctly every single time levels the playing field substantially and can score/brute force hits the survivor can't avoid… conversely if these same killers make mistakes with their aim/reads, the game can easily roll away from them. Nurse is the extreme example, because an extremely high skilled Nurse that reaches her maximum potential and never makes a mistake bypasses all windows, all pallets, all mind games and more often than not simply cannot be countered or dodged most of the time…. but a low level Nurse making lots of mistakes, barely does anything, and struggles to even function as a threat.
This is the disparity of Mind Games vs. Mechanics that I feel creates these killer/survivor sided contradicting perspectives… because the mistakes made create vastly different performances across different MMRs…
In high MMR where very few mistakes are made, if both teams are going all out to win, then a Nurse can best even the strongest and most coordinated survivor teams through pure skill, and even the best survivors struggle not to go down fast vs. her… but no matter how skillful a Myers is, he is never gonna match the strongest and most coordinated survivor team, because in his case there is no mechanical ability he can call upon to catch up…. it's the survivors who have to make the mistakes.
In low MMR however where there are mistakes a plenty, if you take Myers and Nurse again against an equally skilled low level team, then Nurse will be making mistakes and missing hits constantly, and as her mistakes matter more, will walk away with maybe 2 hooks (if she's lucky). Myers has a good chance of getting a 4k however, because the chance survivors make a mistake against him are much higher, and his own mistakes are far less impactful due to how much simpler he is relatively to play.
The weak killers are typically very strong at low MMR, while the strongest killers tend to perform badly at low MMR… but in high MMR the weakest killers can't really do much at all, whereas the strongest killers can absolutely decimate. That's how I see it… and to my mind it makes a lot of these discussions of killer sided vs. survivor sided kinda pointless… The swing in performance between mechanical and mind game based killers is just too huge across MMR levels to make a strong argument for it… there is always gonna be some contradiction somewhere for both sides.
1 -
BHVR imagine you mismanaged your game so hard, that someone wholeheartedly thinks a ''hook-trade'' is a healthy part of your gameplay. The funny part were loops and outplays, but while u designed static loops like TLs and jungle, u fail to educate the whole looping thing to your community. You removed all power perks from survivors for the last two years but failed to remove the toxic aspects from killer gameplay. Your game was considered to be somewhat of a competitive game, now for casual players like me it feels like im a punching bag for some loners dominance/power fetish. But feel free to design more Feet skins and all the other things that boost the health of your game. I guess the old designers mostly left the boat already
6 -
Yes there are "I will always" DCs, there are "I hate this Killer" DCs, there are "the match is unwinnable" DCs, and there are "God why did I log in to play this horrible game" DCs, "I lost and my time is now being wasted if I don't quit" DCs and more. The "I will always" are the group that you are talking about, and is entirely fair to discard those, but all the other DCs are still valid (in comparison). The problem is you are acting like the "I will always" group is any amount greater than 50%, when it is probably 1-5% at most. you are ignoring 50-90% of games (with DCs) with legitimate player enjoyment problems because of one scapegoat, just like BHVR is when they ignore DCs towards killrates.
The "I hate this Killer" DCs are because so many Killers are so poorly designed, and there is no counter (for player enjoyment, not raw mechanical counterplay) other than "I hope I don't RNG into them". That's why so many people call Kobeing 'go-next'. Give me another roll of the dice, because you gave me an autoloss, or a Plague when I'm running a heal tome, or a Ranged Killer and a Pallet stun tome, or whatever reason the game would be unenjoyable on its face. That's the thing though, how often do you run into Plague? Yet somehow her pick rate appears to go up to 50% when you want to run a goofy heal build or get a heal tome done.
Survivor is built to lose, so you have to have fun in the planned loss. If you can't even meaningfully engage with the game such as getting build value, then you sadly are better off "going next" to a game where you can get build value/fun. The design needs to be fixed so this flaw can't occur. Killer bans at 1 per 5 released Killers (round down) would help fix this, and Killers can get map bans so Ghosty doesn't need to go to Autohaven with 0 LOS blockers, and Huntress doesn't need to go to Lerys.
Is it a player problem that the game is so dissatisfying when it using to be fun? That sounds like the players haven't changed, and the game did. That would make it a game problem.
6 -
If you think that ruining the game for 4 other players because you can’t complete a time challenge then you are the problem.
If DC punishments were longer and killing yourself to ‘go next’ weren’t options that saved time over just playing the damn game out then it wouldn’t be so prevalent.
You can dislike a certain killer but when you queue up you are submitting to the chance you may vs them and it’s entitled to feel you can screw over the other players because you haven’t got exactly what you want. There are 4 other people that have wants as well and that may well include playing as or against the thing you dislike.3 -
I'm newer to the forums so I'm not sure where this was ever said. Can you please dig this post up so we can all verify? I don't recall ever hearing this from any source before.
2 -
6
-
This is kinda true of Killer side too.
- "I will always DC" is not really common on Killer side I find, I don't see Killers giving up based on Survivor pick.
- "I hate this playstyle" is the equivalent of "I hate this Killer" and it's usually because the Killer is sick of dealing with it over and over again. Understandable. This usually happens if many Survivors are playing the same style, and usually early into the round when they realize it.
- "This match is unwinnable" in my experiences most often comes from realizing your Killer can do nothing with the given map, the perks the Survs are running, or how fast gens go in relation to their own perks. It usually results more in standing in the corner or at the gate than a DC, because Killers get mocked harder for DCing and called out for malding, salting, rage quitting, or being a 'baby' when they do it. "They want the win more than me, I will stand in a corner." "I'm Ghostface on Coldwind and they want to sweat more than me, and my cosmetics make me stick out. I can't do much, so it's better to just go next." "I'm Dredge on a map with no lockers, GGs, I autolose." "I'm running a silly cat build on Blight who I am still learning, and these guys outrank me, I can't touch these guys so I can't learn, best to just give up and try again". This happens usually start to mid round, not at the end.
- "God why did I log in to play this horrible game?" DCs are understandable too, and usually occur when the Killer is decidedly outranked by the Survivors and on a nasty loss streak. Same as with Survivors. It happens. This often happens middle of a round.
- "I lost and my time is now wasted" doesn't seem to exist for Killers, if the Killer DCs it's usually mid or start of the round.
0 -
Thanks for bothering to dig this up!
It seems clear form this then, that to keep the winrate equal, Kill rate needs to be higher doesn't it? Myabe I am tripping, but it seems like people mistake "60% Kill rate" as "60% winrate". Nightlight says Killers average somewhere between 50-60% winrate, so maybe a bit higher than expected but certainly within range.
So why are people complaining that Killer is too easy now again? it seems like the math here is mathing. And it certainly seems for an assym, this would be the balanced ratio, right? Why should someone who is less good at the game than they seem win easily at lower levels, and someone who gets boosted win easily at higher levels? If you don't like your results in game just lose/win more respectively?
1 -
P1 - If there was no artificial time limit associated with them, then I would agree with you. If the Battle Passes were permanent, and you could get the Battle Pass xp for the revelant historic Battle Pass, then this would be correct. Since BHVR artificially removes Battle Passes for engagement numbers, they know this is a consequence of their actions. This is a scummy tactic to force customers to feel FOMO, and this is a consequence of that artificial FOMO. If I do something really bad to someone, and they retaliate in a predictable manner, I am responsible for that retaliation. This is the case with FOMO Battle Passes, BHVR, and time limited tomes.
P2 - Or possibly more people would ruin matches and bm mid match instead in other ways within the rules. Both are possibilities. You can't hold someone hostage and say 'play the game the way I want you to play or you can't play at all'. Everyone who went to school realizes that you never invite that kid to play games with you again, and they have to play with themselves. This is the equivalent of that same social pressure found in schools. Play so we can all have fun, or we A: don't play with you, or B: make sure you don't have fun right alongside us. Since we can't ban players to be matchmade with, people can only resort to option B, mutual spite unfun/anti-fun (some with, and most without rulebreaking).
P3 - I'm not saying you get to do this for free, I'm saying all of these actions build up a Patience bar. Once someone's Patience bar is filled, they lose the desire to play in a fun manner for other people (but still can play according to the rules while ruining everyone else's match). These things I oppose build up that bar faster, so if we minimize the actions that fill this Patience bar, then we get greater match quality, since less people's Patience bar has filled.
1 -
The problem is a lot of killers that should never be at high MMR are because of how killer sided "noob" MMR is. There is no inbetween, you play sweaty with little skill you're going to hit high MMR and come here and complain how the game is now survivor sided. Actually good killers don't have a problem at high MMR.
Post edited by th3syst3m on6 -
Im not sure how to see the win rate on nightlight, I don't use it much, but does it also show survivor win rate? As well as draws? Killers being 50-60 could mean many things but if survivors are way lower then that would explain things differently.
1 -
Yeah they can happen for Killer also, but I've probably seen 10x Survivor to Killer DCs in the entire time of me playing the game.
The worst of experiences is what I seek to address, that's why I suggest map bans for Killers alongside Killer bans for Survivors. That loading into a open map as a Stealth Killer, or lockerless map as a locker Killer, or indoor map as a Ranged Killer, is such a buzzkill. Its just Survivor has more negative extremes than Killer in general. (Exit Gate timewaste takes 2m max, Bleedout timewaste takes 4m max, the things I've already mentioned, and more.)
I spend most of my time on the forums now worrying about these negative extremes, since I've had 2/4 IRL friends hard quit the game now because of it. The others only soft quit, as one only plays during events, if that, or the other only plays Killer now.
3 -
I'm so glad people are finally realizing the game is killer sided at every level. For so long everyone just stated as a fact the game is survivor sided because it was that way years ago.
9 -
P1 - There is loads of time the rift pass is open, and a couple of 15 minute games where you don’t get to complete a challenge isn’t going to make much of a difference. It’s a weak excuse to try and give rage quitters a pass.
P2 - BMing and sabotaging the game as you describe is a reportable offence and action would be taken that way to deter such behaviour.
P3 - This is the reason longer penalties would be necessary to give players without the patience to play the game normally as is expected of them a time out where they don’t force themselves to queue up knowing the slightest thing that they don’t agree with will cause them to ruin the game for the other players.
2 -
On Nightlight, go to killers, and it will display 0k, 1k, 2k, 3k, 4k. They color the different numbers and make the dividing lines clear. On the right hand side you can also sort the chart, their default is pick rate, if you're comparing kill rates you'll want to adjust to that setting.
So if you wanted winrate you'd have to a little bit of math by adding the 3k and 4k numbers together.
They also have survivor data, but that's escape rates of different survivors, the kill rate from the killers is the most helpful for end game outcomes.
Myabe I am tripping, but it seems like people mistake "60% Kill rate" as "60% winrate".The more relevant part of the BHVR post is that they don't have a firm win rate. However, if you throw out everything else, like MMR does, kill rate and win rate are identical. So going just off that, killers win ~60% of the time, survivors ~40% (thrown off a little bit hatch)
It seems clear form this then, that to keep the winrate equal, Kill rate needs to be higher doesn't it?No, though the reason depends a bit on how you define the win. A 60% killrate can lead to many possibilities for how it comes about.
4 -
Games should never be balanced around the "average player" because the average player is not abusing things that are overpowered to their fullest potential.
You balance things around what the highest level players can do, but also account for lower level players in your changes. You might have seen this because i post it a lot, but this is a video that explains the concept:
It is timestamped to the relevant section, and it is about TF2, but the concept transfers over to DBD quite well.
I would suggest at least watching the snipped i linked before you read on but:
For example, you wouldn't just fix the game by increasing gen times or making it harder to kill survivors, you need to do it in a way that doesn't hurt lower skilled players. So, maybe you nerf the killer shack by adding a breakable wall to it, to make its power similar to the one in dead dog's saloon. What would the impact of that be?
- You would nerf one of the strongest structures in the game for high level players, and they wouldn't be able to exploit it as much as they can now
- What would it do to low level players though? Probably not much, because what are they doing at shack? Probably predropping the pallet early, or mistiming their vault so they end up doing a medium vault and get hit anyway.
What about in high skill vs low skill games. What can you do to buff low skill survivor players without buffing high skill survivor players, not to mention solo vs SWF?
- What if survivors got kindred basekit? This would show survivors what their teammates are doing when someone is hooked, so they know who is closest and who needs to go for the save. And you can see if someone isn't going for the save. Also, you could see if the killer is camping a bit easier.
- What about in high skill games? Well, in high skill games, generally everyone has a good enough game sense to know when to go for the save, or if they are in a group they are on discord and coordinating already.
This is just 1 example, there are many many other things that could be done.
Post edited by Reinami on5 -
P1 - Not everyone has the same time available, nor plays this as their only game. I strongly encourage you to attempt to work 60hrs a week, help raise either your kids or your younger siblings or niece and nephews, maintain a social life, and enjoying other activities/hobbies/games. Time is the most precious commodity, and artificially limiting Battle Passes encourages this behavior. I can only grant you this point if they use unlimited Battle Passes, which respects people's time equally.
P2 - Teabag and WSWS are considered BM by many, but aren't bannable. Bleeding out intentionally is considered BM, but not bannable. Touching gens every 9m59s and never reaching 10m of not touching gens is ratty behavior, but not bannable (last I recall 10m in a row was the limit for 'holding the game hostage'). You can be a jerk entirely within the confines of the rules. The types I was referring to (or at least meant to refer to if I wasn't specific enough) was specifically jerk behavior that is legal. For example, I can run Technician, Self-Care, and Bite the Bullet and not attempt skillchecks, and that is technically entirely legal. I could gen-tap to counter old Ruin, despite it taking ~3 times as long to finish gens. All of those ruin matches, but aren't specifically illegal.
P3 - Again, we run into the problem of people with (near)infinite time, and people with time for 1-3 matches. Someone with only 1-3 matches in their schedule are all the more empowered to quit and act out the harsher the penalties are. You can see this all the time "If I'm getting punished, I'm gunna do something actually worthy of punishment". This would make those artificial penalties cause greater match sabotage actions. Everyone playing with (near)infinite time can just wait for the last match of the night to act out. I know of at least 1 community that jokes past midnight "we play till we win, or if its a Nurse/SM, we DC", so there is no real prevention for this type of behavior regardless. The best solution is preventing these negative extremes from ever showing their faces, not making greater punishments that would be memed around regardless.
3 -
I would disagree here (edit: with topdown balancing specifically in DBD). I think what is intended to be a party game vs what is intended to be a competitive game has to balance around these different factors. DBD is nowhere close to being competitive in any respectable setting, otherwise we would have perks and Killers actually be of comparable power levels already. Instead we have Eruption in the same category as Call of Brine, or Nowhere to Hide in the same category as Darkness Revealed, or Friendly Competition in the same category as Prove Thyself.
Now I do think that most Killers and Perks should be much closer to each other in terms of power, but it is clear that BHVR doesn't care whatsoever. It would require a significant overhaul for the game to be remotely balanced/competitive. This game will never be properly balanced, so if you want true competition, you are better served playing CS, SC, or DoTA2. I think it is good we have the Mario Kart equivalent to Lightning/Blue Shells/Star Power alongside Single Banana/Single Green Shell/Fake Block. The game isn't meant to be taken seriously, so someone spamming Star Power is the one who is rocking the boat and ruining the game for the rest of the players.
Hypothetically if they ever actually balanced the game correctly, then I think this top-down balancing could work. Sadly I don't see that any sooner than 2 years out at the earliest.
Edit: Clarification in the first sentence.
8 -
P1 - This thread is about killer being OP, but by your arguement it wouldn’t matter what killer it is or how strong, if they found you first while you are trying a glyph challenge you would just ‘go next’ because you can’t complete your challenge.
To think you are the only person in such a situation life wise is very self centred; and to suggest that because you’re too busy to put time into the game that you are entitled to get balance changed and be able to ruin other peoples time (who maybe in a similar situation to you) is a very backwards and selfish mentality.
P2 - All of those things at least allow the game to continue somewhat normally compared to you just having a tantrum and quitting because things haven’t gone your way. You are still participating in the match and the other players can still play around your childish behaviour.
Plus you are still wasting your own time and many would just play normally at that point even if you want to suggest many would be like you and act like a spoilt child.P3 - Again if you only have time for 3 games and the penalty is a long enough deterrent then one of those games would be wasting your own time by quitting or trying to ruin the match for the other players, and then another match you would waste sitting out your DC penalty. If time is so precious why would you waste it in this way instead of trying to play a normal match to the best of your ability. If you really don’t enjoy the game unless you win or complete a challenge then perhaps play something you feel you can enjoy with the short time you have to play.
You wouldn’t put a battle royale game on but then complain if the matches you had time to play ended because you died shortly after starting, or that other players needed to be changed so you got to win because you don’t have much time in your life to play.Some games aren’t going to go your way, such is the nature of online PvP especially when teams are involved and you have to be grown up to be ok with that, as that is what you are signing up for when you hit that button to search for a match.
0 -
My experience in DbD was far better prior to MMR.
As survivor I end up with incompetent players because all the better ones are pairing up even more to increase their odds of escape. Since escape boosts MMR.
As killer it’s either 4 lemmings, or 4 navy seals. So the trial ends super fast either way. I learn little to nothing these days. That’s why I stopped learning new killers.The best killers out there may agree that SWFs are a hit or miss. It’s because average SWFs abuse comms and perks (exploit) to reach higher brackets against average killers, but that can only take you so far.
That’s why we see big streamers stomping so many groups. Those players they face boosted themselves to the top via exploits, but are no match for a big fish even with their boosts.
MMR makes us obsess, and sweat over something we cannot see.
MMR doesn’t allow people to learn. Especially new survivors, or whenever you want to learn a new killer. You sink and sink and sink.Essentially all MMR really does is force us to get paired up with and against players we shouldn’t be with... The exact opposite of its original intention.
Why can’t everyone realize this?
We all need to demand that the devs change MMR in some way...
1.) Let us see our MMR once upon every reset.
2.) Rework how we rank up. Pipping should still count.
3.) Remove MMR altogether.Post edited by WaveyTrey on0 -
It’s because average SWFs abuse comms and perks (exploit) to reach higher brackets against average killers, but that can only take you so far.
Using perks is an exploit now?
10 -
I think you're right about this and literally everything BHVR has been doing for the past year now has been in the service of trying to make it less and less comp - removing skill expression, adding modes, making Killers stronger, turning niche funny perks into perks that are ONLY about funny and have no real effect that could ever be considered that helpful, things like Hex: Two Can Play, Dracula being balanced but not THAT strong.
BHVR is 100% trying to get us all to lighten the Fog up, and yet the community keeps steadfastly refusing and going "no, this party game is competitive, you can't make us not sweat every single round for wins."5 -
P1 - First off, the thread is about main-brained Killer players falsely thinking the game with a 60% killrate is Survivor sided, not Killer being OP. Secondly, you can still complete a glyph challenge if you get chased first, so this is plainly a lie. Thirdly, I wasn't even saying people are justified in these actions, just that this is what can drive them to these undesired responses. I don't get annoyed at a tree blocking my view and cut one branch expecting it to magically disappear, I have to cut it down at the roots. Same here, don't stick a bandaid on the Monty Python Black Knight's stumps for arms and legs and be confused when they don't grow back. Address the primary cause, not the symptoms. You are promoting symptomatic treatment, which is only good when you don't know what is or could be the root cause.
P2 - Even the worst case scenarios of these DC/Kobe death games allow them to continue 'somewhat normally' just the same. That guaranteed loss is still a guaranteed loss, regardless if they played out the match, DCed, or Kobed to death. That argument for bleedouts justifies DCs in the same breath, and to be clear I don't advocate either of those. I am saying that it is a consequence of actions. I agree, all Killers bleeding out for the 4K should just take their 3K hook and stop acting like a spoiled child as well.
P3 - If I only had 1-3 matches, then the second things go south, it would make the most sense to go crazy with my last match. If the match was so horrifically boring/unfun/bad, then all that does is make more people do negative actions. The threat of a penalty is only relevant if it would achieve the desired outcome. I could pee on my dog and hope it stops eating my furniture, but that punishment isn't likely to actually achieve my goal of stopping my furniture from being ripped to shreds. Instead, my dog is just going to look at me confused and shake it off onto that same furniture, making the situation far worse.
Thank you for bringing up the Battle Royale genre, because that is what people are forcing the game to be. When a Killer tunnels someone out, and you can't even look at the Killer's perks before the match is over (for everyone, not just yourself), many (newer) people assume the Killer is some form of cheater and go to the next match. If they didn't get killed 90s into the match, maybe they would actually be invested enough in the outcome of the match, wait till the end, and actually learn the Killers perks and what contributed to their win or loss. People are being further and further encouraged to treat the game like a Battle Royale, unless there are actual steps taken to stop this problem. Greater DC penalties will merely encourage this Battle Royale styled 'I don't care about the outcome' problem further, because their big penalty will cause them to quit for the day, and no longer be invested.
Also there is a difference between a game 'going your way' and 'being a complete and utter waste of everyone's time'. The problem is far too many matches are falling into the latter category, not the former.
6 -
My experience in DbD was worse before MMR.
Earning emblems and pips, and more bloodpoints in the process, invariably raised your rank. Once you got to green ranks as killer, you were prone to being matched with rank 1s (who could only match downwards), losing most games, and thereby being unable to progress higher, while also not losing enough pips to derank out of this matchmaking limbo. Average/midling killers were forced into this sweatfest. The monthly reset would then result an about a week of even more sweating as everyone rushed to rank up.
Under MMR, you get the games you deserve. If you sweat, you get sweatier games. If you play chill, you don't get inadvertently catapulted into higher skill brackets just because you play often enough.
MMR makes us obsess, and sweat over something we cannot see.
No it doesn't. Nothing in the game tells you MMR exists.
If you ignored MMR (as intended) and played towards earning emblems and pips (as intended, and the only tangible score the game provides you) then you wouldn't need to sweat all the time, artificially inflate your MMR via cheap and boring tactics, or end up in an MMR bracket far above your actual skill level.
5 -
It wasn't Killer-sided until very very recently. It didn't start to change until arguably, 6.1. The game has been more Survivor sided for most of its lifespan. And crucially, it was never intended to be that way, because the Devs are and have been changing that.
8 years is not that long, it's two presidential terms in the US - or almost a decade. You can't blame people for feeling skeptical that the game really is more Killer-sided as the Devs intended it to be right now in light of the fact that it literally wasn't Killer-sided for at least 5 of the 8 years it has existed.0 -
You're mostly someone I agree with here except for one thing: using perks effectively isn't exploits no matter how strong the perks are, and the game does not consider comms to be anything even approaching an exploit.
1 -
If someone was a little bit petty they'd say; since you only need to get one thing right as killer to win a match with most killers and builds the vast majority of times that leaves two options: the killers who do complain surv is OP can't even manage to get that one thing right — or these killers think they not just have to win the vast majority of their matches but all matches.
But in all seriousness; while I do think the above isn't necessarily untrue (exaggerated, yes - but not untrue) I do also think it's difficult to make a statement about "killers" collectively. There are huge differences between the killers and someone who plays a killer with a non-sweaty build and finds themselves on a map that isn't good for that killer might genuinely find that survs are OP and kinda forget to mention that they mean OP on that map against that killer with that build. As a player you shouldn't always have to bring the strongest of the strongest stuff to even have a shot.
4 -
Your dog analogy is such a weird comparison lol. I guess your arguement would be to not punish the dog or stop it from ruining your furniture but give it treats instead without addressing it’s bad behaviour; or remove your furniture altogether and everyone has to sit on the floor. And nothing you do will make the black knights arms or legs magically grow back lol.
If people didn’t care about the outcome of a match then they wouldn’t be ragequitting when things don’t go their way. If kobes are removed and an adequate punishment in place for DCs and griefing then the sooner those players can quit for the day and stop ruining everyone else experience that are invested in the game which would be the desired outcome. Or put all those players into their own queue so they can ruin each other’s matches without affecting everyone else and then they’ll see how their behaviour affects people when they are subjected to it from others themselves.
The game only becomes a waste of everyone’s time when someone ruins it for the others, and if you personally find playing the game a waste of your time then you shouldn’t be queueing up to play with other people.
People have different opinions and you’ll never please everyone, and if everyone behaved like a child and quit when they don’t get their way then no one would ever get a normal match because there would always be someone leaving.
It’s not even really to do with it being one sided or the other as back before DC penalties when survivors were at their most powerful people still DCd rampantly for the slightest reason. As long as an easy out option is there some people will take it and the sooner it is removed and more heavily discouraged with penalties the better for everyone except the rage quitters.
2 -
Literally nothing I could add… flawless summary.
I don't know why people obsess about climbing an invisible ladder that does nothing but make your games less fun... Like if you could see your MMR, I would still call it dumb, but could at least understand even if only for the bragging rights, but you don't even get that...
There is literally no reason to hard-core push for higher MMR, the grading system actually contradicts your goals for MMR, as going for pips/emblems tends to decrease your chances of getting a 4k/escaping...
To my mind a lot of people just seem to be making a rod for their own backs... obsess with winning, pair up with SWFs and/or run lame playstyles and perk combos to get big advantages... get mad when they get matched with opponents who do the same 🤷♂️
7 -
Honestly it makes so much sense that BM'ing killers are so common if this is the lense they see the game through.
7 -
Counterpoint:
- The devs constantly release kill rates and various other stats that people care about from a competitive point of view.
- The game has MMR and matches you based on that
- They make balance decisions from a competitive point of view (I.E. they nerfed blight hug tech, something that casual blight players never used, but was very important in competitive play)
How many party games use MMR? Do you think mario party uses MMR, or mario Kart?
1 -
Mario Party has no public matchmaking, but doesn't Mario Kart use a rating system?
6 -
A lot of online games use an MMR system, and most of them don't do so as a measure of competition, but in recognition that some of the players are more competitive than others. It's not that the game is either competitive or It's not, it's that it has to be either/both and serve all of those players.
It's used to seperate the competitive players from the new/non-competitive players, which is exactly how DBD uses it and is why there's really only three distinct brackets; new, below soft cap, and above soft cap.
1 -
Ahh yes ty. I found that the survivors and killer page both have an overall section it's just placed in between the individual characters of both sides. I guess even then it's open for interpretation.
If I look at just the killrates, it shows killers winning at 51.7 percent, Survivors winning at 35.27 percent, and draws at 13.01 percent. I think I'm figuring that correctly.
If I look at just survivor escape rates its 42.17 percent. Though that doesn't seem to take draws into consideration.
This is of course changing but at the time I saw the numbers
1 -
This is the case very much so.
I play Ghostface a lot. I'm very good at him because I am good at stealth games. I can make him look S tier on the right map. I have played this one character for 2+ almost 3 years now and I am p68. I usually win rounds with him to the point I often feel bad and let people go, because he's my Main and I know it wouldn't be a fair fight. I run his Classic robes because I love Scream a lot. I do great on any map, as long as it's not bright and open. If I am running a lot of rounds, and I end up sent to a map where my outfit makes me stick out like a sore thumb, I functionally can't use my character. The whole reason I play Ghostface goes out the window and I end up being relegated to a basic M1 Killer that can hide his Terror Radius. And as an M1, if you send me to a pallet dense map, I can't do a whole lot either - you have too many resources. If I am on the Game and not enough gens spawn in the lower half which is better for stealth, I am once again forced to play mostly Chaseface with no Terror Radius. These are map design flaws. For Ghostface, Survivors on maps like Ormond, Coldwind (even with the pallet reduction), Gideon, and Eyrie can be OP.
Now let's try Huntress. I am a terrible Huntress, I rarely play her and am still learning. I am not good and struggle as her a lot. I suck at shooters so I suck at her. I cannot hit orbitals, I can barely hit normal hatchets. I am p1 and have the most basic perks on her, I don't do well as Huntress. I make her look F tier. Regardless I can still win if I try enough… as long as the map is open. If the map is not open, and people know how to counter me, I can't do much. I am a 110% speed Killer with a ranged attack I need to reload. If I am running a lot of rounds, and I get a closed in map like Lery's or god forbid Hawkins, I really can't do a whole lot except be a slow M1 Killer that can maybe hit you at short range unless you crouch and then you are magically immune - you have too many hiding spots. It's even worse if there's lots of clutter; I am forced to play M1 Huntress somewhere like her own Red Forest map because there simply isn't much other option. These are map design flaws. For Huntress, Survivors on maps like Hawkins and Red Forest can be OP.
I don't believe for one second the old canard that every Killer main, heck every Killer player, believes they need to win 100% of their matches. In fact I have rarely met any Killer Mains or players like that, most seem to take losses gracefully. But then again, when I do see it? The Killer is usually brand new or under 1000 hours of playtime, and thus still conditioned to sweat now ask questions later because they don't know any better yet.
4 -
I'd take Nightlight stats with a grain of salt if I were you, it seems clear they are based more on team wins/Killer wins being only a 3-4k, not individual Survivor/Killer wins. The game instead sees Survivors winning as an individual and Killers winning based on number of Kills, then adjusts MMR accordingly.
Damn but I wish we never acquired the Promethean fire of knowledge that is the existence of MMR in this game. We'd all be better off for it not knowing and being blissfully unaware, a Lovecraftian placid isle of ignorance in the midst of the Fog… it was not meant that we voyage far and learn such, but learn we did. Now look where it's left us all.2 -
I brought up nightlight because you brought it up. I don't personally use it for anything. I prefer the official stats but even those can be impacted by many things. Which is again why I say it seems open to interpretation. I'm not even worried about the MMR here.
I was just making the point that just because killers are at 50-60 doesn't mean survivors aren't way lower. At that point what is fair and what isnt?
1 -
I think it is obvious what BHVR believes fair is: a 60-40 split of Killer to Survivor wins, and they balance around keeping it not more than about 5% above or below that as a margin of error. If it's really too much BHVR can continue to balance as needed, or Survivors can continue to try and improve while Killers have some breathing room and learn to actually chill out for once.
2 -
Yes, the dog part is saying the wrong punishment makes things worse, and the Black Knight part is saying some solutions do nothing at all.
There are levels of 'caring about the outcome'. There is "I will do everything I can to win", there is "I'm just here to get paid (Blood Points)", and there is "Golly Gee I hope my day doesn't get ruined, I'm at my breaking point". Normally you don't really want people in the third category to play the game at all. The issue is the game itself is pushing people to that negative extreme. It would be hypocritical to shove someone into the pool then ask "why'd you go in if you can't swim".
The waste of time issue is a flaw of the game, because you can ruin someone's experience without even attempting it. It can be an ally or enemy. Legion is an example of a commonly disliked Killer, even if they aren't necessarily considered strong. For some Survivors, they can hate Legion themself because they despise spamming M1 to mend, or hate their teammates for healing against Legion only to get Feral AOE stabbed seconds later. For the opponents exclusively, there can be exit gate teabags and Bleedout for the 4Ks. You go in expecting everyone to play the game normally, then the next thing you know 8+ minutes are being wasted from the Bleedout alone (4 for the Bledout Surv, 4 for the hiding Surv, and 4*remaining Survs waiting to see perks). This could easily be fixed by revealing perks on death (outside of SWF), and adding a 'giveup' button when either A: down to the final 2 Survivors, or B: reached max Recovery without being picked up.
If people act like petulant children they should get punished, I agree. The problem is that it is currently rewarded for Killer all too often. Act like a jerk and you can get an extra kill or 2. They are your opponents, so there often is little to no empathy offered towards them.
If any change is made to DCs, it should be that if a DC happens in the first 5 minutes, everyone else should be able to DC with their items+offerings and BP. If it happens after 5m, honestly that's late enough in the game to use the normal method. Also DCs are often better for Survivors than Kobes, because you at least get a bot rather than someone intentionally or passively griefing. Having less DC penalties encourages DCing instead of Kobeing, which is sadly better for the game. If there aren't sweeping changes to prevent these negative extremes from happening. Lets go back to what we originally started this. I said that the only reason people are Kobeing(/DCing) is because the match itself was so garbage and unfun, that they are actually having more fun quitting the match. That is a massive design flaw. No fun game has people going "Yippee I can't wait to DC next match I queue into!", so the problem is inherent with the game, not the players.
Point 1: I think the stats aren't strictly from a competitive point of view and some are the Marge styled "I just think its neat!". It isn't necessarily competitive to want to know which Mario Kart goes faster, just as it isn't necessarily competitive to want to know which Killer has a higher killrate.
Point 2: I partially agree here. I think MMR (in its implementation) has psychologically pushed people into playing more sweaty. I had far more fun on both sides back when we used Rank-Based Matchmaking. Alternatively, team-based MMR would make the game far less unfun, because people would play to grief (legally) less often. I would prefer to go back to RBMM, as it tracks all the actions leading up to escape, and tracks skill far more effectively than blind K/E.
Point 3: The problem here was sweatlord Blights was ruining casual matches with bugtech. So that isn't making a balance decision to screw over comp, it was a balance decision to help fix normals.
How many party games use MMR? Mario Kart itself uses MMR for its online play. There does have to be some system to split the highest and lowest skilled players, otherwise the lowest skilled players quit. That's probably more important for a kids party game like Mario Kart. (You don't want a kid showing up the next day at school saying 'Mario Kart sucks!') The idea of Mario Kart using the campaign scoring system to split the players, so that next match there is a lobby of the 1st place winners against each other, lobby of 2nd place winners against each other, all the way down, actually makes a lot of sense. DBD using blind K/E doesn't make sense, and again, I'd prefer to use the system actually designed with the unique game rules in mind (Ranks/Grades).
Like I said (and will rephrase here) though, if they fully revamp the game such that Nurse and Myers (and everyone else, as well as perks) are perfectly equal in power, then I am 100% on board with top-down balancing. I was just saying that feels like a pipe-dream minimum 2 years out at the soonest, even if they took that dedicated effort.
2 -
Oh I agree with that. They are constantly balancing the game. They could even change the numbers they want to achieve, based on what they think is best suited for the game. Alongside the 60/40, Peanits has also stated they balance that way to support the horror theme of the game. In that sense I think they've done what they want to achieve. But in doing so, playing survivor has possibly started to feel more like a chore to some people. Rather than a good time.
2 -
I think that just means the game is no longer for those Survivor players. That happens, sometimes a game changes and it's not for you anymore. I don't think that is bad. The people who still care about the core horror feel of the game will stay, while everyone just interested in wins will leave and go play something else. That can really only be healthy for the game if people who don't enjoy it stop playing and ruining it for others, right?
4 -
With your pool analogy, no one is pushing or forcing anyone to play the game; it’s solely their choice and they have to respect that other people are enjoying it too, and that they can’t keep playing and ruining others experience because it isn’t like they want.
I get that there are things on both sides that some don’t enjoy, but people know that there’s a chance they might go against it when the queue up and so should be prepared to stick it out if they go against it which is the grown up thing to do.
If someone is really finding the game that frustrating to play then they should take a break until they have the patience to be mature about dealing with things that aren’t their favourite.
A better way of dealing with and discouraging ragequitting would at least keep the people who engage in that behaviour out of the queue which you say is the desired result, for them to not play the game while they are just going to rage and ruin the match for the others.We’ve seen the game with no DC penalty and it was a mess. You see killers quitting more rarely because they don’t have a loophole to exploit to go next with no repercussions. If they could open the exit and walk out at any time then you would certain see a similar problem from that side when the first chase goes too long, or gens start popping before they find or down someone, or their first down gets flashlight saved or hook sabotaged, or they get head on flashbanged etc.
Killers can’t just go next and so tend to put up with things they don’t enjoy because they have to weigh up just doing their best and playing it out or wait out an ever increasing time out.
1 -
I don't see how people playing are ruining the game for others? It could mean they may just switch to playing the other role for a while until something changes. I play both sides and don't play to win. I just generally play the side I find fun. Ideally, I can switch back and forth.
1 -
So in an online pvp game, only one side should care about wins and the other side should just be okay with losing in the name of "Horror"? Hate to break it you but dbd hasn't been a horror game in a long time. Sometimes I feel like a lot Killer mains want the challenge of a pve game, but the ego gratification of knowing they beat a real person at the same time. This is probably the most hilarious permutation of this sentiment I have seen though. "All the survivors should stop playing unless they don't care about winning in an online pvp game."
4
