http://dbd.game/killswitch
Why can't you just show boon auras to killers?
There is plenty of hex perks that does this, I'm not sure why it cannot be applied to boons too
Especially if we gonna pretend boon sounds are super loud and obvious, all it does is simply gatekeeping with hearing capability
Comments
-
First, killers aren't allowed to have accessibility features. Survivors get a visual heartbeat for TR and lullaby, but killers will never get a visual notification of gen progress if in hearing range, if gens are being worked on and are in hearing range, if footsteps or breathing can be heard, and so on. Not sure why, but only specifically survivors get these features.
Second, if that were to change, it wouldn't work out balance wise from a distance since the killer could pinpoint where it is from anywhere. Do you mean perhaps the aura circle pnly showing up if you're in hearing range of the totem? Problem here is it'd be a lot easier to figure out where it is (center of circle). Perhaps an alternative is to see a boon icon appear on the UI if within hearing range.
-4 -
I don't even see any real problem in it being easier to see, the balance factor is always time it takes to travel to it, not if you can find it or not
-1 -
Seeing it from a distance essentially would show the killer where the survivor's area of operation is, or there "secret" healing spot. That would be too much information for free.
2 -
But then you'll do same with sounds anyway, it's directional and changes in volume, should be same amount of information as simply seeing totem aura
-2 -
I was talking about from a distance. If you're within audible range, I could see them adding an icon popping up on the UI that there is a boon nearby.
5 -
i mean personally i have no problem with the aura being revealed since the problem i have with boons is survivors can light them infinitely and hexes (in general are supposed to be strong) get nerfed to uselessness and gets destroyed only once outside undying
1 -
The game is already heavily killer sided as BHVR intends. You do not need yet another hand out.
-8 -
Only for newcomers. It's survivored sided once everyone has experience. A 60% kill rate means having one average 2.4 kills a match. That means killers getting a win slightly under half of their matches. For the game to be mathematically balanced, each survivor would need a 38.5% escape rate. Right now, experienced players numbers reported by BHVR has solo queue having a 40% escape rate all the way up to 4 man squads having a 48% escape rate...nearly 10% more than the balance line. The game is not killer sided XD
0 -
These are some crazy mental gymnastics and I've read this nonsense before since you're just parroting what you've read so I'll quickly refute it.
Even at the highest MMR, against the sweatiest SWF squads, the game is still somewhat killer-sided (48% escape rate). However, your sweaty high MMR comp-level 4 man SWF is the vast minority of the player-base, so that means that in your average pub match there is an abysmal escape rate and a high kill rate. And no this isn't only "newcomers", this is a majority of the player base ranging from beginners to seasoned vets. A single "newcomer" on a team with 3 vets that have thousands of hours each, can easily guarantee a loss for the entire team, as the killer can just target the weak link to win.
Your win condition is just stupid. Killers kill roughly 60% of time on average. That means they "win" 6/10 of their matches overall. Heavily killer-sided. Not to mention that BHVR pulls a PR stunt with their stats by excluding matches with DC's, which are all too often a 4K sweep by a Nurse, Blight, or other broken killers like Kaneki that are purposely made easy to win with to increase DLC sales. This kind of balancing is literally unheard of in other popular PvP games, where the mechanics are actually balanced to give both sides a fair game. Even if 2K is a "draw" for killer, that still counts as a loss for 2 survivors, which your broken logic is ignoring.
Oh yeah, I play both sides. Killer it's very easy to 3-4K consistently. Getting equivalent results as a solo survivor (75-100% average escape rate) is far, far, far more difficult to do.
-2 -
Sorry to tell you, but your math is way off.
A 60% kill rate does not mean he wins 6/10 matches. By that logic, does that mean a 75% kill rste means he wins 3 out of 4 matches? Of course not, it's because ALL of his matches. If he had a 25% kill rate, he wins 1 out of 4? No, thats a 0% win rate. If he had a 10% kill rste. He wins 1 out of 10? It doesn't work that way.
First, 48% escape rate is ridiculous considering there's 4 survivors. Let's put it into perspective. If there was 1 killer and 1 survivor, then the balanced escape rate is 50%. However, let's say there are now TWO survivors, obviously, BOTH of them having a 50% escape rate wouldn't be fair to the player who has 2 opponents. The more survivors there are, the more EACH survivor's escape rate MUST decrease to maintain balance. However, we don't have just 2 survivors, we have 4 survivors. That maths out to each survivor needing an 38.5% escape rate. This isn't me "repeating what others have said", this is literally the math. If each survivor with 4 survivors had a 50% chance to escape, for example, then the killer's chance to win would be in the 30's percentile. Imagine flipping a coin 4 times. What are the chances you'd get at least 3 tails after, say…100 flips? Not very often!
As for a 60% kill rate, that means on average they only get 2.4 kills per match. A 3K is required for a killer to win. For the sake of easier math, let's just say the kill rate is 62.5%. That's an even 2.5 kills per match on average. That means, over the course of several matches, they would win roughly half of their matches. I'm hoping you at least understand the basics of averaging, as I really don't want to have to break the math down further on something as basic as that.
Also, another thing you failed to understand is that there is no draw in a 1 vs 4 individual players match each with their own win condition. If there is a 2K, then the killer failed to win, 2 survivors lost, and 2 survivors won. You can't draw on 1 on 1 situations in DBD - survivors either escape or get sacrificed - it's very binary. Which survivor exactly did he tie with? You cannot answer that because there are no ties. Now, if this game was actually the survivors being a team that wins\loses together, then that would make room for ties and each survivor escape rate would math out to 44.2%. However, BHVR has already made it very clear over the past few years from comments and clarifications that survivors are NOT a team and are instead 4 distinct individual players each with their own goal and individual win condition. That's why it never says Survivors Win! or Survivors Lose! at the end. It's an individual report on if you escapes or not. Working together increases their odds, but they are also welcome to go at it solo. That's also why there are perks that exists that actively work against working as a team (such as sole survivor). That's also why some of their advertisements ask things along the lines of "will you help other survivors, or will you look only out for yourself?"
You can poke fun and laugh at the math all you want, but the math is math. 1 killer vs multiple opponents in which each of those opponents only have a single and same opponent clearly had to have a reduced escape rate to MAKE the game balanced. That's an asymmetrical game design. If they each had a 50% chance to escape, then the killer would practically never win. If there were 1,000 survivors, do you seriously think every single one of them should have a 50% chance to escape and the game be balanced? Of course not. The more survivors, the less the escape chance. That's not imbalance, that IS balance.
Post edited by RpTheHotrod on0 -
Do yourself a favor and stop digging yourself a hole with this convoluted nonsense. Yes, a 25% kill rate means an average 1/4 "win" rate. The game is basically 4 1v1's with the killer each match. If he kills 1 survivor, then he wins 1 1v1 and loses 3 1v1's. The killer "wins" every time he kills a survivor. This isn't difficult to grasp. The primary objective of the killer is to kill, and the objective of the survivor is to survive/escape. The MMR system itself, as designed by BHVR, determines "wins"and "losses" based on # of escapes/kills. So the killer has a potential to win/lose 4 times per match. Saying the killer requires a 3K to "win" is just stupid. We are not talking about a single match, but all matches by the entire player base. The killer wins against every survivor that he sacrifices, and that averages out heavily in his favor across all matches.
Your second paragraph fails to take into account the fact that the game is balanced for the killer to compete with all 4 survivors as a unit. The killer succeeds at his objective well over half of the time, assuming the survivor team as a whole is equivalent skill to the killer. This kind of balance is unheard of in other successful PvP games, which actually require both sides to use skill to win, instead of being handed free kills just because BHVR wants to sell more DLC and make killers "scary" (let's be real though, for such a large company, it is primarily the profit motive calling the shots).
No, the killer does not win roughly "half" his matches when killing 2.5 survivors/match. You are just rounding down the number to make it look balanced, when it isn't. He wins well over half of his matches, on average. Yes some games he will get only a 0-1K, but more often he will get 3-4Ks.
A "draw" is simply when in a given match, the killer wins 2 1v1s and loses 2 1v1s. Again, not hard to grasp. But when you take the average across all matches, the killer has by far the advantage when it comes to succeeding at his objective (which is obviously, to kill survivors). The average result is not a draw, it is heavily killer-sided, as shown by the 60% kill rate.
If the escape rate were 50%, then the killer would have a 50% probability to kill any given survivor, on average. This would also mean that the game were properly balanced, fair, rewards skill expression on both sides, applies game theory by balancing challenge and reward to create a flow state (a.k.a. the game is fun). Instead, BHVR has gone the route of turning their game into a gambling machine which is boring for killers, and frustrating for survivors, because it happens to be the case that this is highly profitable.
Your attempt to make the game appear "balanced" when it is very obviously heavily killer-sided is very obtuse and pedantic.
-2 -
Aight. I took it seriously for a while, but I stopped reading after you claimed the killer wins a match after getting a single kill. Sure, he succeeds in one of his 1 v 1s, but he still has 3 more opponents to face. End of the match, he'll need a majority of his opponents sacrificed to get a personal win, while survivors need only escape in their personal win. You're conveniently forgetting there are 4 opponents total the killer must face. Maybe you're just very unfamiliar with asymmetrical game design?
Let's say a killer player plays 1,000 matches, and in every single one of them, he kills a single person. According to you, him having that 25% kill rate, means he wins 1 out of 4 of his matches...man, if you genuinely believe that, I don't know what to tell you. Heck, with your logic, a 25% kill rate is a 100% win rate since a survivor died.
I already laid out the math, as well as laid out what BHVR has stated the game is designed around. If you don't grasp it at that point, and are disregarding the math behind it, disregarding BHVR's explanation of how the matches are designed, and disregarding what the majority of the community has accepted, then there's not much point discussing this further.
0 -
We aren't talking about a single match, we're talking about an average win rate across a ridiculously large number of matches.
I am not forgetting there are 4 opponents per match. You keep talking about the win criteria for a single match, which is irrelevant, when the game being killer-sided or not as a whole is determined by the win rate across the entire player base, across all matches played.
The killer does not 1K out of 1000 matches. This is an irrelevant hypothetical which is out of touch with reality. Killers get a mixture of 0Ks, 1Ks, 2Ks, 3K,s and 4Ks, then BHVR determines the average results, while also removing a bunch of DC matches against OP killers that got an easy 4K (meaning the 60% kill rate is an understatement, but releasing the true statistics would be bad PR and infuriate the survivor main player base). But in any case, a 60% kill rate means killers get more 3-4Ks than they get 0-1Ks, on average. If killer genuinely were winning only half their matches, the kill rate would just be about 50%.
Even if I were to assume a killer somehow got 1000 1K's without intentionally throwing, the win rate is still 25% because the killer succeeded at his objective, to kill survivors, 25% of the time, while the survivors failed their objective, to survive, 75% of the time. The MMR system designed by BHVR themselves determines "wins" and "losses" based on the 1 v 1 outcome of killer vs a given survivor in the trial (yes, I know there are 4 per trial, the killer is made far more powerful to account for this). No amount of wishful thinking makes this game any less killer-sided than it currently is.
-2
