http://dbd.game/killswitch
As a Killer who doesn't tunnel/camp/use slowdown perks, I only have 56% Kill Rate
I'm just proud of being a fair Killer player, nothing else :)
Anyone here plays like this as well?
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot I don't use add-ons either LOL.
Comments
-
It's quite common, 80% of the players in this game don't know how to do the basics. So it's no surprise to have a high kill rate.
-9 -
Well I thought 56% is lower than average haha.
11 -
I don't tunnel, camp, or really run much slowdown, but I do main Nurse
I mean, it's not horrible but I expected my killrate to be a lot higher. It's prob because I lose the hatch game all the time, and sometimes don't bother to play it, but still…
Edit: Y'all are really downvoting a good faith post because of Nurse. That's just sad, people.
Post edited by AlreadyTracer on10 -
Can I ask how much higher you want your killrate to be for nurse? As 72% is really, really good, statistically speaking. I feel like if it was higher it would be a bit unreasonable.
11 -
percentages are always a bit weird with things like this tbh. I expected mine to be lower for a few killers but percentages are deceiving.
-1 -
I'm shooting for 85%.
I know it sounds unreasonable, but I'm at the level of hours where the lack of matchmaking basically makes it impossible to lose. My killrate should reflect that but my lack of hatch gaming kinda undermines it.
-5 -
God, you're pathetic.
-13 -
I mean 73% is pretty damn high. How much higher did you expect?
Never mind. I should have kept reading lol.
7 -
Who cares? They enjoy that killer, that's the point of a videogame. Play what is fun to you.
4 -
73 is high, I just know I can go higher
1 -
Nothing wrong with using slow down perks. Hell I'd argue it's needed if you're going to play without camping and tunneling.
-1 -
I know there's nuance to be had when it comes to the numbers but it's also evidence and proof that isn't reliant upon subjectivity. Everyone is different but I'm the kind of person that can't just disregard actual data in favor of anecdotal opinions. A 72% is objectively, very good. I don't agree with dismissing the numbers just because they don't feel right.
3 -
Ah, I see. Totally fair to have personal goals, but I think it’s also important to separate personal grind from balance expectations. At really high MMR with enough hours, you're naturally going to outperform most matchmaking brackets. But that’s kind of the issue if you’re playing so well that the system can’t keep up. Aiming for 85% might not be unreasonable from a personal goals perspective, but I feel it would be from a design or balance perspective.
In any case, you're killing it! Gliyn and hopefully I never face you in the fog because I'm really terrible at facing cracked out nurses haha j/k
Congrats on your success :)
3 -
depends on the killers that you play but tbh at 56% killrate you winning more games than you're losing it's around 52.5 ish% killrate that you start losing more games depending on the kills distribution from your avrage 0 to 4k kills so you're doing verry good
3 -
Statistically, its always correct to assume you are average.
I think your killrate is pretty much exactly where the devs balance the game at: around 50%.
So there is nothing wrong.1 -
slowdown perks on nurse? i'm sorry but your never gonna get a higher killrate if you have to run slowdown on the most powerful killer lol
-2 -
Oh no, I'm not talking from a balance perspective lol
Nurse doesn't need buffs, I just need to step up my hatch game 💀
And thanks so much for the kind words!!
1 -
Well I wish you luck! When (not if cause we're being positive and empowering here) when you do hit that personal goal we should celebrate. I'll bake a cake 🎉 or maybe a pie if you prefer 🤗 gonna need a treat after that grind
2 -
Aw that sounds amazing!!
I'll help you; let's make an Oreo pie!
2 -
I was speaking in general not about Nurse specifically. That said I disagree. Slow down perks give you more time to practice getting better with a killer. You can't learn a killer playing five minute games.
0 -
they have 500 hours on nurse, im pretty sure that's enough time lol
-1 -
I salute you sir/ma'am. Thank you for not conforming. Glad there's still people like you around.
1 -
I just don't like slowdown perks in general, because it's just boring. Sure it'll always give me more kills, but I just don't feel satisfied with it lol.
That's why I love info perks and agitation to help me get into chase faster
0 -
Your kill rate is great, wdym?
2 -
I do the same man!
I also almost always play hatch, and even if I win the hatch showdown, I also tend to give hatch/gate anyway. I also tended to let players go when someone on their team is sabotaging the games and trying to SoH... so given that, I'm quite happy with a 56% killrate.
My Piggy is ofc also at a further Snoot disadvantage... 🐽
You slacking on the bloodpoints though... cut coin troubles maybe? 🥺
Which is finally fixed now! 🤘😁🤘
2 -
I usually go for 12 hooks. Good work :)
3 -
I also accept them, and don't disregard them. I just have a lack of confidence in my 60% kill rate.
1 -
Winning without slowdown perks or tunneling/camping can be tough against a skilled team, but in my experience, it’s not necessary in most games. I checked my stats yesterday, and I currently have a 76% kill rate with Pig, a character I've been playing on and off since her release. I usually don’t use any slowdown perks, and I rarely tunnel or camp, as I understand how unfun and unfair that can be for other players.
4 -
Glad to see a fellow friend who plays the same ^^
2 -
I think in THIS case, the numbers are misleading though. You could get very similar numbers from someone who killed 3 people at 5 gens left or at 1 gen left if the majority of the remainder is hatch escapes rather than people actually getting gens done. Cranking the percentage up more would just fall down to if you wanna slug for the 4k or not rather than skill.
If we were looking at a killrate of 60%, you know alot of that is from actually losses. Being so close to 75%... He COULD very well be winning essentially every match at 5 gens left and we can't tell.
1 -
I was surprised, and my main killer has a higher KR than my average at 83.4% so that was funny to see. For survivor I beat the average escape rate so i'm content at where it is
I don't think these are 100% accurate as I assume I might be missing some data.
0 -
A 56% kill rate means on average only getting a 2k with an uncommon match thrown in of getting more. Thats not winning more than losing. Survivors aren't a team and dont win/lose/tie together either, so there's no ties. A survivor wins if they escape (their own individual win condition). A killer wins with a majority of the kills (3k+). It would take a 62.5% kill rate to be between a 2k and a 3k on average - that there would be a 50% win rate on average. Remember: a 3k in a match is a 75% kill rate for that match.
2 -
Im also trying to get my killrate higher, but isnt it kinda pointless if we have hatch in the equation? Yh you could slug, but i dont want to do that and it sounds like you also dont want to do it.
Like my best killrate is on wraith (80%) bc he is better than most at the hatch game. But even with him i lose them a lot.
It would be great if we get the amount of merciless, ruthless killer, bc for me both is a win.
1 -
It's funny how it makes sense in my head that a killer's winrate should be around 50% because that's precisely the idea of game balance (you win some, you lose others). But this game is so easy for killers that tunneling and camping give you the upper hand, meaning it significantly increases your winrate. That means the user, far from dominating a killer, simply means your basic strategy allows you to win every match.
It would be interesting to see real statistics from people who have mastered a killer, users who don't need to camp and tunnel to win. But this game has so many factors and variants that it's impossible (a useless MMR that matches you with anyone and not necessarily someone of your skill level; get matched against SWF or soloQ; until recently, map offerings that benefited one side or the other; the ability to camp and tunnel because anti-camping is useless; extremely competitive users who play their tournaments in every match and only seek to win, not make the game experience entertaining for the rest of the users; and even abusive mechanics supported by the game system itself).
It's curious how you show that, without camping and tunneling, the killer can have a balance; but since tunneling and camping (among other things) are part of DBD, win rates skyrocket without needing to master the power of a killer.
BTW, my win rate is 54%. I don't camp or tunnel either because I believe everyone has the right to enjoy the match. And sometimes I "win" and other times I "lose" (depending on how each person considers winning or losing).
TBH, I wouldn't be surprised if this is part of the sellout. People who buy a killer want their money's worth, and this translates to: "I paid for this, I'm not winning games, and that bothers me because I already paid for it and should be winning with it". People no longer want or care about mastering a killer. Unfortunately, there's just consumerism (how many people buy DLC to complete achievements or obtain perks and never touch the character again?).
I sincerely doubt this will change; win rates will remain high for those who camp and tunnel. It's already been proven that the "anti" mechanics they introduce are useless, and it would make sense for them to fail for monetary reasons.
The game will always need more killers than survivors just because of the sheer number of players... so the game will always look for them to have the best experience and tools to win despite their lack of dominance of the character's power.
1 -
that's untrue as far as im aware 2k is a tie on average for the killer i left a post explaning it on why the 60% killrate is overtuned with stats but basically what matters is kill distrubations overtime you can go all the way down to 54% killrate and still winning more game then losing
from the dbd wiki and a lot of older post on how dbd killer mmr works
"
Ranked Trial Mechanics
During ranked Trials, the Skill-Based Matchmaking Rating functions as a sort of game within a game.
In essence, each Survivor is in an individual mini-Trial with the Killer and vice versa, in which wins, losses, and draws can occur.The game effectively tracks each mini-Trial, adds up the individual wins, losses, or draws, and calculates the change towards the Player's MMR score based on that.
"
The system has been in use since 8 September 2021 and replaced the previous matchmaking system, which had matched Players based on their grades
as far as im aware the same system is still in the game for hidden mmr in your normal games so ill take my old example from the other post
lets say the kill distribution goes something like this over a sample size of 10k games
0kill 18.93%
1kill 16.76%
2kills 12.14%
3kills17.39%
4kills 34.78%
total killrate 58.08%
at that kill rate the win rate for the killer would be 52.17% draw would be 12.14% and losses would be 35.69% when you have 2 kills your mmr relatively stay the same it counts toward a draw you may still pip up but it's not your mmr so my point still stand unless behaviour changed the system recently and it's not base on kills anymore. and your right about survivor not being a team in term of them affecting there mmr witch btw it's really flawed as hell and the only draw for survivor is hatch but on the killer sides of things what counts toward it's mmr system is kill distribution not kill rates but correct me if im wrong and im missing something
Post edited by devoutartist on0 -
I see where you're misunderstanding lies. You're confusing MMR adjustments with Wins. That's a common misconception - no worries.
MMR adjustments are entirely unrelated to win conditions. It's usually that way for many, many games. For example, in Chess, a grandmaster doesn't gain "ranking" because he beats a newbie despite winning, and a newbie doesn't lose "ranking" because he loss to a grandmaster despite losing. Ranking\MMR adjustments are not an award - it only exists to try to balance games and place others against opponents better matching them. In DBD, while BHVR follows a similar guideline for both wins and MMR adjustments, they are also entirely separate and are not equal. For example, if a survivor escapes through a hatch, they met their win condition and won, however, the game treats it as MMR neutral - likely because the devs don't want to unfairly inflate that survivor's MMR just because of a random chance lucky hatch which would in theory make their next match harder. So to be clear, MMR doesn't care about who won - it just cares to make future matches more fair even if that sometimes means NOT increasing their MMR despite their win.
So this comes down to your tie comment, a 2K isn't a tie. Why? A tie requires at least 2 parties to tie because…well that's what makes a tie a tie - neither side lost or won against the other. To whom did the killer tie in a 2k? 2 survivors won their match, 2 survivors lost their match. Which out of the survivors neither won or lost their win condition? BHVR has cleared up the misconception that this is a team game quite a few times over the years, it's 1 killer vs 4 individual opponents who each have their own win condition. Working together isn't mandatory, but it will usually help their chances at earning their win condition. That's why there is no "Survivors won!" or "Survivors lost!" screen, because survivors are not a team and do not win\tie\lose together. That's also why solo perks exist such as sole survivor, and why some advertisements ask if you'll work together or will you go at it alone. This is an asymmetrical game, so survivors have a much different win condition than the killer. Don't have to take my word for it - BHVR themselves have clarified this multiple times - DBD is designed around individual players, NOT team vs team. So, for any individual player to win, they have to win their "majority of points" (almost all games in existence work this way). For a survivor, their points available to them are binary. They either get no points (they fail to escape), or they escape and get that point. When only one point is possible, the majority is considered scoring that single point. For the killer, they have up to 4 points (kills). So in order for them to get their majority, they must score (kill) at least 3 out of the 4 points. If they only kill 2 people, there's literally no one you can compare that to - it's an asymmetrical game. Again, a 2k means 2 players won and 3 players lost. 2 survivors fulfilled their win condition, 2 survivors failed to fulfill their win condition, and the killer failed to fulfill their win condition.
I hope that clears that up.
1 -
I agree. I'd prefer it if it had a calculated winrate, because like 70% of the time the last survivor escapes by hatch for me. It makes it hard to increase the killrate
0 -
That's a lot of paragraphs for someone who's completely wrong. Any veteran killer will have a good killrate on anyone they play consistently because this game doesn't have matchmaking.
-1 -
In an even 4v4 it would be. But this is an asynchronous pvp, one of the first of its genre. The 1 has to be equal to the 4. When the 4 becomes 3 the 1 has a larger advantage. That's why killers want to get a 3v1 fast while survivors want even hook states.
0 -
Oh I know you can win without those perks. I was just encouraging OP to not feel bad about using them if the needed.
0 -
Surely there has to be a more productive way to engage in a conversation that does not involve using insults?
4 -
He's getting all pissy over who I main in a video game. There's no other word for it
-1 -
My comment goes both ways, not just to you but also to them.
0 -
I'm opposed to tunnelling too.
So, uh.
Although Unknown, my current main, is wholly absent from my stats so idk.
1 -
Yeah same. My rate is 60% and I don't tunnel or camp, and I use real basic perks like Iron Grasp and Lightborn. No hexes. I'm also merciful, and will team up with active survivors whose passive teammates are hiding and waiting for them to die so they can try for hatch. I do a lot of second chances for bad starts too, like if I down everyone super fast because of their bad luck.
I only wish I got the same treatment when I play surv but I just get slugged while standing still and playing the lute lol
1 -
I do not camp/tunnel/slug or whatever. And that's Legion. So, what is your point?
-1 -
This would be a lot more meaningful if it wasn’t always someone talking about how fair they play killers, for the sake of survivors.
Where are the people letting us know how fair they play survivors, for the sake of killers?
0 -
nice one
0 -
For the sake of argument, what does 'fair play for the sake of killers' mean here?
-2 -
I'm matching energy and there's nothing wrong with that. Never insulted anyone else on the thread, and there's a reason for that
-1
