http://dbd.game/killswitch
My problem with the 60% kill rate target
On the face of it, I am all for a target of 60% kill rate for killers. Make the game slightly killer sided so that it's clear killer is the power role.
My problem with it is how it's currently being accomplished.
If you check the stats on nightlightgg for a more nuanced look of kill rate statistics you'll see that the thing that contributes most to the 60 percent kill rate is a high rate of 4k's.
As a killer main who dabbles in survivor to do challenges my least favorite games as either side are the same. One side snowballs out of control so hard that the other side has no hope of a comeback. Not killing anyone as killer sucks, but I also dislike stomping so hard that it was hardly a game.
As survivor, watching no progress happen as the killer stacks hooks feels Sisyphean. But sitting on a gen and hardly getting to interact with the killer for the whole trial is also less than appealing.
Close games, 2ks or 3ks, are the sweet spots in my opinion, but looking at the stats 2k/3k games are an extremely small minority of games. In fact for most killers about half their games are 0ks or 4ks.
This is why I loved the second iteration of 2v8, because very rarely were games 8k or 0k. There were comeback mechanics and both sides could turn things around until the end. Games didn't snowball out of control early on like in 1v4 and as a result there were also far less leavers.
TLDR: I would rather get more 2k or 3k games while still maintaining the 60% kill rate, if possible. Shifting gameplay tendencies away from snowballs into more back and forth games that end somewhere in the middle.
Comments
-
for that to happen bhvr need to buff survivor 2v1 / 1v1 and tremendously nerf 1v4 while making 1v3 depend on the stages killer got prior to the first kill.
they need to make it so that survivors' team doesnt immediately lose the game the moment they lose 1-2 people and killer isnt under tremendous pressure in 1v4 that they need to get rid of ASAP.
bhvr would rather keep the snowball nature of the game for the survivors and nerf killers' ability to engage in that, while acting that killers arent allowed to express macro skill more than to get minor advantage, up to the point of implying that killers (specifically killers) are boosted in current mmr system.
the more they keep doing that, the less there's hope for either side to win in the match if it goes wrong from the start. comeback systems devs implement feel artificial and like rubberbands pulling your punches.
the game is getting scripted in really wrong ways.
2 -
I mean if you go on nightlight the only killers with a 60% kill rate (as of now) are hag, onryo and nightmare, but if you want to be technical only hag has 60% at the moment. But like with nurse stats are not telling of a killers true power as the high kill rates on most killers are due to their kit being difficult to understand or not. Like hag has one of the lowest pick rates in the game and due to this people never get to learn how to play against her. I mean hell on nightlight pig has a higher kill rate than ghoul but if you play the game you know their power in no where near equal. So going for a 60% kill rate statistically in not great as there are many underlining factors causing bloated kill rates, onryo has a high kill rate but once you know how to play against her she becomes one of the weaker killers as you can make it so she almost has no power.
-6 -
There were less 0k games in 2v8 because the high amount of survivor aura revealing made it a lot easier for killers to find chases, having 2 killers made chase times a lot lower, and remote hooking meant it was a lot easier to hook survivors.
And all those changes allowed the game to have an anti-snowball mechanic for the survivors, and a random hooked survivor location mechanic (anti-tunnel), which resulted in less 8k games.
Which means the games were allowed to have anti-snowball mechanics, because it was much easier for killers to find survivors, it was much easier for killers to end chases with survivors, and it was much easier for killers to hook survivors. Pretty much all of the mechanics that survivors use to slow down the game, were removed, so that survivors could have an anti-snowball mechanic.
(And arguably, 2v8 having double the survivors, also made less likely for perfect games to exist)
-2 -
I'm saying that having such a high percentage of 4k games isn't fun for anyone. It's not fun for survivors for things to snowball out of control in the killer's favor early on with no hope of a comeback, and personally it's not fun as killer either when you know the survivors don't stand a chance and you have to "go easy" on them for the game to not be a stomp. It's extremely bad game design.
8 -
Killers can slug to guarantee 4k so i'm not surprised, most killers do it, if you want less 4k you'd have to rework endgame slugging and hatch to make solo escapes more frequent
1 -
I'm right at 60% as a chill killer and I agree that engaging games with 2ks and 3ks are the sweet spot. I play both roles and think a balanced match has 3 to 5 gens completed with 1 to 2 survivors getting out. That's enjoyable and feels fair.
When I'm killer and things go absolutely horrible for survivors because of bad luck, and it's looking like it's gonna be a 4k at 5gens, I will often pull back and let them recover so we can have a proper match. I don't enjoy stomps, so I let them heal and we start again.
15 -
I play killer about half the time and I agree having lower variability in the difficulty of matches would be great. It seems like in a lot of matches I steamroll the survivors or they steamroll me. A comeback mechanic for both sides like we see in 2v8 would help reduce the variability in outcomes and I would very much support that as long as the 60% kill rate is maintained.
2 -
You're basically asking for killers to have a "reverse hatch" mechanic, where they can get a free kill even if they didn't deserve it.
Even though the majority of players is fine with survivors getting free escapes they didn't deserve, they will never accept the killer being able to get a undeserved free kill.
-8 -
No I am asking for the game to be designed where 2k is the most likely outcome and not 4k or 0k.
6 -
Look at all of the sports in the world. Look at all of the other popular PvP games in the world.
Do you know what causes people to get bored? Too many draw games. That is what you're asking for. Most people aren't going to want to play in a game where there are too many draw games. It's boring. People want a clear winner.
For example, do you think football would still be popular if most the games were draw games? Do you think Counterstrike would still be popular if most the games were draw games?
-6 -
…For what exactly? More “killer watch me leave” moments at the exit gate?
True. exactly this.
I always play for my 4K. No settlement for less.
“1–2 kills are still good” — nope.
“1 kill is fine, you had a lot of hooks” — also no.
If I go in as killer, I’m going for the 4K. Nothing less.
I’m not looking at stats or trying to keep that 60% kill rate balanced — I’m just here to kill.-13 -
A 60% kill rate for killers means the win rate, under MMR win conditions, is about the same for killer and survivors.
Do the math if you understand statistics.
MMR win conditions, for a match:
killer: 3 or 4 kills
survivor (individually): escape
-6 -
It's already easy for killers to get undeseved kills though, and undeserved 4ks. I've had endless matches where a killer gets little to no hooks, can't chase, can't land basic attacks and then their Noed kicks in and they get some skill-free downs.
On the flip side, there's no equivalent of this for survivors. Killers get to choose if the hatch even spawns. They just slug the second to last person and keep the game going until they get both downs.
3 -
undeserved kills
On the flip side, there's no equivalent of this for survivors.
DS+unbreakable, DH, otr, sg + ftp + bu, deli, shoulder of burden, backgroundplayer + breakour + sabo, mft, 4 percent (still), red syringes,
the newest fun fun "get away for free" surv toy conviction, backgroundplayer + flashys…
..
Should I keep going or can I start laughing now?
-14 -
Escaping the killer, sure. But Unbreakable only works once. Use it, then get slugged again. Now what? Dead Hard just prolongs chases with an extra health state. Sabotaged hooks respawn. OtR and DS don't work in endgame. These perks will buy time, yeah, but I'm talking about escaping the match. If the killer doesn't want the hatch to spawn, then it doesn't spawn. The only possibility is waiting out a slug death and in that lengthy time, the killer will likely find you. Which is why the game needs a quick bleedout option.
And you're examples always involve meta perks being used by skilled teams. This is not the average survivor experience. Most are in soloq and not everyone runs meta. I don't use any of the perks you've mentioned.
10 -
My problem is that they are not even aiming for a 60% kill rate. In a stream they said they are fine with „60-65% kill rate“. 60% is already absurdly high, but then they go even higher. The killer has a 20% higher chance to win than the survivors. I can understand that this a horror game and for the theme of the game it needs to be killer sided, but it is just too much. They should aim for 55-60% kill rate instead of 60-65%. With their current philosophy you almost win every match as killer without even having to try. A lot of bad decisions and changes solely came from their stupid goal, which made the game increasingly frustrating because of it.
I agree that matches should be more closer and have more 2ks and 3ks than 4ks and 0ks.
0 -
You want non perk-independent stuff? How about fast vaults at windows in tight hallways that clearly weren’t meant for that?
Or just walking a bit so the chase doesn’t start and the killer doesn’t get a window block?
Or solid bodyblocks and actual teamplay in general? (I see a lot of that even in solo, honestly.) or crouch tech - is still a thing.But as surv most of the time all I need is my little pew pew :D
We're usually duoQ, but I play a lot of soloQ too. (full swfs always feels too boosted the moment u can stack all the good stuff perks, → escalation in some random lobbys is way more fun).. And most of the time, all I really need is my favorite "toy" + maybe Unbreakable just so the killer can’t pick up right away. That’s usually enough. Works in soloQ too.
Sure, if the killer brings Lightborn, then y — you gotta sacrifice this unsafe 50/50 filler pallets instead of relying on flashy batteries.
IDk.
Sure, there are games where you just don’t escape.
But in a lot of them… that’s not on the killer.-9 -
Because DBD is asymmetrical, I don't think "ties" feel as anti-climactic as they do in, say, football. A tense 2k where one person gets hatch would be a great game! The killer doesn't walk away empty-handed, some survivors got to escape, and there was some RNG to keep things interesting.
I would like to see some reward (like a 50k scoring event) for killers who give the last person hatch. Or maybe instead of a mori on the last survivor, you can let them go. The animation shows the killer respectfully nodding, the hatch appears behind the survivor, and they crawl thru it (and killer gets 50k BP).
If you still want to slug for the 4k, knock yourself out, but I often slug for the 3K, then give the hatch. I hate when people "Abandon" too soon, and I wind up mori-ing a bot. I wanted to be nice!
-1 -
Steamrolls are the most common in my experience as well. Early ones too no less. That's why go next was so prominent. There was a degree of frustration there naturally, but it was also good game sense. If you're logically about 80% likely to lose a trial, why would you be expected to stick out the remainder of it for that 20%? Even now without it and less of my teammates leaving the trial, we're still getting bodied early. All that changes is that we can maybe pull through with a very frustrating and difficult 2k/2e. It doesn't feel like we're forced to be there for our own benefit at all.
With that in mind, I don't even really think a 2/3k is the sweet spot with the game as it is. There's a serious lack of fun and good energy in the game. There's ways I think you can fix that, but it requires so much work that I don't think it'll ever happen.
The game has been balanced to give out "free" kills for a long time now.
Players seemed much happier when both sides had busted stuff instead of focusing that primarily on the power role. Just look how much protest there is any time Survivors are given a perk that becomes strong when the gates are powered.
3 -
I think this is generally true about the game. It's elimination/snowball nature make it so lots of games can feel like they ended long before the game actually concluded.
I don't think there is a realistic way that this could actually be changed without such a massive overhaul that DbD doesn't even look like DbD anymore. It is one of my hopes for 2v8 because as you said I think it is better in that lots of games feel like they are more in the middle instead of the extreme.
1 -
You're either missing the point or avoiding it. Evasion and chase-winning don't equal victory, and flashlights require practice and skill. "Undeserved" is the key word.
Noed is an example of a crutch perk for low-skill killers to get underserved downs/kills/wins. What is the low-skill survivor equivalent of Noed for endgame? What cheat card does the game give a survivor whose straight garbage so they can pull off an undeserved victory?
7 -
If the game is going to have less 0k and 1k situations, then the "undeserved kills" need to be dramatically increased.
Literally hatch. The survivors can repair 0 generators, and a survivor can still get an undeserved escape. It doesn't raise their MMR, but it's still a free escape.
-7 -
One thing to keep in mind is a 4k doesnt necessarily mean it was a stomp. That doesnt tell you how many gens got done or when the first kill was. It COULD be from a game that ended in 2 minutes, but it could also be a bloodwarden play at the very end.
1 -
As I mentioned, the killer can slug second to last person to avoid hatch spawn. I rarely see chances at the hatch these days.
And thus, everything loops back to the tunnel/slug/camp arguments.
4 -
NoED is uNFaiR?” We’re really still having that conversation in 2025? Come on.
It only works if the survivor team brainlessly rushes into the NoED camp at the end. Just be smart about the last gen — if you can’t rule out NoED, take a second to check for a totem before rushing the exits. Plus, you see the aura now.And if the totem is next to the hook? The killer gets a kill. Okay? What now? He’s the killer. He’s supposed to kill.
And on the survivor side? How about a sexy little 4% right at the open gate?
Fair?
Hatch spawning right in front of your face?
Fair?10000 second chances for survivors..
fair?
What about all those boosted RNG situations where the killer literally can’t do anything — no matter how well they play — unless the survivor makes a huge mistake mid-chase?
fair?
“Just chase someone else.”
Ye, and what if the next person uses the exact same busted structure?fair?
And to even get that “evil” NoED, the killer has to catch me in the endgame. That’s a won chase. That alone already makes it fair.
This community nowadays, damn.. ouuuf, big OUUF :/ ... Sometimes I miss 2017.
Back when you got old-school facecamped. The maps were cracked, sure, but you knew one thing: You got one chase. One shot.
Screw it up?
→ Facecamped.
And if your team didn’t bring old BT, insta red mori and you were out
Survivors today don’t even realize how much they’ve been given — and they just keep asking for more, and more, and more, and more...and more
“I want my free escape goodie, no matter how bad I play!”
-6 -
This forum thread is saying the game should force most games to be a 2k.
How do you think the game could force less 0k and less 1k situations? I claim it would need to dramatically increase the number of deserved kills. If you have a different solution, please let me know.
-3 -
EVERY kill is deserved.
Just because you happen to have a one-shot on you in a certain situation doesn’t make that kill “undeserved.”and to anyone still playing this game even somewhat seriously:
Don’t let anyone tell you that anything you achieved as killer in a match was “undeserved.”
Ehw. :/I... I’m tired.
-12 -
The elitist wants the game to be killer sided so BHVR will never change from that.
-7 -
I want to play super bad, make tons of dumb mistakes, feed the killer early, misplay everything so that the killer even gets the chance to snowball...
...but I still expect built-in comeback mechanics to save me from the consequences.
Free of charge, handed out generously by BHVR.-5 -
Then fine, for both sides. It doesn’t change anything. You messed up, you need a moment to get “back into the game.” And that comeback shouldn’t be cheap or handed out for free. Sometimes it should be so costly that you can’t even turn the round into a win. Otherwise, what’s left? Bland, washed-out matches with the same mediocre “average result” over and over.
"u should be allowed to make any mistake you want—but you still stay in the game. Thanks, BHVR, for letting me not have to try, not have to learn anything, not have to develop any skill, and not get punished when I mess up. "so please make this possible and thx bhvr".
-5 -
I have no problem with those killers. The only time I’d say “I’m totally dead” is against Nurse on certain maps when the Nurse player knows what they’re doing. And even then, it usually gets tough the moment it is a bad map for her... but with the other killers?
That’s a you problem.And dying to Nurse on The Game or Silent Hill? I just try to stay in the round as long as possible. I make the best out of it. I know I’m not getting out. And that’s okay.
(The moment I play Nurse and get this maps: I make it quick and painless. You’ll be back in the lobby in no time.)
on the flip side:
Just like how on some maps, against certain killers, I know it’s a guaranteed Survivor win — unless the team messes up.
It’s the same thing, just the other way around.
-8 -
This is the attitude that prevents discussion on balance and fairness. Even when the game is balanced to favor Killer by design, players will still defend tilting it even more in that direction to a fault while calling everyone else entitled.
6 -
Phew… Sure, balance is important, but balance in terms of “fairness”? This game is a 4v1, not a one-on-one. The killer is and should be the dominant, powerful role. They must always have the upper hand against a single player — that’s factor one. At the same time, they need to be strong enough to handle four individual players (1+1+1+1 = 4) and remain a serious threat.
And yes… against a single player, the game should be allowed to be “unfair.” The killer is the threat. It’s part of the game that people die “unfairly,” because it’s not a 1v1. That used to be different back in the day, when survivors could drag the killer around the map for 5 gens without much trouble… (not that I want those times back, though). just my pov.
If you give every single player in the match a “fair chance,” we’d be right back to where we started 2016.
-7 -
Noed is just pathetic but I have no big issues with it because it's 1) usually used by awful players who can be easily outdone and 2) I have the sense to not panic and go find the totem and cleanse it, if I wasn't the one on the receiving end and 3) nothing gives me more satisfaction than cleansing a Noed totem.
I'm talking about low skill/new players. I don't know why that part isn't coming through. Low skill killers have more advantages than equivalent low skill survivors. That's it, that's the whole point. Low skill survivors can't smell things like Blood Warden and Noed coming. They dont have the sense to avoid them. They don't know not to stand by the gate during No Way Out. But a killer with an equally bad understanding of the game can get a 4k.
Show me where OP said games should be "forced" to be at 2k. They said 2k to 3k is a better balanced match and the game should work towards that in its mechanics instead of an overwhelming amount of one-sided stomps. A suggestion to improve tha one-sidedness? Better matchmaking, better tutorials, and a training wheel period where new players exclusively face one another with crutch perks like Noed (and a survivor equivalent) found exclusively within that training ground. Once you hit whatever threshold, be it time based or accomplishment based, you can leave the kiddie pool and swim in the deep end.
3 -
Ye, sure. If you want to restrict it to “new player lobbies,” the killer is absolutely the power role from the start. No questions asked. They just have to chase, capitalize on survivors’ mistakes, and occasionally land a hit to get a down. Meanwhile, survivors need to learn the maps, camera control, tile layouts, movement, perks, killer abilities, and how to counter them. New survivor players will die. Often. And pretty brutally. It sucks, but that’s just the nature of the asymmetry and the problem at hand. You simply can’t balance the game around new players. :/ That just wouldn’t work.
If you ask me how to improve the “one-sidedness,” better matchmaking like you said, definitely. And a drastic overhaul of some perks, especially all that “anti-gen” stuff. Pain Resonance? It only works well combined with a down and a hook. Who gets that super fast? Nurse, Blight, Billy—basically all the top-tier killers. Meanwhile, M1 killers who really need anti-gen perks don’t feel anything at first... except—here comes the problem—in casual or new player lobbies, where people just feed insta-down after insta-down. Scourge hooks keep kicking. Same with Dead Man’s Switch. Good players know the perk and never touch an “unimportant” gen because they know it will be blocked. New players who don’t consciously counter the perk, or even get scared and drop the gen early? Hello, gen block. Most anti-gen perks are either just there to make already strong killers stronger or to mercilessly crush casual lobbies, yada yada.
But regardless of the new player lobbies, I think “one-sided stomps” are kinda part of the game to keep it intense. A single mistake can make the round costly—for both sides. That’s what keeps the game engaging. Anything else would be bland, washed-out gray, always the same “perfectly balanced” result.
but.. .. at this point, the killer role should feel like the bigger threat.
I mean..
The killer should have more potential for those one-sided stomps. The killer is the killer. Escaping should be tough (just my opinion).
-4 -
You realize that if there are more 2k to 3k games, but the same kill rate, that the survivor team as a whole needs to lose more games, right?
Because the survivor team as a whole, wins on a 0k to 1k. So if the game is supposed to have less of those games, then it needs to have less games where the survivor team wins as a whole.
-6 -
Sure, but if the survivor team wins as a whole, that’s on the killer for allowing it. (That's why I don't put much stock in all those stats. ) That’s not happening in my lobbies—unless I seriously mess up.
I don’t think things need to change just because some killers choose to be overly generous or passive, which is usually what leads to those 0–1k results in the first place. Super rare results-1 -
Again, it's not about forcing the 2k and 3k to occur. What's being said is these games tend to be the more engaging and rewarding to play, regardless of wins and losses, and it would be nice if things were often like that. This is probably because these matches likely have a more even skill range. If four average survivors and an average killer are put together, the game has a better chance of being more interesting and having less one-sided results. A 2k or 3k is the logical result of good matchmaking, rare as that concept is.
Here's one of my examples of a recent unbalanced game. This poor Nemesis didn't stand a chance. Bad matchmaking does not make for fun games and I think it's responsible for a lot of one-sided blow outs.
2 -
1v4 really is kind of a snoozefest that feels underwhelming to play after you get used to 2v8. 2v8 feels more like a real game, every game, whereas in 1v4 the matchmaking is so bad that one side almost always stomps the other.
1 -
Sure, bad matchmaking is a big issue. But: That Nemesis probably just experienced what a lot of new survivor players go through in their early matches. That’s something all PvP games have in common — even the ones with significantly better matchmaking.
When you’re new, you’re going to have a rough time until you catch up and start learning. And that includes going up against stronger players. That’s just how it is in every PvP game.
(When I think back to my early days in Hunt: Showdown — no sense for sound cues, no idea about weapons or the map, 20 minutes into a match and bam, one headshot from somewhere I couldn’t even locate — match over. My hunter? Permanently dead. And you lose everything. A hunter you’d leveled for hours, your entire expensive loadout, gone.)
That’s just the nature of PvP games — as a new player, you’re going to have a bad time until you learn. And honestly? DBD is still one of the most generous PvP games I know. It gives players more second chances than almost anything else out there.
Was that match boring for the survivors? Yeah, probably. That’s why we do need better matchmaking.
…
but..
But from what I can see on the screenshot, the match didn’t seem all that less interactive. Judging by the points, it looks like the Nemesis somehow just… kind of made it into the match and had his time.
a super one sided match looks more like this : (and y, should not happen for sure, safe safe.)
-3 -
Thing is, many (if not most) killer mains would disagree with you. Plus, like you said, it snowballs. That's just a fact, and one of the main reasons why many killers tunnel. 3v1 is just simply easier than 4v1. The only way I see to fix it is to make MMR less binary, but they likely will never do that. They are fine with their KILL vs. ESCAPE binary MMR.
-1 -
This discussion has literally 0 sense with MMR currently works like it doesn't exist at all. I stopped to watch some American killer main streamers, because it's absurdly boring to watch how they destroy completely clueless Sables game after game after game after...
The only thing that keeps the kill rate so high is major matches like this, if MMR really worked the way it should, I don't think killers would even have a 50% kill rate with current balancing.
-1 -
y..
The old emblem system was actually a good idea. They should’ve never changed it in the way they did—removing resets and de-pipping. It had plenty of flaws, sure, but the core concept and the direction were solid. They should’ve built on it (made climbing harder again) instead of scrapping it, imho.
The real problem is: if they ever brought something like that back (or maybe something totally new), players wouldn’t change. Their playstyle is already burned in—Killers and Survivors alike. I know I wouldn’t change mine either. If they made changes in that direction, I’m not just gonna suddenly stop tunneling or stop playing for my 4K. Not unless something drastically changed balance-wise.
I don’t really know what the best way to “fix” the current MMR system would be either. But tightening it up significantly might be a good start—right now it just feels way too lenient.
And absolutely, they should weigh more side-criteria than just kills and escapes. There’s so much more to the match that should factor into skill evaluation.
On the one hand, I do kind of miss the old system...
but..
Just bringing back a more fleshed-out emblem system at this point? Nah, that wouldn't work. Too many playstyles are already deeply ingrained
0 -
Totally agree with you here. I mean, he's not even as strong as Nurse, Spirit, Blight, Billy, etc.—but ye, this is exactly the kind of direction I really don’t like: every change or new killer (Ghoul, I’m especially looking at you) seems to be designed to be super easy to play for the amount of value you get out of them.
The game just keeps leaning more and more toward being braindead and skill-less on both sides.
But hey, there are still alternatives...(And sp yup , I agree—many of the new or reworked killers really don’t take much skill anymore.)
My last 30 days of killer? No Ghoul, no Clown, no “new guy” in sight.
-1 -
Who are the “elitist”? What are you even talking about?
I’m glad that BHVR doesn’t listen to survivor-only players who don’t have to deal with the miserable killer experience when kill rates get too low like they have several times in the past.1 -
That's basically what the OP is suggesting, other than that he would also change the target kill rate.
0 -
You see it the wrong way.
There are not many 4ks bc the goal for the killrate is 60%. Its the opposite.
Bc there are many 4ks (and 1ks to some extent) the killrate needs to be 60%. Otherwise on 50% survivor would "win" (0k, 1k) more often bc they dont get enough 4 escapes to even out all the 4ks.
Hatch is often called "free escape" but in reality the killer decides most of the time if the hatch is even an option. Slugging for the 4k is pretty effective.
I agree with your point of having more close matches but its hard to accomplish with the current win condition. A 4k with one gen left can be a close game, but it counts the same as a complete annihilation. 8 hooks without a death could be a close game, but in truth its a misplay of the killer bc killing someone early is better for the win condition.
0 -
You don't think that's a problem?
You think survivors are going to be fine, if their team as a whole loses a lot more games?
-1 -
You think survivors are going to be fine, if their team as a whole loses a lot more games?It's a subjective thing and we're guessing at the opinions of millions of people spread out around the world, but looking at some of the basic issues:
1: The win/loss is not a universal thing. I like to escape, I like to get my team to escape too. I value a 4e more than I do a 3e even if they are both called a 'win'. I don't think many players value the win/loss/draw groupings on the survivor as much as some people on the forums.
2: I think people would gladly take a better overall game than trading some wins for draws. The game is at its worst when its lopsided on either side. If, and its a massive if, they could balance that out it would be an improvement.
3: As I mentioned earlier, I think it's impossible to fix within DbD given the game design. Dropping the kill rate down by itself wouldn't change the game's nature, just the frequencies of where the lopsided events occur. And then even if it could be done, the way it would be done might be worse. But supposing that somehow it could just happen and the balance of games shifted away from the extremes, yes, I think survivors would overall enjoy it much more.
I also don't think the numbers would be that extreme, you'd just have to pull from both sides in equal measure which would quickly boost the middle. Not to mention this is whether the idea of a 60% KR is the right call, which is a different subjective subject.
3 -
You do have a point about the matchmaking, or rather a half-point.
The one-sided matches comes when there is back-filling of lobbies, if the killer dodges for example. I have seen this happen way too many times, and since that algorithm prioritizes a fast back-fill, then more often than not, you will end up getting matched against someone of a completely random skill level.1
