We need different playlists
I've mentioned this a few times in various threads, but felt like I should make an actual thread dedicated to it. It would really be beneficial to the game to give us two separate playlists: a ranked competitive playlist using the current tier system with additional rewards, and a separate casual playlist.
Before people come in with "sweats will abuse casual" I'm well aware some players will absolutely do that. But people do that anyway, players will deliberately make smurf accounts or tank their mmr to get into matches with lower skilled players. And I'm not saying a playlist split would instantly fix toxicity. But it be a step that would help improve the current situation.
Currently lumping everyone in the same playlist pool makes a situation where killers feel thay have to tunnel and camp hooks to take control of the game. As a result survivors get sick of such tactics, so when they do get a game where they outplay the killer they bm and bully as much as possible. Causing the killers to take out their frustration on the next group of survivors, so on and so forth. A vicious cycle.
Whereas if we had a ranked playlist with nice, shiny cosmetic prizes that players can use to show off how good they are it will attract those who want to play at a high level and be super competitive. Plenty of easy to implement prizes, coloured skins for survs/killers, badges, banners etc. This would also allow players who don't necessarily want to play hardcore to gravitate to an explicitly casual playlist. Could even add simple surveys after casual games asking if opposing team played aggressively or in a more sporting fashion, ask if they were toxic or not, perhaps allow that to form a sort of mmr like the aggression mmr in arc raiders.
The recent events, 2v8, chaos shuffle and seasonal events show the game can run 2 playlists side by side and not affect queue times too badly. So yeah, it can only be a good change for the gamr and improve the matchmaking experience for players versus all the toxicity we get currently.
Comments
-
2v8,…..and not affect queue times too badly.
Errrr.. what?
Splitting the playerbase is the last thing we need. The game is far too RNG, perk reliant, lopsided and luck dependant to ever have a real worthwhile "ranked mode" in any sense of the meaning. You'd basically have to copy comp DBD and hard limit survivor and give preferable maps to killer. Not to mention it'll just be blight by nurselight ft. ghoul and people SWFing, sounds god awful and boring as heck and not even remotely fun because the game isnt created and balanced for that. BHVR arent going to incentivise that anywhere near enough to get anyone to play it enough to be worth it.
This would also allow players who don't necessarily want to play hardcore to gravitate to an explicitly casual playlist.
99.9% of players are not going against "hardcore" players, the gaslighting really has to stop. This is a perfect example of the biggest issue in DBD, it has always been player mentality. It's a PvP game, not PvE roleplay gen simulator. Playing to win is literally the foundation of PvP games, its literally just playing the game, its not toxic, sweaty, or try hard or whatever other buzzword you might describe it as. The game has MMR, by definition it has a competitive basis.
People just want easy wins with minimal effort and it really does show in how people react to normal gameplay (DCing, giving up, throwing, crying tunneller, crying for unjustified killer nerfs etc etc), and in how they talk about the game.
-1 -
Im not completely against the idea, but the recent events showed the opposite. 2vs8 ruins my queue times.
0 -
Ranked mode is pointless in this game and the event modes has shown what having several queues in this game do and that is that they make queue times longer.
0 -
The negative mentality you're talking about is in part caused by the fact that everyone is stuck in one playlist, sweats and casuals alike. And it makes for really bad games. Vast majority of games that I play, survivor and killer alike are not that great, I get a good hard fought even game once in a while, but they're the exception rather than the rule, usually it's a steamroll.
The whole point of two playlists is it will ease that and help divide the attitudes a bit. There will always be salt, that's a given in any pvp game. But this solution would focus more of the competitive energy which causes salt in a separate playlist. It's rare to see big pvp focused games to not have some sort of ranked and casual split. Plus you can have two different balances for the playlists. Atm low mmr survivors have a remarkably bad time, due in bo small part to the fact that anti camp, tunnel and slug mechanics were scrapped because it would make the game unplayable for killer against high skill co ordinated swfs.
I also noticed the fact you had to cherry pick my words to change the context of my statement of queue times. Yes 2v8 had a bad effect on queue times for 1v4, but it also required twice as many players. Take the seasonal events for instance they are a better example. During the winter event I found my games on the event playlist were on average, more fun because killers and surv teams were being a bit more chill, excuse the pun. And I never experienced a drastic increase in my queue time for games during that event.
-2 -
I'll happily take longer queue times if I get better games. And I'm pretty sure ranked would be popular, people already play their socks off to get iri 1 ratings each month.
2v8 was a bad example. Neither ranked or casual will need double the amount of normal players to start a match. Seasonal 1v4 events did affect queue times but not to a drastic degree.
-1
