Bad news for y'all guys... :(
Comments
-
Your first point, about large rank differences being unthinkable even 8 months ago. I started this game around a year and a half-two years ago, my FIRST game, FIRST had a rank 11, rank 6, and rank 14 survivor in it.
0 -
2 -
If all of Rank 1's sacrifices/kills/disconnected were counted as Rank 2's, then why is Rank 2's Survival Rate still high as being around 60%? If the answer is 'Rank 2's sacrifices/kills/disconnects were counted as Rank 3, then why is Rank 3's Survival Rate still high as being around 60%? And so on. The problem is, there's no other huge discrepancy in that graph as the Rank 1 and Rank 2 difference of ~20%, including at Rank 20, where all of Rank 19's sacrifices/kills/disconnects should have been dumped at.
So overall, this graph itself is very questionable to me. Why didn't they just take the players' Rank at the beginning of the match instead of after the match? After all, isn't the point of the graph to find out the survival rate of each individual match in THAT rank, and not the survival rate of the rank where they END UP in?
In addition, it is still unbelievable to me that they included matches with disconnects in the first place. @Peanits had at one point mentioned that exclusion of matches with disconnects would skew the results, but in reality, if you are attempting to balance the game around these numbers, it is absolutely essential to have excluded matches with disconnects, because those are not the kind of matches the game balance should be striving towards.
Let's say, for example, the 2-Killer exploit was rampant throughout the game, and plagued many of the matches people are playing in. Should such matches be included as part of the data? Should such matches be included in the statistics in which the developers decide whether to buff or nerf a particular group? Should all the killers be nerfed because the 2-Killer exploit's effect on the statistics significantly showed the killers to be too strong? Of course not, because the game isn't meant to be played with 2 killers in a match.
Then why should matches with disconnected games be included as part of the data? Is this game meant to be played with constant disconnects? Are disconnects due to deranking part of this game? Are involuntary disconnects part of this game? Is the chain of disconnects by SWF groups part of this game? Is prevention of BBQ by disconnects part of this game? Is rage quitting part of this game? If they are not supposed to be part of this game, why are they balancing around them?
Why is Behaviour giving the power to balance the game to people who are constantly disconnecting?
7 -
A bit late to the party on these stats. If you were watching the forums when this was originally put out, you probably would have seen a very well thought out post by me going over the listed stats. But to summarise what has been said before.
The stats for SWF were not broken down by rank. The lower your rank (IE: Rank 1) the more likely you are to recognize the names of people you play with, and are more likely to group with them. And even when green ranks group, they aren't that much better off. It isn't until you reach purple that the 3-4 man groups have enough skill to capitalize on voice communication.
I've been in swf with both red and green players.
Green rank player voice coms go like this:
"I see the killer, It's Billy he's by the ugh.... Building. #########, he sees me. I'm down."
Red rank coms of the same situation:
"It's bIlly, He's by the center structure and moving to the killer shack. ######### he see's me, i'm going to burn some pallets near the center."
Also: The lower your rank, the smaller the playerbase, which means less games are played when compared to higher ranks. So, the ranks that have the most SWF are smoke screened behind the higher ranks, where no one knows anyone, or how to loop a killer.
edit: As for the playerbase numbers. They are hidden behind consistant free weekends. But they were down from last year, but steady. (Down as in a full years growth was shed in a short period. Steady as in, it stopped shedding, and maintained a number similar to the year before the influx of new players)
I imagine they will run free weekends throughout the summer season, and it will be fall before we can get an accurate snapshot of the playerbase. Next time they ask for stats we want to see, I'm going to ask for average hours played by the playerbase. I have a feeling that a lot of older players left, but were replaced with about the same number of newer players.
1 -
I would also like to add in this case that these stats also show that splitting the playerbase would be insignificant when allowing killers to opt out of playing against 3 and 4-man groups.
THE DEV DATA DOESN'T LIE
Let us Opt out since the number of groups won't greatly impact the playerbase in a negative way.
*Unless the data is incorrect or skewed for some reason...*
4 -
It may if enough do it, it's still a large portion of the userbase.
Say 300k players come into the game each day and around 20% are in the 3 and 4 man bracket.
So around 48k playing in those squads.
That would take 12k killer needed to opt in out of the 60k that is quite a lot in reality.
0 -
@SpaceCoconut I see what you did there C;
1 -
Wait, am I finding myself agreeing with SenzuDuck just now and upvoting them? Do I feel well? Am I feverish? Did hell just freeze over??
Co'mon guys, the graph is likely legit, you just don't like it because it doesn't fit your bias.
Besides, it still proves that almost half the players you cross are with at least 1 or two other people. I'm not sure why nobody but me finds that significant.
0 -
@knell Woah, wait a minute! Did they actually admit at some point that they included games with disconnects in their statistics? I've been trying to get clarification for the longest time if they were ignoring games with disconnects or not! By any chance do you have a link to the statement where they said whether or not disconnects are taken into consideration?
0 -
Daily peak is around 23-25k so work with those numbers instead.
Also, there's no way of estimating what percentage of killer players will opt out when given the chance. Some players enjoy the challenge.
It also might be more accurate to measure the matches themselves rather than the number of groups at any given time.
A match has 1 killer and 4 survivors. Everyone else will sit in a queue until there are enough people so they shouldn't exactly be a part of the calculation.
0 -
It's not so much the challenge as much as I like to be spit on and laughed at.
1 -
Yup us console players are def a smaller number so the extremes are more pronounced I'm thinking...
0 -
According to those graphs, swf should be limited to 2 players. That gives the best compromise of killers not dealing with 4mans, and swf not being hugely impacted, since 3-4 man groups are in the minority
0 -
50% of players are solo. Meaning since you have 4 people in your lobby, on average 2 of them should be in SWF.
That's basically going against extra communication every single game, regardless of whether it's a 2 man or a 4 man.
1 -
Exactly, data was taken under certain circumstances, such as a different ranking system and in a specific time span (if i recall correctly that data was taken in a time span of a week, but i could be wrong).
Also, like you and Peanits explained, the rank was registered at the end of the match, so rank 1 survival rate was higher than it should've been.
1 -
Cherrypicking stats will not change the reality. Sorry.
Still a mistery to me why is people afraid of this: rather than facing it and ask devs to work in order to have people coming back.
Something they did starting from Sept '18 on made people leave the game constantly, despite the new killers releases.
I have a pretty clear opinion of how they made the game less fun to play, so we can discuss on WHAT happened, but it is not disputable THAT IT DID happen.
Bad matchmaking feels like an easy consequence... they still need 5 people per match with half the people.
0 -
The only thing which would make players leave are bugs lmao. The matchmaking was fine before the event. It's just that it's easier to make bloodpoints with killer.
0 -
I just checked your infos. Looking at it you're claiming that something happens which made people leave. What happened is that in August 2018, Dbd was free for a full week. You're the one cherrypicking your infos.
Also, this month of June 2019 is the month with the highest average player count since release.
3 -
About the matchmaking
I think they simply messed up
The devs are probably testing a new matchmaking system since the Dedicated Servers a coming soon and have accidentally released it
That's the only explanation I can think of for why it takes ages just to create a lobby as killer
0 -
Actually if you would stop your own cherry picking and really look at the numbers, you'd see that with the exception of last year, June always hovers around 24k.
If you want to say our numbers are stagnant, you won't get any argument from me, we've been stagnant forever. But to say the game is dying is pretty funny. You see, I've been hearing this since The Last Breath - and the game is still here.
Go say "The sky is falling" elsewhere chicken little.
0 -
I'm pretty sure I heard that back in beta. Some people said it'd be dead on release.
2 -
Even if we take the peak numbers instead of your 25k its still 20% of those that in a perfect world are killers who they then need to opt in. If that dropped to even 15% of those players it would mean huge queues in reality.
Take your number with it being 25k so that means in theory 5k killer players, you hit the 20% opt in number so 20% = 1k. A drop of even 5% equates to 25% less players opted in so thats a loss of 250, thats 1k survivor players finding queues incredibly long having to wait for other matches to end which could be 3-15 min.
Even if it dropped 1% of that 20% number it would be 50 killers short of the goal so 200 players waiting up to 10 mins.
If you cant estimate the percentage of killers who would opt out doesnt that negate your initial post? it was exaclty what you were doing in essence by pressuming more would opt in or it simply wouldnt work.
Everyone in game or in a lobby has to be taken into account as those in game already have been paired with someone who has opted in, those out of the lobby are looking for the rest who opted in, both are equally part of the overall equation.
You also never touched on the 3 man SWF needing one solo player I mentioned 😉
0 -
Kinda funny considering a few years back they said only around 30% of Survivors are actually solo players.
I just noticed OP is no where to be found.
1 -
If you do the math properly, that's about the same percentage of solo lobbies nowadays as well.
2 -
I currently love the matchmaking at the moment on ps4 - takes 2 minutes to get into a game, killer is ranked near to mine, sometimes higher, sometimes lower. +1 for matchmaking as far as i'm concerned.
0 -
It's actually "Percentage of All Players" the "100" is not part of that phrase, it's part of the legend on the left axis of the graph.
0 -
Sorry but I am looking at 18 months trend: wouldnt define that cherrypicking... :)
I am not saying game is dying - i hope it will not - but still not sure the reason why some of u are trying to negate the obvious.
Negating the playerbase trend, negating the dev stats...
Then, again, my explaination for bad matchmaking is just the easiest connection: if there is any better hypotesis - supported by any minimum evidence - I would be glad to read it.
0 -
The event giving at least 2 103% bonuses per bloodweb for killer and one each 5 bloodweb for survivors? The higher BP gains as killer that make every single event that involves BP bonuses, be it bloodhunt or distribution of BP offerings, only worth playing as killer?
Anybody can see that. You can't because you want to be wrong for some reason. Events ALWAYS make this happen.
0 -
Would you calm down?
Can i correct you?
Events since the serum one make this happen... maybe they are badly thought?
0 -
So the oceans of people saying they stopped playing survivor for the event because of bloodpoints don't matter?
0 -
Matchmaking can be explained in two areas.
1- the matchmaker has always been derpy and put people who clearly don't belong in the match together.
2) we have a new killer and an event going on.
Killer population always goes up when new content is released (even if the killer is trash) and during events because people want the BP's to either spend on the new killer or on character that they still haven't maxed out. And killers are really good at making points if nothing else. (Especially my BOI Doc)
You'll actually notice the number of farmer killers you get goes up drastically during these times.
When you have a bad ratio of killers to survivors, the matchmaker always derps out worse than usual.
0
