"Let's Play Killer" day for the developers

@Master said:
I always wonder why people consider 50% kill rate balanced. Such a rate can almost everytime be achieved by hardcamping the first guy and killing a second with NOED.

On my opinion it should be rare that survivors escape, but then I am a very special guy that expects to fear the killer in an horror game, I know not everyone thinks like that

50% was just an example. Developers might as well think 75% kills is better ... I can't really tell.

In my personal opinion we can understand the scores in the following fation :

0 Kill : shame on the killer. (4 winner / 1 loser)
1 Kill : the killer loose, shame on him and the dead survivor. (4 winer / 1 loser)
2 Kills : that's a tie. (2 winner / 3 losers including the killer)
3 kills : both the killer and the final survivor wins (2 winner / 3 losers)
4 kills : Killer wins, shame on all his victims. (1 winner / 4 losers)

@Lyro92 Let's organize this, me and you!

@se05239 said:
Just bumping it as its still being relevant.

Co-signing this idea.

@Tsulan said:
I think the 13th of each month would be a great day to play as killer. 

It's a shame that I don't have multiple accounts to vote up this comment, unlike some people...

@se05239 said:
Most of the time, apart from Not_Queen, it's clear that most of the developers don't play their own game and are completely oblivious to the things that's happening inside it. Old examples would be them calling killers to "get good" for complaining about looping and such.

So here I come with a pretty unorthodox balance suggestion to Dead by Daylight, the developers need to have an actual play session as part of their job where they're forced to play Killer. Be it only for 2-4 hours, it'd help greatly towards them understand all the faults that Dead by Daylight suffer from.

Any opinions?

This post should be reviewed and read by some developers and they realize, that the game does not revolve around rank 20 and that many streamers as you have named knows how the game is and I have to say, that little by little it is getting better , but still a lot is missing.

@Entità said:
I humbly suggest @not_Queen and other Devs to play at least ten trials as killers and ten trials as survivors before a Player Test Build is released as a new patch, against both other Devs and common players. It should help you in your great job!

At rank 1 against a swf

@Entità said:
@Blueberry No, at all ranks and against all combinations of opponents. The game must sell and, to sell, must be as balanced as possible for all categories of players.

Balance for lower ranks means intentionally making something overpowered because you assume the player will just be stupid and use it incorrectly. That is a terrible way to balance.

@Blueberry said:

@Entità said:
@Blueberry No, at all ranks and against all combinations of opponents. The game must sell and, to sell, must be as balanced as possible for all categories of players.

Balance for lower ranks means intentionally making something overpowered because you assume the player will just be stupid and use it incorrectly. That is a terrible way to balance.

You forgive two questions:
1) both survivors and killers are inexperienced at low ranks, so why should a role be overpowered?
2) nobody reaches rank 1 without passing from rank 20: if the game is not balanced at all ranks, many people probably will give up (and new players mean new customers, who buy the gamee and convince their friends to do the same).

@Blueberry said:

@Entità said:

@Blueberry said:

@Entità said:
@Blueberry No, at all ranks and against all combinations of opponents. The game must sell and, to sell, must be as balanced as possible for all categories of players.

Balance for lower ranks means intentionally making something overpowered because you assume the player will just be stupid and use it incorrectly. That is a terrible way to balance.

You forgive two questions:
1) both survivors and killers are inexperienced at low ranks, so why should a role be overpowered?
2) nobody reaches rank 1 without passing from rank 20: if the game is not balanced at all ranks, many people probably will give up (and new players mean new customers, who buy the gamee and convince their friends to do the same).

1) Something isn't overpowered just because they're bad at the game, it's a skill issue.
2)They realize they failed because they have to learn to become better at the game. This is an entitlement issue and skill issue. Just because something is difficult you don't just lower the bar, you work harder to reach it. The most successful games apply this.

I agree, in theory. In practice, a too difficult game is often abandoned: videogames are not a school or a job, a player is not paid in knowledge or money for playing it, they are paid in fun. And Developers know that, and try to do a game enjoyable at every rank, which is a real issue, not to talk about "solo survivors/SWF".

@Blueberry There is no disagreement between you and me: the game is not too difficult for any of us, I find it pleasantly challenging. Maybe Devs want to help low rank people, I don't know. Aside that, the "solo survivors/SWF" issue is almost unsolvable.