Make up your minds already. Do you guys want us to balance around good players or not?
If somebody brings up how it's literally just impossible for a killer B-tier or lower to win against a good survivor team, y'all start moaning about how "Well actually most survivors aren't like that! Not every SWF is seal team six, so BT/DS/DH/Unbreakable are fine."
...and then in the same breath you'll say that Nurse, Spirit, Deathslinger, and Pyramid have zero counterplay because the best players on those killers can remove your options.
I'm sorry, no. You don't get to have that both ways.
If we're balancing survivors around the pepegas who can't do skill checks and run into a wall every eight seconds, you don't get to balance killers around the assumption that everybody who picks Deathslinger is a member of Faze Clan with pregognition.
Comments
-
Killers just need to get gud
3 -
I said the exact same thing a few days ago. Survivors want to pull the "you dont play them that often" card when it's their broken crap, but they face otz every game when it comes to killer broken crap.
20 -
a. Most SWF teams are just friends playing together, not some sweaty de-pip squad.
b. killers should have to work for their hits and not have times where, regardless of what the survivor does, they get a hit in.
These are not mutually exclusive
20 -
We could just have a reliable match making system where noobs played against noobs, pros against pros, and those who just wanted to have fun playing with friends could do so against killers that are also there just for fun
4 -
a. Most killers aren't 5k hour Spirit mains who can guarantee a win just by existing.
b. Survivors should have to work for their safety and not have times where, regardless of what the killer does, they can't be touched.
See how that can be turned around?
58 -
No killer, including Nurse, can really compete with a full team of good survivors with decent perks and decent coordination. And it isn't something that can ever really change, because as has been stated, most survivors aren't like that.
4 -
I mean a god nurse with double range add ons could have a pretty good chance
0 -
Well they either have to balance around the highest potential of both sides like most games do when they balance around pro play. And yes I know dbd is no report title.
Or they have to balance around the masses.
The first might lead to new player to be stuck in the mud while the latter will result in abuse and unbalance on a high skill level.
This means they should either balance around swf or bring solo up to swf on the survivor side. And on the killer side either lower all killer down to m1 trapper Niveau or bring all killer on nurse level.
Nurse level vs swf balance
Trapper level vs the masses
Problem with method 2 is that swf and their higher "potential" will keep existing.
Edit: Right now they are doing neither and a little bit of both, atleast at the killer side. Some killer are valid on the highest skill level while 60-70% of the roster can't really keep up. While not the other hand the other 30-40% stomp survivor in low level where the other killer are still valid.
6 -
I made a complete post about why the top down balance needs to start at bridging the Solo Queue Survivors vs SWF gap before it makes any sense but so it won't completely derail this topic and because it's in the feedback section I'll just add a link here. The point still stands for this discussion though
2 -
I agree, nerf Legion
4 -
Nowhere near 50/50
2 -
Are you sure about that? I think BBQ, Corrupt,Pop,Shadowborn and double range add ons could clap any team
1 -
Balancing disparity between skill levels would be separating the groups. They don't, so it's balanced towards the masses rather than the experts.
It's also why balancing everything towards the possibility of everyone being swf shouldn't be a thing. You'd crush literally everything until you actually run across a swf then get your ass handed to you. In fact it already happens that way.
But honestly, there needs to be more game modes to sort these things.
5 -
Well, an interesting thing i noticed. I am a survivor main, but play killer as well. Most of the time i stayed in green ranks, and faced full red rank teams a lot, often swf. And got outplayed time and time again, because i wasn´t a good killer. Now, slowly i become decent, and i worked my way up to killer red ranks. Now i get mostly green ranked solo survivors that don´t know how to deal with a killer. Yeay matchmaking.
6 -
the highest skilled players are able to exploit game imbalances and they are the best at breaking a game. Balancing a game around the most skillful players will balance the game around all skill levels. In a PvP game, in order for the game to be fair, the higher skilled player should beat the lower skilled player. When the difference between winning and losing is player skill rather than game mechanics, the game is fair. Losing and winning fairly are what create a healthy community. This game's toxic community is fueled by how unfair it is.
14 -
Before we talk about where balance (skill wise)
Expanding the ranks and separating the number and color
10-1 for each color
Reenabling MMR limits on MM (low ranks against low ranks- high ranks against ranks)
SWF's no longer can group up if colors don't match (Red ranks can group with other Red ranks... ETC)
After that we can start looking for misbalance
4 -
A good Nurse definitely could on a Macmillan or autohaven. Idk what the other guy is smoking. That was even more true when prenerf omegablink was a thing. Good times...she had some very fair and balanced add-ons before.
0 -
Na, you don't. Most people are just goofing around. They just want to have fun. They would never call out your perks, your totems/traps, the way you are heading and they would never go for a coordinated hook save. /s
Ontopic:
Balance should be from the top to the bottom.
3 -
Don't say that and complain that killers are OP.
7 -
Sure you can have that both ways. Want me to prove it?
Hillbilly.
That was easy.
2 -
Everything in any competitive game should 100% be balanced around the highest level of play, because that's where you actually come up against the limitations (or lack thereof) with specific mechanics, perks, add-ons, etc.
If you balanced any game around the lowest common denominator, all the stealth killers would've been removed day one because they scare new players, and Scratched Mirror Myers would've never been made because he's "uncounterable." Killers would've had pallets and loops removed because they'd take all match to catch a decent survivor, etc.
You must always balance around the top-end. That does not mean make it unfun for lower skilled players, but fun and balance generally go hand-in-hand. Some early confusion and frustration at mechanics you don't understand (especially in DBD, where the tutorial is Z-tier and the game tells you almost literally nothing about anything beyond how to move) is part of getting skilled, but having the game changed because you vaulted the window behind the survivor every time would be bad for everyone.
11 -
I do it. But lets assume im lying, did you see the recent tournament that dowsey and hexy hosted? There were really good teams, and guess which killer dominated against this amazing teams (just look for fingerguns performance). Luckily for us nurse players, nurse is really strong and highly rewards your skill. And you can dominate really coordinated teams, provided you are good. I really wish every killer could be like that, they have done an amazing job with nurse
0 -
You mean the tournament filled with terrible teams that genuinely didn't know how to do gens, with maybe 3 exceptions that were only reasonably close because of perk/item/add-on bans?
3 -
I literally played spirit against my SWF friends in a KYF
I never play as killer and they have like 300 hours of survival
In the end i was forbiden to play with spirit against my friends because i do 4K 2 gens
1 -
So you dont see any difference in skilled survivors and uncounterablw game mechanics? Well, you disqualified yourself.
1 -
and so they hated him because he spoke the truth......
4 -
I'm not arguing about balance, I think we both think the same on that matter. Who cares how many chill teams were there, there were also nurses that look like they were playing with their eyes shut. It all comes to the final stages. And good teams were for a fact there. When both sides compete under equitable terms, nurse provides a fifty/fifty situation. That's my point.
When the match aims towards skillful gameplay, she has the highest skill ceiling in this game. Even god spirits are capped by design, and well unfortunately I don't think I need to say a word about the rest.
When the match becomes a repairing simulator (casual 'depip squads'), clarifying what could classify as 'winning' under equitable terms might prove useful. Personally, as soon as survivors decide that for them 'winning' is to abuse every possible game mechanic they have at their disposal just to do gens and leave under three minutes, I decide that slugging and one hooking them all is 'winning' for me. Yeah, thrilling gameplay.
I think lots of problems evolve from having this two types of mentalities mixed up in matches, giving really unfair and stupid outcomes for both sides. Problem is the game itself contributes to promote this kind of behavior.
That's why I said they have done a pretty good job with nurse. The game's foundation however is subject to another debate. And no, it shouldn't be like this. This is not what I want for this game. I'd like fair and fun competition, without made up rules devised to compensate for poorly designed mechanics.
My point stands, nurse can compete. Regardless of made up rules. As long as you play under equitable terms, and provided you are up for playing against your opponents and the game as well.
Is it worth your time? I don't think so.
3 -
Nurse ... Deathslinger ... someone has never played console. They're bad.
0 -
At least DC should be nerfed.
It's at least acceptable that good squard of survivors are almost incompetable... in terms of skillfulness. This unbalance mainly comes from personal skill.
But DC ? noway. no skill, no thinking, no preparing, even 7 years old kid would succeed DC, earn 30 to 60 more seconds.
You can't just give them precious free 30 to 60 seconds, you can't do it just as because they have that perks, without any skill.
0 -
Did you happen to be here two weeks ago, when the forum had three new threads about how 'uncounterable' Deathslinger was popping up every four minutes? Now that there is cross platform, it's all lumped together.
1 -
I stopped reading after you said "competitive game". Dead by daylight, like it or not, is not competitive
1 -
Doing gens while the killer is not chasing you is literally the best way to ensure survival ######### are you on about?
0 -
It is a competitive game in every way that matters. It is one team vs. another using their skill to try and win. You can see this with perk designs, if it was a "party" game like the devs occasionally like to call it, rather than an entire perk slot like Hope giving you a whopping 7% movement speed boost, it'd be like 50%, because party games are all about big flashy moments.
Anyway, I get what you're saying, this game isn't tournament or esports viable because it's an unbalanced busted mess and the devs don't commit to fixes or balance passes fast or often enough to keep it that way. We saw that with the multiple game breaking bugs in Hexy's tournament a few weeks ago.
However, that does not mean it isn't competitive.
4 -
Why would you want to balance around the top 0.1%.
That just makes no sense from a business and game perspective.
2 -
Fun fact even an original party game like smash bros has a competitive character and a professional competitive brand.
But party games in general are not one side vs the other but origin in free for in a group of friends like worms, smash bros, mario cart and so on. And even their people get competitive.
Dbd is PvP team vs "team" only and you want to tell me it is a casual party game. Sorry but even the if the devs called it that it isn't.
1 -
No. It should be balanced around casual play because a majority of the players are casual.
1 -
Yeah. I mean it's good and all us trying to think of solutions or whatever being a salty survivor or an annoyed killer but at the end of the day match making is bad for everyone. It's more then bad it's appalling. So first things first let's keep telling the devs we deserve a better system. I agree with your ideas swf should only be allowed between the same rank colour.
1 -
They should balance around the "majority". A group of casuals should have a fair shot at winning.
1 -
Everyone talks about “casual” survivors and how it should be balanced around them. How about the “casual” killers? Should they be able to have fun too?
would simply having an AI killer fix the aforementioned “balance around the majority”? Then the killer can be tuned all the way down and a group of swf can run in circles and hold m1 as long as they want.
12 -
Thanks
1 -
Lul casual non competetive party games.
There were special rubber gloves being sold by nintendo for people who kept injuring their hands while playing mario party 1.
PEOPLE INJURED THEMSELVES TO WIN IN A CASUAL PARTY GAME.
Dbd is by definition competetive.
4 -
It's not competitive, for being competitive it needs a clear goal, you can say that your goal as a killer is to kill everyone but It is the goal or a winning? Because killing four survivors too fast grants you nothing but a depip and a low amount in BP, so if it were killing the four survivors you shouldn't depip or have a short amount of BP.
The same goes as a survivor, you can say your goal is to survive and escape but if a killer is AFK then you will likely depip as well. You can sometimes get killed and yet you earn more points that those who have escaped from the exit gates and they may depip and you might earn two pips. So if the goal is to escape, then you should have a guaranted pip if you escape or survive.
The game awards you more points if you're interacting with each survivor and the killer as well, because the game is made to be interactive and the ranking system it's not a way to meassure "your level" so don't even try to drag it into the thread saying And why it's there a ranking system? The ranking system is, or should be there to prevent newbies to have unfun matches.
2 -
God I miss Omega Blink. Nothing like 1 blink getting me to someone I saw with BBQ. Those were the days.
0 -
Escape and kill 4 survivors are the goals. Why else would killers "only want to 4k"?
The ranking was tacked on and doesnt fit correctly anyways. Thats been clear day one. Survivoes not fulfilling their goal getting better results is a good example tho, thanks for that. As you said, it's designed to not reward players for playing to win, but to have a great time and butterlies and rainbows.
A system like our emblems would look funny in football etc. " doesnt matter you scored 7-2, the other team had more passes than you, they win."
0 -
this game was meant to be fun party game interacting with each like you would in a horror movie why I would think mostly horrror fan would like this game
don't think it was ever meant to be competitive and it shouldn't be how the game is.
1 -
No, not mutually exclusive but certainly hypocritical. It always takes work to hit a survivor, that was a fallacy and 80% of the game for survivors is holding m1, not much work involved there either.
0 -
A. is literally proving his exact point.
0 -
Oh man I say this all the time, it's such a double standard we have for balance.
They balance around low rank survivors that don't know what they're doing, yet simultaneously balance killers/killer perks around a top tier multi thousand hour killer.
I personally think it should all be balanced equally around top tier both sides, but if we aren't gonna do that on the survivor side, at least keep consistency and treat both sides that way.
1 -
...what?
How does that even happen?
I mean, I hate Mario Party so I guess I don't really get it.
0 -
IMO it makes 0 sense to balance around anything OTHER than the best players. Why? The best players play the game in it's most optimal form. Issues with balance and design will become readily apparent. You can't balance around bad players because bad players aren't predictable. There is no balancing for stupid. The only reliable balance point is around players who actually play the game correctly because it's the only reliable and consistent measure you can make.
And yes there is such a thing as player a game WRONG. For example, if you put on a meme build just to mess around with the killer, that is objectively playing the game wrong because now you aren't playing to win or playing optimally. That's not to say there is something WRONG with PLAYING WRONG, you are free to play as you want, but to expect the game to be balanced around WRONG PLAY is unreasonable.
4
