Why is the swf option a forced thing?

Well, so you want the killers to leave first, so noone is left to spend money? because imbalanced games tend to do that, they die out sooner or later.

The mori thing would just be a better version of Devour Hope, as the survivors wouldn't be able to get rid of it,

Everyone has to endure toxic and sweaty matches in this game. Do you think anyone enjoys playing against moris, or Insidious campers, or Stridor Spirits? Should there be an opt out for all of those as well? Let’s just show everyone their opponent’s load outs pre-game too, that way I can dodge iri head Huntresses and rusty shackle Hags and Objects and DS/UB gamers and Freddys with slowdown builds.

To help the new players they should implement a practice mode with bots. The tutorials don't really help that much.

Having an option to turn off swf would hurt the game much more than it would help.

Based on the killer mains I've seen on here....hahahahaha there's no way any of them would ever queue for SWF if they had the option to. Some things just don't need an option, and a SWF queue option would absolutely kill the game. I'm sorry if you think otherwise but there's absolutely no way there'll be enough killers to play against swf groups, and the game would lose about half of its players. The rest will be queueing forever in killer queues because nobody likes playing solo survivor.

Actually it would do the opposite, as all killers would disable SWF to prevent facing SWF teams and only face solo teams, resulting in EXTREMELY HIGH queue times for people who want to play a game with friends, resulting in them leaving the game or attempting to queue together in solos

This would chop the player count down massively and possibly result in the death of the game, hence why game companies never want to restrict you from playing with friends

Pretty sure there were stats somewhere that showed at least half the people who play this game play with their friends.

"Why would killers opt out of SWF?" Idk because playing against 4 solo survivors with no Comms is almost always going to be an easier match than a SWF team with comms? So why wouldn't they choose, and I'll say it again, the path of least resistance especially if that path has literally no downsides for them?

I never said killers would be overpowering. And you haven't given good reasons for the option to exist either. How would effectively saying "hey you can't play this multiplayer game with your friends because your queue times will be an hour long" bring MORE people into the game?!

Look I'm really sorry but I just don't see where you're coming from with this.

If SWF was an option that killers would totally take over solo games, then you wouldn't need to separate SWF in the first place. Your whole argument is that killers should be given the choice to play against SWF or not, implying that SWF is harder or not an enjoyable game mode. Otherwise why would such a 'choice' be needed.

To quote your initial post : (and no i don't agree with you falsely generalizing an entire section of the game )

"Majority of SWF is toxic"

"The game loses new players all the time because of the abuse feed to new players by swfs"

If this were to be true, and you separated SWF ques, VERY FEW killers would opt into it.

Your other argument seems to be it will bring new players to the game. Perhaps it would, but how many of them join the game because they think it will be a cool game to play with their friends?

I don't deny there is toxicity due to SWF, i don't deny that some SWF groups might be unfun or frustrating to play against. The same can be said about a lot of this game because everybody has their own beef somewhere along the line. Separating SWF ques might increase the player base, but only very briefly once players realize that if they want to play this game socially they have to sit in a que that will be excruciatingly long. Because as you stated "Majority of SWF is toxic" and whether this is true or simply a perpetuated myth based on the actions of the few rather than the many, the statement gets thrown around enough that nobody would touch such a mode.

Social gameplay is a big thing in this day and age, you cannot deny that. Most of us have a group we play with, or perhaps family at home or some other form of gaming social circle. And while yes, DBD does have a decent solo player base, any game that can be considered multiplayer will also have a huge 'group' player base. It's why even single player games hammer in terrible multiplayer modes because word of mouth and 'group gaming' culture continues to grow and make them money.

I don't have a horse in the race one way or another, but your idealist notion that splitting the player base will improve player count and the game overall, is either willful ignorance or not thoroughly thought through beyond the result you hope for.

I can't agree that most SWF is toxic. I face a lot of confirmed SWF that plays the game normally and I don't have any toxics in my friendlist

EDIT: Unless the pure existence of a key or a toolbox above yellow is already regarded as toxic (which is BS in my opinion, if someone says so, you just purposely ruin your own gaming experience)

The point of opting out is to balance solo and SWF differently, and thus both options would provide a fair game? Then it would actually be no different for the killer. Either you play a weaker killer vs. solo players, or a buffed killer vs swf.

Why do you think people would only choose solo?

Like prior mentioned, SWF queue times would be pretty long if opting out of SWF was a thing as then almost all killers would want to face solo queue players as they are missing the critical things that only SWF can have, making matches so much easier for them

Also what is stopping players from playing a buffed killer VS solo players?

Actually no. Nowhere on my post implies you arent wanted on the forums because you believe in options.

All i have done is use your own arguments to prove that your particular solution to this problem is flawed. If you want to make a difference, take your idea back to the drawing board and try again, and no im not being sarcastic. I'm all for change in the game, and calling you naive because you seem to be willfilly ignoring that group play is a large part of the game and the game itself would be negatively affected by a player base split, is not insulting you or telling you to get off the forums. It's asking you to recognize that you might have to rethink your position.

If you want to pretend the mildest of perceived flaws in your theory and character as so offensive as to chase you away that's fine. Personally, while i don't agree with you, i have seen you hold your own throughout this whole thread and don't believe for a second you are quite that thin skinned.

Honestly?

This game has changed from what the devs originally envisioned. Some allowances have been made and while some have been good for the game, others have tipped the balance, and some things cannot be removed or the balance gets tipped even further and the whole thing collapses. Personally, and this is from a standpoint of someone who admittedly couldn't tell you how much work this requires, i think the whole thing should be rebuilt from the ground up.

Instead of splitting up the player base and crossing fingers that the game doesn't die out from lack of a multiplayer option, because i'm sorry but its very evident from countless posts about SWF, very few killers would choose the SWF option, incorporate swf properly, balance it properly, allow multi killer matches where the other side can also have the advantage of comms. Use what has been proven successful and adjust what is causing the most arguments between killer and survivor. At the end of the day its very hard to satisfy everyone, but slapping on a patch by splitting your player base to keep one side happy, is only going to work for a short while before half the games population head off for a game they can play together without having to wait christ knows how long to get in a match.

This probably isn't the answer that you want, but its the most honest answer I can give.

As for calling you thin skinned, I believe my actual words indicated that i DONT believe you to be thin skinned enough to consider my words an insult. I try to be as objective as possible, and pointing out cold hard facts isn't insulting you. It's simply being realistic.