Kill-Rate is not a good metric for balance
The actually important metric is, IMO, the number of generators completed and how long it took for them to be completed.
- the difference between a 4K at 5 gens, and a 4K with all generators completed is night and day in terms of how balanced the matchmaking was and how you feel about the match afterwards
- A 4 escape in 4 minutes with 1 hook is a completely different game than a 4 man escape that took 10 minutes and all the survivors are on death-hook.
- If the killer gets a 4K but there was only 1 generator left, its actually a very close match.
I'm sure the developers are also looking at these statistics but I think all the forum posters quoting kill rates and deciding if the game is balanced or not based on that are doing themselves a disservice.
Comments
-
- If the killer gets a 4K but there was only 1 generator left, its actually a very close match.
Lol no it isn't. A 2K/2E is a close match.
A killer getting 4K is an easy win even if there were 1 gen left. Killer is not supposed to kill the 4 survivors.
4 Survivors escaping is an easy win also.
0 -
Any killer can get a 2K by just camping the last hook in the end game. If all the gens are done in 3 mins but you exploited the survivors trying to get everyone out is that a balanced match?
No, its not. The killer got destroyed.
3 -
Ummm, no. Your logic is flawed to the point that I can't even explain to you why it is flawed. The person you responded to is quite correct in pointing out that a 4K with 0-1 Gens left is a HUGE difference from a 4K with 4-5 Gens left. The fact you won't concede that point is troubling.
2 -
Kill rate is a bad metric because of how ######### the matchmaking system is.
One bad survivor means you get 4k'd, so the fact you can have an 4/5 players be elite level and the other one be a level 37 Dwight with 30 hours who is also "rank 1" is a major problem.
0 -
Kills and escapes do not tell the whole story. Balancing around a 2K/2E is a terrible idea in the long run.
0 -
The way you are thinking is flawed.
Killer main objective is to kill. So a close match is 50% kills.
Survivors's main objective is to escape. A close match is 50% escapes.
Period.
Using your logic (but you will tell me i'm wrong again), why do you evaluate the survivor's performance with gens done and the killer's performance with kills ? Evaluate the killer's performance with numbers of hooks he has made, same logic you have for the survivors.
And then here is your logic :
- 4 escapes with 8 hooks is a close game
0 -
I agree with this concept of balance. The whole 2K/2E is an unreliable idea for data as once again, there are many factors that aren't accounted for when it comes to balance.
0 -
Since the Killer point is to kill, and Survivor point is to escape, the break-even of a "equal" match, is 2K.
2K is Tie. 3K is Killer Win. 1K is Survivor Win.
Gens dont really figure into that, and are incidental.
1 -
Then apply this concept to the killer and not the survivors. Evaluate the balance of a game with the number of hooked survivors.
Thanks :).
0 -
I would say that it depends. If all 4 Survivors were alive with one gen left, and the Killer had to slug them, I'd say that yeah, it was close.
0 -
"A killer getting 4K is an easy win even if there were 1 gen left."
Then how did it get to 1 gen if it was so easy? A 4K does not always mean "easy". People who play killer often would know that. I play both sides fairly often and I'd say you can't just say "oh 4 survivors escaped so it was easy for the survivors" or "oh 4 survivors died so it was easy for the killer". That's not always the case and should never be judged as if that were always the case. If all 4 survivors escaped but everyone was on death hook, how is that an easy win? The killer was able to catch you. To me that sounds more like everyone went into stealth mode after they were dead on hook. I you have to go into stealth mode to finish the game and get everyone out then obviously the game got more difficult.
0 -
If gen times are the metric, how do you control for killers like Myers, Trapper, Oni, and Hag that start relatively slow but can be very snowbally later in matches?
I think kill rates are fine as a metric, but I'm definitely curious to see what kill rates are like for the top 1% of players by MMR once that gets live again.
0 -
It's impossible to balance because all it takes is one survivor doing a challenge to end up getting everyone killed or one survivor who's not so good, also it doesn't account for when killers are doing meme builds or playing a certain way for whatever reason, I feel like everything is for the most part balanced in this game except gen speeds which is what the problem has always been , gen speeds have always been the elephant in the room being ignored by the devs.
They need to make a secondary objective for once you reach red ranks that are equally as important as gens , that way the newbies won't be overwhelmed and once you hit high ranks gen rushing won't be as powerful and people will actually need skill to survive the trial while also giving survivors something besides generators to focus on to escape, and thus kicking the potatoes who barely make it to red ranks back out to where they belong so truly the best are in that category.
0 -
It isn't flawed in the least. This game tends to snowball, and surely you have heard of the BELL CURVE? Statistics are not based on a singular match. They are based on a huge sample of matches. The Bell Curve, if balance is where the DEV want it, will end up with an average of (2) escapes per match. I can't believe I'm having to explain Statistics 101.
To achieve good matchmaking you need to be measuring the actual skills of the combatants, and there is a MONUMENTAL difference between 4K with 0-1 Generators left and a 4K with 4-5 Generators left. One is a damn close match that snowballed at the end. The other was a curb stomping. Surely you can see that?
So many of you miss the forest for the trees. An individual match is a TREE. All of the matches in a given interval are the forest. Matchmaking is done at the TREE level. Statistics are done at the FOREST level. Are you understanding what I'm explaining?
0 -
Forgetting that the match length, chase length, gen completion time, map size, individual survivor skill level, and killer powers are a factor during a match.
Also, this idea of 2K/2E was tried back in Patch 1.5.3 with the Victory Cube. You get rewarded for the Kills but punished for Escapes that would determine your pip.
yw (:
0 -
And there is a big difference between a 4 escapes and a 2K/2E and a 4k/1gen left.
And no a 4k with 1 gen left is not a close match that snowballed at the end as you didn't have the 4k when 1 gen was left. In most of the case you will get the 2 first kills when 2 to 3 gens are left, then the 2 last kills when there is 1 gen left --> This is not a close match, it's a game where the killer has been dominating from the start, in chase, kills and map control.
If the killer has the 1st kill when there is 3-2 gens left with some hooks on other survivors and then get the 2nd kill when there is 0-1 gen left, this is a close match. He can even get the 3rd kill during the end game phase.
But the game is not linear.
There are 3 phases in the game :
- 5 gens left, 8 gens on map --> map control is hard, killer has to apply pressure but survivors have the advantage
- 2/3 gens left --> if the pressure was good enough during the first phase, the map control is easier as the area to cover must be smaller
- 1 gen left --> 3 gens situation, killer has the advantage if he had a good strategy in phase 1 & 2
So most of the kills must be done during phase 3 & 2. Phase 1 is a "preparation" phase (hooking surv).
So around 1 gen left, 2 to 3 survivors must be alive.
During the ending phase 1 more can be killed and it's a balanced game.
I don't think i need a statistics course, i surely did more maths than you when i was in high school. Statistics are not made with 1 single match, exactly and end of 2020 statistics have shown a 70% kill rate in red rank, meaning that the average kills were almost 3 while it should be around 2 (50%). We don't know the standard deviation but from what i have seen as a soloQ survivor, i don't think it's too big.
The good metrics to evaluate balance is already in the game, to calculate the points you have done in a game, there are many metrics used. Divide the points earned by the lenght of the game, you then get a score/min.
Higher score/min = higher skill.
0 -
Meh. I'm not going to try to explain this to you. Why? You will refuse to accept any answer other than your own. :) Facts are things for other people. Another reason is that I don't care. I'm going to 4K you regardless. :) I don't truly believe there is a working MMR system that is going to use any metric we are discussing. I think it will, once they divest it from Rank, be entirely random, i.e. 1st one in is 1st one out. With no information, we can't check their math. It is win/win for the company.
In short, you will be just be playing with whatever Killer came up next in the rotation. You might get Otz followed by a potato.
0 -
This last message discredit all you have said before, well, good luck next time lol.
0
