Why People Think This Game is Killer Sided

I think that there is a misconception when it comes to the balance of this game. Often times I hear people saying that the game is killer sided, that survivors have no hope of survival if the killer plays well. I want to give my input on this, after thousands of hours playing this game.

I think the most important distinction, above all else, comes with the difference between solo q and SWF. I do not think that Survive With Friends is OP, I think that solo q is drastically underpowered. I say this with one important thing in mind, and that is the current ranking system, or realistically any one which is implemented. This is going to sound bad, but I'm going to put it as straight forward as I can: Killer is not too strong, the majority of survivors just aren't that good.

Allow me to explain and at least hear me out. I'm not saying that these players are bad, I am saying that survivor has such a steep learning curve that it will take more time than many people have dedicated in order to be an optimal survivor.

This should be fine, and should be reasonable, however there are two factors which I think create a problem here. The first is that killer is easier to reach a certain level of skill. I am not saying killer in general is easier by any means, simply that to reach an average skill level of killer takes less experience than survivor. My reasoning is that for the most part, survivors are the ones who have to make decisions in chase, and the killer can simply follow them and cut them off when necessary. Therefore, the survivor is the one who will make far more mistakes, as it takes time and experience to understand how to use your camera, how to loop tightly, how to know when to vault or drop a pallet. With all of these decisions a newer survivor is faced with, the killer often just has to follow the survivor until they inevitably screw up. My first point here being: Killer is easier to play at a low/average level, which in turn leads to survivors saying that killer is too strong, although in reality it is simply that they are unfortunately given the harder job at this point, and have much more learning to do to perform at the same level.

The second problem is the ranking system. It is far too easy for someone with only 100 hours in the game to reach red ranks. Sure, it's an accomplishment for some people, but what this leads to is these survivors being jumbled in with the genuinely good survivors and killers. As any good killer will tell you, 1 weak link can destroy a team's hope of winning. These survivors, being able to achieve a rank which realistically they shouldn't yet be able to reach, are understandably frustrated when they get killed by someone with 10x their experience. It's not that killer is too strong, it's that inexperienced survivors can rank up easily and as a result face players who have far more playtime.

I am not attacking anyone, I just want to make a point. At the top level of play (I'm talking high skilled players, not just red rank), you will find how weak m1 killers are. These are killers who rely on fundamental aspects of the game, and they will get destroyed every game if survivors play correctly. It is only when killers stray away from fundamentals (nurse, spirit, hag, etc.) that there is more competition.

My Point comes down to this. The fundamental looping aspect of DbD leads to potentially survivor sided games, but lack of survivors capable of looping effectively leads to seemingly killer sided matches, when in reality it comes down to inexperienced survivors.

Thoughts?