I've had enough. This needs to be said.

I had plenty of counter argument; you lied and said you didn't read it (the novel). It was easier to pretend you didn't read it than answer the points I made. That isn't an uncommon rhetorical trick; politicians do it all the time, i.e. say they didn't know that, hadn't heard that, or haven't seen it yet. :) For the record I've already gone back and read your posts, all of them. It took me the time between my last answer to you and this response. It is an interesting litany of rage against Killers, and very "us versus them" oriented. I play both roles, as you indicate you do as well. The key difference would be that I play both roles more or less equally, whereas you indicate you are a Survivor main.

But you did ask a question, i.e. "why do we have a pipping system at all?" They created it as a placebo. You will note there is no official way to win in this game. Unofficially, 0-1 kills is a Killer loss and Survivor win, 2 kills is a draw, 3-4 kills is a Killer win and a Survivor loss. The DEV have pipping as a way of making people feel like they are making little strides. Rank is another way to make you feel like you are moving forward. MMR isn't even going to use Rank, and I would argue they haven't been using Rank for a long time already. In short, you can get killed but still Pip, and thus have a personal win. You can be killed and not Pip, but still earn a lot of Blood Points, and thus still feel you got a sort of win. All these systems are like the stars your teacher would put on your report card in Kindergarten; they are to make you feel better but are entirely meaningless overall.

Should these things matter? Sure. Would I like a matching system that is better than what we have now, and works more like you suggest? Sure. I'm simply more realistic and understand the hurdles. I've got my fingers crossed for MMR but I don't really believe it will work any better than now. I believe the "first in and first out" will remain the main factor in who we get matched with. No matter what, the matches must continue and the Que cannot be allowed to slow down beyond a certain point. That will always be the straw that breaks the camel's back and why the kind of matchmaking you talk about will NEVER exist here.

Criticism? Oh, the mods aren't gonna like that.

Actually, I comment that the other points are fine. However, the OP directly links their dying to their bad teammates in that post. It is done multiple times. The other things (and there are not ten in the OP) are legitimate gripes but NONE of them have anything to do with the OP dying. There was nothing for me to say in regards to the other gripes beyond what I said. I answered the key issue, however, the one that seemed to have the most emphasis, i.e. the frustration at dying all the time, because of bad teammates. I am pointing out that there is nothing the DEV can do about that. The angst and passion of this post could have been directed at said bad teammates.

Hell to the yeah

I wouldn't go this far. The DEV should (and believe it or not) do listen to us. The problem is there are so many garbage posts, written in a rude way, that it makes it almost impossible for them to sift the gold from the mud. The DEV are people, just like us, and it wears on them to get nothing but bile day in and day out. Just like us, they start to tune it out, stop bothering to read it, or give any weight to it because of the manner in which it is delivered. You will catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. The old saying holds true today.

I think people should give feedback. I happen to agree with the OP on a few things. I just didn't have anything to add to it, so I only addressed thing I disagreed with. I would rather they take more time with an update and get it right. I don't see the point in a ridiculously short play test when they really aren't going to make many changes. Their playtesting should actually start almost six months out, and should involve Players they trust who have agreed not to leak or speak on certain things. Or they shouldn't bother with the public play test at all, because it sets this false expectation. Just because WE said something doesn't mean WE are right. Hell, the Forum-dwellers rarely agree on anything, so I doubt the info they get from us in those short playtests is of any value whatsoever.

I'm a quality over quantity kind of guy. I play the same game you all do, and I would love for there to be fewer bugs and unintended consequences. However, I'm also an adult who understands how a business works. I understand costs and labor. I realize that they push these regular, rushed update because of the cycles. They have to offset each dip, and doing so is only accomplished with an update. A lot of people on this Forum talk about the company like they are some rich Corporate villains like the Captain Planet cartoon in the 90s. That is silly, and they have margins, and costs, and overhead that we don't know (can't know). So I temper my expectations. I give them feedback all the time. I don't get offended if they don't use it.