We have temporarily disabled Firecrackers and the Flashbang Perk due to a bug which could cause the Killer's game to crash. These will be re-enabled in an upcoming patch when the issue is resolved.

Killer Mains and their idea of "Balance"

2»

Comments

  • notstarboard
    notstarboard Member Posts: 3,864
    edited February 2021

    I agree with some of your points here, but "Saying the game is killer sided on the higher level just because of win rates is wrong" needs to be qualified. The kill rate directly reflects the experience of red rank players. Therefore the game is killer sided at red rank. However, we're agreed on the fact that all red ranks aren't created equal and even one potato can sink a team. This doesn't say anything about how the balance would be at high skill levels with a proper MMR system, but it certainly does reflect the game's balance at high rank (i.e. not necessarily high skill) using the current rank-based matchmaking.

    You certainly should be able to 4k on any map as Pig; balance in DBD isn't that lopsided. It's all about mistakes and good plays on both sides, luck/RNG, and of course matchmaking. Not every game will be a 4k, but no game should be a foregone conclusion even for a garbage red rank player being hurt by a non-skill-based matchmaking system. Pig had a 73% kill rate at red ranks in late 2020, which is 5 points above average. That's extremely high.

    If your Discord SWFs rarely lose, that just shows that they're very strong compared to the average red rank killer. It's no different than a Twitch streamer with 5k hours going on a 50 match win streak with either side; it's just a side effect of the bad matchmaking system and says nothing about game balance. This shouldn't be feasible on either side once MMR goes live.

    Old Ruin was certainly still very strong at red rank - per the devs it was used in more than 80% of matches pre-nerf and that certainly wasn't because it was weak. I agree it was even stronger at low rank, though, and I'm sure that was a factor in it getting nerfed. I think that's a good thing.

    I would disagree that analyzing player experience should be the driving factor behind balance changes. I do think it should be a factor in changes in general, as with OoO in particular, since I don't at all doubt the devs' numbers showing it doesn't really help survivors statistically, but that also doesn't make it fun to play against. Fun obviously needs to be an important factor too. Still, I much prefer balance changes coming from in-game statistics. For example, perks that are extremely underused or that lead to worse outcomes than running most other perks should usually be buffed, and vice versa. The problem with making player experience the main focus is that now you have to wade through the partisan shitstorm of community feedback to get at something resembling a fair balance change. They would do well to listen to community feedback when weighing whether something needs to be changed in the first place, but the community directly informing the devs on balance would be a nightmare.

    It's also worth keeping in mind that if OoO really were busted in high skill matches with SWF, but weak at low rank and/or in solo queue, the devs should easily be able to see that once MMR goes live. There are a lot of variables to consider, but something truly OP or underpowered should theoretically be able to make enough of a dent in match outcomes to show a clear trend. Without a good metric for skill, though, which we won't have until MMR goes live, the devs might not be able to see something like that in the stats; so, for now I'll admit it's fair for community feedback to fill the gaps in the stats on potential balance issue, but once MMR is live and performing well I don't think it should be much of a factor in balance changes.

    ---

    Losing as Pig, Myers, or Trapper against efficient survivors feels bad, but all three of them are above average at both red rank and at all ranks as of the late 2020 stats drop. So, statistically, proportionally more people should actually be frustrated that they're always getting stomped by Pig, Myers, or Trapper.

    MMR should address those bad, frustrating losses on both sides and generally make matches more competitive. Even if killers like these perform a bit worse when MMR goes live they'd just be paired against weaker survivors to compensate, because MMR is killer specific. This relies on the overall game balance being somewhat decent, meaning there are actually the right amount of similarly-skilled players to make for good matches, but I would expect we've already cleared that bar. If not, the devs can tweak overall game balance accordingly. They can also of course still buff weaker killers based on their performance, but at the end of the day it won't be nearly as much of a functional issue once MMR goes live.

  • PeaceNGrease
    PeaceNGrease Member Posts: 673

    Dude, I don't know if you missed the point of what I was saying, but I meant that BHVR does not WANT to take the game in a strictly competitive direction. It has NOTHING to do with whether I think it should be able to or not, I'm for competitive balance.


    Like I said, it's a problem because competitive games tend not to have a mass appeal.. most people don't want to get really good at games. SF 5 was pretty much in a loss for years, and yea that had somewhat to do with mechanical changes people didn't like, but remember, this was a game that even had a period of commercials between fights in order to sure up profits, and SF is a big dog in the fighting game community, so imagine all the other hyper competitive fighters that don't have nearly the profile of and SF. I defy you to go find a fighting game that isn't SF, Tekken , or MK and find an active lobby with any consistency.


    TLDR; BHVR does not have a great financial incentive to make the game a competitive first game. Therefore they will likely never go in that direction over balancing for the middle.

  • Unifall
    Unifall Member Posts: 747

    I dont think balancing around 2k or 50/50 is a good idea only because it'll make the game easier for high ranks. What people don't seem to understand though is that kill percentage means nothing. Anything can happen in a match for example the survivor could dc, give up on hook, crash during the game, afk, or just be completely bad at looping. With the mori nerf im sure kill percentage has gone down a bit. The game should reward good loopers a bit more though.

  • JasmineDragon
    JasmineDragon Member Posts: 372

    you see theres this thing called a moron. They aren't good at the game, and both sides have them, and they are very good at b1tching about everything because they don't know any better. They're also notoriously loud

  • OldHunterLight
    OldHunterLight Member Posts: 3,001

    But mostly survivors will cry if killer is using strong perks and strong addons.

    According to survivors who I have played against, nurse without slowdowns and just tracking is unfair, nurse with slowdowns and 2 tracking is unfair.

    Oni with M&A and IF is unbalanced and unfair.

    Trapper with corrupt and pop + trapper bag is unfair.

    Wraith with all seeing (purple) is unfair.

    Hag, boring.

    Freddy, boring.

    Billy boring.

    Huntress unfair with sniper builds.

    Demo unfair with stbfl.

    Pig unfair and boring with stbfl + combat pig.

    Ghosty unfair (yes I've seen people complain about him).

    Myers most fun addons are unfair.

    If you as a killer use strong stuff you are the bad guy, but if a survivor has full meta perks then it's all good.

    That is just basing from my experience on the game and this is from someone who started early in 2018.

  • Predated
    Predated Member Posts: 2,976

    There being a 4k 0k difference doesnt matter tho. The AVERAGE should be a 2k. If 50% of the games are a 4k and 50% of the games are 0k, that goal of an average 2k is reached

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 5,229
    edited February 2021

    I think the only two things this game really needs balance wise are some of the maps need to be revisited again. Maps like Shelter woods are too killer sided, and maps like Bedham are so survivor sided it's laughable.

    Also, the matchmaker and ranking systems of course would need to be much better as well.

    I have other issues but they cannot be fixed at this point in the games life cycle, it is impossible to change the other issues I have with the game anymore. (Such as the game requiring that killers have half their build dedicated to just stalling the game; and survivors around just speeding things up or giving second chances)

  • Johnny_XMan
    Johnny_XMan Member Posts: 6,430

    On the forums? Their idea of balance is nerfing anything they deem "second chance" or "undo button".

  • Moundshroud
    Moundshroud Member Posts: 4,458

    Yes, I want a 4K every game if I can manage it. I suspect every Survivor wants to get out alive, and if they did that would be four escapes every game. I do not recall any Survivors ever caring much about my fun when I play Killer. Likewise, I don't focus on the Killer's fun when I play Survivor. The game doesn't provide fun. You have to bring that. You either enjoy the challenge and rise to it, or you don't. This is a PvP game where the two roles have mutually exclusive goals. So when I'm playing Killer I'm going to try to get you all. When I'm playing a Survivor I'm going to do my best to get my entire team out alive. I don't expect the opposition to give me any quarter or cut me any breaks.

  • Maelstrom10
    Maelstrom10 Member Posts: 1,922

    Kill rate is a dumb metric, though for a completely evenly skilled team vs killer it should avg out to two kills, or one escape with hatch.

    I play both sides religiously, and i typically get 4k's or solo escapes (or just you know solo sacrafice myself for the entire team to get a 3 escape)

    But like.. kills aren't the final metric of winning imo. i mean, if a clown can get a 4k vs a freddy who can get a 4k against the same team whilst having vastly different perks and abilities, whose truly the superior player? who feels like they've won?

    the freddy likely had a far easier time of it, but would that denote that the clown had a more rewarding game? or a more stressful one. whose the better player if their playing against a perfect team and still get a 4k? are they both masters of their craft and was it a fair win.

    did the clown camp until they all died? did the freddy?

    how do you define a win in dbd?

  • Reinami
    Reinami Member Posts: 5,445

    And you are missing my point.


    It is a terrible financial decision for them to ignore this aspect of the game. Competitive play is what keeps games alive for a long time. If they don't do it, a competitor will. And games are already trying to do the asymmetrical thing again. It is only a matter of time until one succeeds and this game dies.

  • Zarathos
    Zarathos Member Posts: 1,911

    In order to win in red ranks you need to 4k or 3k with a lot of points. So a 70-75% kill rate is likely the most ideal. But i dont care for kill rate what really annoys killers is buggy broken mechanics. Survivor this patch got to see some of the absolute nonesense crap many killers have to deal with.

    By that I mean the desync issue is awarding unfair hits. Meanwhile im playing blight and several months after release still sliding off walls. I'm still getting huntress hatchets give an indication of a hit (blood splatter) but then randomly not connect because dead hard? Then theres recent map changes that have gimped many range killers even though indoor maps exist which horribly neuter them as well.

    Most of the stuff mentioned above was unintentional whats even more grating is the intentional nerfs that have utterly annialated the play rate of traditionally popular fun killers. Ie billy and nurse. The deliberate effort to rain them in was so horribly executed many lost interest in the killers entirely. Again kill rate isnt pissing off killers its these horrible god awful design choices.

    I remember when the pallet vaccum got changed we could still get kills even with pallet vaccum nonesense exisitng or double pallets. These changes forced survivors to play better. Coasting off easy pallet vaccum safe zones was out. Looping and pathing got more efficient. This will continue espicially since even now people are adjusting there pathing to accomodate the new map changes.

    Tldr killer mains want cleaner less clunky gameplay that dosent break or have glaringly simple counterplay.

  • Devil_hit11
    Devil_hit11 Member Posts: 8,418

    I definitely do not aim for 4 kills every match despite being competitive. I just want the game to reward my skill when using playing a killer. For example, if 12 out of 15 phase walks as spirit, I land a hit and I am decimating the survivor in a chase, I expect to be winning that match. I think most killers want their efforts to be rewarded whether it is landing nurse blinks, landing clown bottles or using wraith stealth effectively.

    Its the same for survivor, survivor expect to escape when they're outplaying the killer and winning the chases. depending on teammates, you should be able to get unhooks, heals and complete generators when your survivor team is doing well in chases. Its just that most of the time, Survivors are able to escape even when half the team was not playing very well and being able to effectively use a killer power often yields no reward when survivors are playing well and it has little impact on the match(as vast majority of killer powers are really bad/easy to counter-play).

    As people have already stated, Kill rate is nothing more than a final result. Its not good statistic for balance. Its only good statistic for finding out how good a specific player is at playing that killer(assuming no facecamping, noed etc.). Average hooks and hook progression is a way better statistic for judging average balance of the game. Ideally a killer should get 7-8 hooks on average per game, however how many hooks a killer gets is based off survivor's skill in a chase & coordination on generators. If everyone really skilled at the chase and optimize the objective(as a team), than a killer will not get many hooks. Stronger killers have more opportunity to set up mindgames(opportunities to get hits), so the killer's skill matters more and has more input on outcome of a match. weaker killers less input on the match and often their abilities/tools they have to work with either do not work(too easy to hard-counter) or are ineffective/not rewarding to use in general.

    devs should not focus on statistics, they should focus on gameplay interaction between the killer/survivor above all else. I am not sure how I would describe this, but the other important aspect should be to focus on functionality of the creation in gameplay over its effectiveness. If something is meant to be good at stealth, than it should focus on being very good at stealth and not worry about its overall statistic in relation to others. These two factors preserve fun aspect of the game and fun should be major goal for both sides.

  • PeaceNGrease
    PeaceNGrease Member Posts: 673

    Dude, I never missed your point. I said the financial incentive isn't there for BHVR, I never said an assymetrical game can't be competitive or even make money.


    And it's not like they haven't already tried to make competitive assymetrical before. Hell, the first ever true Assym-game, Evolve, was extremely focused on becoming an E-sports, it was born with that as part of the intent. It didn't work then, but I still loved the game for what it was.


    Also, BHVR tried to make another Assym-game, one they were gearing towards strictly the competitive scene... It flopped within months.


    This is why BHVR specifically is reluctant to go into that position again. Also the fact that they attempted tournaments in the past with this game, and for the most part they were embarrassing.


    I do hope another game dies pull of ayssm in a more competitive style of game, I absolutely do. But it's likely just not going to happen with this game

  • awsome_predator
    awsome_predator Member Posts: 35

    To be honest everyone has there own opinion and what some class as balance others won't regardless of what changes same with all things I guess, but for me in a game where most ppl class escaping as a win or killing all 4 as a win I put to them if the killer ends the game with 3 kills and 1 guy escapes who then has won? Is it the survivor or the killer? Let's face it it doesn't really matter for me I want to win but with this game there is no clear what is a win as is it pips or kills for me I look at the points if I'm survivor and the whole team gets killed but at the end say I have the most points as all that killer has done is camped and tunneled and teammates have been over altruistic I'd be like we'll be ain't won look at his ######### score but like every1 we all have our views but for me where there is no clear and concise win I use points as more of a realistic benchmark for who won as if I haven't done enough on either side then I have lost like I say that's just my opinion

  • DontNerf
    DontNerf Member Posts: 990

    If a 2k is perfect balance why does it almost always give a saftey pip?

  • Kellie
    Kellie Member Posts: 1,328

    Basing balance off of kill rates is one of the most stupidest ways I've ever seen a group of developers.

  • Hex_Salt
    Hex_Salt Member Posts: 443

    As a killer main but as someone who also plays survivor I agree with you. It makes me cringe when killer mains moan about not getting a 4k every match. I want balance but not balance to favour killers ACTUAL balance in the game where neither side as a ridiculous edge for some reason other than skill. All I can say is please don't think all killer mains are like this, they represent us badly

  • OniWantsYourMacaroni
    OniWantsYourMacaroni Member Posts: 5,944

    Those stats aren't reliable though.

    There are a lot of factors that make them unreliable.

  • crow13312013
    crow13312013 Member Posts: 61

    I usually get 4k kill most of the time with Freddy he 2tiers I leveled him up mostly

  • TheWisp2006
    TheWisp2006 Member Posts: 32

    Yeah but usually you have to work to try to actually get those 2 left in early game

  • Huge_Bush
    Huge_Bush Member Posts: 5,340

    Don't waste your time responding to him. You'll only give yourself a headache. Just look at their comment history and you will understand.

  • PanicSquid
    PanicSquid Member Posts: 655

    A 50% survival rate would be balanced as an average, but a 2k/2e isn't realistic in how the game actually works.


    Killers start the trial at their weakest, all survivors are full health, 3 hooks from death and all resources are still available. As the trial progresses, pallets are destroyed, items are used, perks are used up and hopefully some of the survivors are closer to death than others.


    Once a survivor dies, the other survivors need to pick up the slack. As this goes on, survivors get weaker as they run out of health states, have more work to do, and less resources to use to do it.


    So goes the snowball, as survivors fall, so do the chances that anyone escapes (excluding hatch escapes).


    The way to balance the game is improving matchmaking, re-balancing maps that are one sided, and probably look at the most common perks and add-ons and figure out why those are the most common and give some nerfs and buffs to improve the variety of gameplay styles.

  • Anyone who thinks this game is balanced quite simply is a moron. You're in a casual game, it's not competitively balanced.

    The problem with it at the moment is that you don't need to be good as survivor. Some players are good but you don't need to be, you just need to do gens and not waste your time hiding in a bush or sight-seeing. That's it and you win.

    Killers don't want the easy 4k they just want balance. If you think the game is balanced then how come it's universally agreed that as killer time is money and even something like walking to a gen is a decision you need to carefully weigh up and see if you have the time or if it's worth it, whereas survivor you can meme about, chill, play silly games with other survivors and still get the gens done in time?

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 5,229
    edited February 2021

    I'll be honest, I could give a damn about true balance if they just made the game ######### fun.

    Give solo survivors a different objective beyond survival; something that awards just as many points or something.

    Give new perks to the game that do nothing but increase blood point earnings or something but don't buff you. Like "Gain a stackable 25% BONUS in bloodpoints in all categories however your power cool down/Charge time is doubled" or something. I would love that.

    It removes the stress about "Winning" and rewards you more for TRYING TO JUST PLAY.

    That's what this game needs more than anything right now, a will and motivation to just....play.

    There is too much stress based around trying to win either by killing everyone or escaping; and nothing properly awarding you or giving you a sense of accomplishment for literally anything else. Change that; and I promise the atmosphere of the game would change immediately for the better.

  • Killing_Time
    Killing_Time Member Posts: 894

    Which is boosted, but when it's Killer nerf time... Stats.


    But when we look at them same stats, Nurse has a weak kill rate and pick rate. She should be buffed based on this information, but ya know... Stats only matter in a nerf.

  • SaintDorks
    SaintDorks Member Posts: 252

    It aint about kill rate, It is about the fact that when you get down to It survivors have more control then the Killer in the game.

  • KasumiFox
    KasumiFox Member Posts: 117

    I'd be satisfied when ranking is fair and survivors don't act like toxic little children.

  • Moundshroud
    Moundshroud Member Posts: 4,458

    I think all the discussion of statistics in this thread misses the forest for the trees. There is such a thing as the "Bell Curve" which is the heart and soul of actual statistical analysis. The DEV do not expect perfect balance to be defined by all games coming down to a draw, i.e. two kills and two escapes. That would be impossible to achieve and deadly boring if you somehow managed it. It would mean the game has become entirely predictable.

    What the DEV are looking to accomplish is a Bell Curve which radiates out from two kills and two escapes. That is the best you can do in this kind of PvP game. Individual matches, however, are going to be all over the place. For the sake of argument (and not a personal claim here) let's say that I get 3-4K nearly every game I play. This is true against potatoes and good players alike. That doesn't mean the game isn't balanced. Let's be MORE realistic and talk about Otz. Just because he is capable of inhuman feats of skill in DbD doesn't mean the balance is off. That is simply Otz being Otz; he is that good. My point is for every Otz there are literally hundreds (if not thousands) of Killers who are lucky to get a single kill (some can't even get a hook).

    People are always trying to "interpret" statistics, but those doing so are looking too hard and seeing things that aren't there. The most valuable and telling information is visible in the Bell Curve, period.

  • JordanMalicious
    JordanMalicious Member Posts: 383

    Both sides cry my dude. These forums are proof of that. Survivors cry as much as killers. Both sides get equally butt hurt about things.

  • SocialDistomancy
    SocialDistomancy Member Posts: 1,319

    they already admitted hook suicides are averaged into those things since they "have no way" (meaning are too lazy or poorly skilled) to sort those out

  • MeltingPenguins
    MeltingPenguins Member Posts: 3,742

    Do we need to bring up ALL the quotes from any given social media platform the devs use and survivors crying bloody murder about how this and that killer needs to be nerfed if not removed at all, and when you dig deeper for their reasoning it turns out they deem killer broken because they can't run them easily/in general can't apply their uninspired 'endless loops chase' approach?

    But seriously now:

    The issue is with entitles brats on both sides: Players who demand an 'iWin' button. Survivors who seem to only think the game is good if they can insta-finish gens and insta-wiggle off while stunning the killer for the entire match, and killers who want a 4k by so much as looking at the dbd icon on their desktop/dashboard.

    And it's these brats that drown out the genuine helpful feedback. Things like why the killrate with freddy/bubba/spirit is off-balance, reasons why certain perks need to be overhauled etc. The brats just drown them out. Be angry at those people, not the rest

  • bobateo
    bobateo Member Posts: 368

    For me, it isn't stress. It's lackluster end of game. I really don't care if I escape, though it is nice to do so. It does suck though to lead the Killer on a long, end chase that allows whatever other remaining survivors there are to get out, and though you've been active in the game the whole time, the reward is a pittance.

    I suppose the intention is to feed into the decision to play altruistically or not and I can respect that intention, but as you say, it would be more fun and probably more engaging to have efforts like that have a bonus reward.

    I imagine that Killers can have similar frustrations.

  • voorheesgt
    voorheesgt Member Posts: 827

    You know survivor queues are so long because killers are rare right? Because killer is underpowered and not worth the abuse.

  • scottyj555
    scottyj555 Member Posts: 24

    Absolutely. I'm more interested in a quality match/chase.

    If the match is going my way I have no problems giving up the hatch or gate. I've walked people gen to gen and let them out if it ended up too one sided.

    Doesn't get returned as much because I've def been beat up by Srv's but there are some out there that will which is always appreciated.


    Is there any way to track kill/escape rate ?

  • Zozzy
    Zozzy Member Posts: 4,759

    I would be satisfied if I could make a play and be rewarded for it.

    Right now you only get a hit when survivors stuff up somehow since most loops have safe spots and holes all over them to see what the killer is doing.

  • solidhex
    solidhex Member Posts: 889

    There is not really any metric that shows who has won, and it's hard to find any metric that shows how balanced the game is. In general, you shouldn't play this game to win. We just have to accept that Dbd can be very unrewarding and punishes mistakes quite harsh. This game is hugely momentum based. I had games were i played very bad as killer (or let's say, i got a map like Ormond, survs did gens and i couldn't pressure enough due to the map being too big) and suddenly in end game i could turn the tide because they ######### up a save and i slugged everyone. Or if the killer suddenly decides to chase that god Meg and the last 2 gens, while being in a bad position, just pop, even though he had an early kill in the match.

    Kills doesn't mean that you played good, the same goes for escapes. If the killer camps his 2 only hooks (that he had in endgame) to his 2 only kills, does it mean the match was balanced?

    Or if you get 10 hooks but only 2 kills, what does that mean? Some would say, it means the killer dominated the match. For me, that means that you either don't care about kills or that you are a BAD killer - because killer is not just about doing good chases and mindgames - it's also about management and game sense. If you don't manage your hooks even though survivors only have 2 or 1 gens to do, you don't know how to play killer efficiently. I know, sometimes survivors manage to magically draw your attention to that one Feng who hasn't been hooked yet. But as a killer, you should know when to "tunnel" or "camp" (given that you're a sweaty tryhard), because killing someone is the greatest form of pressure for the killer in this game.

  • DaFireSquirtle
    DaFireSquirtle Member Posts: 188

    No ones asking for a 4k every game. But killer does need buffs as do solo que survivors. I dunno what the point of your post is? To make it out the majority of people are asking for insane nerfs, nope simply not true. Yea there small groups of survivors and killers who are asking for insane stuff but that's the same with every group.

    Your point is invalid, not true and isn't helpful in the balance discussion stop being toxic .

  • Bonig
    Bonig Member Posts: 9

    That's the whole problem if you wanna Ballance something look at the pros don't make everything easy for noobs since it becomes broken for pros. Devs will never achieve any balance with currect tactic using some kill rates is stupid ask pros. I myself am rank 1 piggy main piggy is so bad killer that I win only because of my game knowledge and intelligence. I would say that I have 90-% kill rate not counting amount of people I let go just because I feel sorry for them.

    My record is 20 or so 4 k's in the row tho to be honest most of the survs I meet suck at the game and are overconfident. Maybe in 1 in 20 games I meet 1 good survivor and 1 in 60 games a good swf which can f me hard. To balance this game whole stupid looping must be reworked to the point in which it can be easy enough for the noob and not be just running from one pallet to the another forcing killer to change a target. How would I affect that? Add some events happening on the map extra objectives power ups abilities something like that game rn is just not good and can be easily exploited especially for poor m1 killers not even mentioning stupid mechanic of undetectable in which you are being detected by perks spine chill etc just moonwalking xd reminds me of old legion. I would gladly do something good with the balance of this game but it's the core that's is corrupted without implementing new mechanic's changing few numbers would never make this game balanced but what Am I expecting from people not playing their own game they don't know what they are doing