Raw Data vs Prepared Graph...
I wonder what the rates were like separated by system.
I wonder what the survival rate is for 2, 3 , and 4-man SWF groups.
I wonder what the chart would look like if they looked at total hours played instead of rank.
There's a lot that was unsaid when they presented the chart. Don't be so quick to take it as proof of anything without knowing all the factors that went into or were discarded while making it.
Comments
-
You could request more specific data, you know.
7 -
I wonder if DCs we're counted as "kills" by the person making the chart.
This isn't what the graph was even looking at, it was looking at people leaving via hatch and door, not the amount of people the killer didn't kill, lol.
I wonder what the rates were like separated by system.
What do you mean b this?I wonder what the survival rate is for 2, 3 , and 4-man SWF groups.
I'm assuming they still fell into the graph, and if 2/3/4 man SWFs are still in the "less thatn 50%" category (everyone was btw) then it's safe to assume swf isn't the untouchable gods the forum killers paint them out to be.I wonder what the chart would look like if they looked at total hours played instead of rank.
Why does this matter? Every killer main on the forums speculates that survivors are op and amount of hours wouldn't matter. I've seen bad players escape, I've seen good killers escape, it doesn't take into account really good survivors that die or really good killers that do poorly because it's bound to happen and probably balances each other out in the end.Lets be honest, if this graph fitted your narrative you wouldn't have even made a post of "what ifs".
14 -
-
If a survivor doesn't escape, they've probably left the game through death or DC. The chart is still affected by that information.SenzuDuck said:I wonder if DCs we're counted as "kills" by the person making the chart.
This isn't what the graph was even looking at, it was looking at people leaving via hatch and door, not the amount of people the killer didn't kill, lol.
I wonder what the rates were like separated by system.
What do you mean b this?I wonder what the survival rate is for 2, 3 , and 4-man SWF groups.
I'm assuming they still fell into the graph, and if 2/3/4 man SWFs are still in the "less thatn 50%" category (everyone was btw) then it's safe to assume swf isn't the untouchable gods the forum killers paint them out to be.I wonder what the chart would look like if they looked at total hours played instead of rank.
Why does this matter? Every killer main on the forums speculates that survivors are op and amount of hours wouldn't matter. I've seen bad players escape, I've seen good killers escape, it doesn't take into account really good survivors that die or really good killers that do poorly because it's bound to happen and probably balances each other out in the end.Lets be honest, if this graph fitted your narrative you wouldn't have even made a post of "what ifs".
Separated by system: PC .XBOX PS4
No data should be "Assumed" when looking at a chart like this. SWF data was not presented separately and clearly, so nothing can be said about it. Of course SWF groups are beatable... The data would show how much higher their survival rates are compared to solo. Further proving the need for stronger tools to use against groups.
Hours: Experience counts towards escape and kill rates. Their rank system isn't good at separating skilled players from unskilled players. Hours might be a more accurate measurement to campare escape rates to.6 -
I wonder if DCs by the killer we're counted as "escaped"
2 -
Maybe it would be a good idea to post a link to whatever it is that you are talking about instead of assuming everyone already knows.
2 -
You do realize that people derank because of the rank system?
But you will never understand that and I wont bother anymore
6 -
@Master said:
You do realize that people derank because of the rank system?
But you will never understand that and I wont bother anymore
Yea, I never will understand deranking because I'm vehemently against it because I don't struggle at any rank.
Unlike you, who constantly confesses to deranking so you can "have fun" bullying newer players.13 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@Master said:
You do realize that people derank because of the rank system?
But you will never understand that and I wont bother anymore
Yea, I never will understand deranking because I'm vehemently against it because I don't struggle at any rank.
Unlike you, who constantly confesses to deranking so you can "have fun" bullying newer players.Yeah I know, you prefer teaming up with low ranks
5 -
@Master said:
Yeah I know, you prefer teaming up with low ranksI think preferring and just happening to are two very different things.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'm very happy for them to match your highest ranked killer in an SWF to the highest ranked killer it can, I'm fine with that.I also don't play with comms which is apparently what makes survivors have 20+ extra perks, but hey, I still do well, I don't derank, and when I do play rank 1 matches I don't come here complaining about anything because I'm ok at the game and realise my mistakes and those are the reasons I die.
But hey, you see no difference in intentionally bullying lower ranks and just happening to match with lower ranks.
9 -
Don't forget It was SenzuDuck telling us that healing at half the speed would take more than double the time.^^
5 -
@Wolf74 said:
Don't forget It was SenzuDuck telling us that healing at half the speed would take more than double the time.^^While I'm not a fan of SenzuDuck, I feel I should point out that so many people here showed they didn't understand how a speed reduction translated in terms of time increase that I made a thread explaining it in detail.
EDIT: Here's the thread - https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/26495/psa-how-interaction-speed-reduction-calculations-work3 -
@Wolf74 said:
Don't forget It was SenzuDuck telling us that healing at half the speed would take more than double the time.^^Oh no, I made a mistake, for shame.
These aren't my statistics and I didn't alter them, but yes, lets talk about how a few months ago I made a maths error because you don't like what I'm saying, and the things I'm presenting are facts, as it was posted by the source of the statistics, the developers.11 -
The thing with the graph from the stream is its kinda useless because most people in any game DbD included are just bad. Rank 1 people are bad on average too. Maybe disconnects count as kills maybe not (though my guess would be they do) but the only thing to see how balanced a game is is to let the best players on both sides play each other over every map multiple times and see how they perform on average.
To claim that the game is balanced or killers are OP because of average player stats is just simply stupid.4 -
Crythor said:
The thing with the graph from the stream is its kinda useless because most people in any game DbD included are just bad. Rank 1 people are bad on average too. Maybe disconnects count as kills maybe not (though my guess would be they do) but the only thing to see how balanced a game is is to let the best players on both sides play each other over every map multiple times and see how they perform on average.
To claim that the game is balanced or killers are OP because of average player stats is just simply stupid.
exactly!!! they should build this game around the top 5% of players. ######### anyone who isn't a pro-gamer or the average players, they don't deserve a good game.4 -
@Avariku said:
exactly!!! they should build this game around the top 5% of players. [BAD WORD] anyone who isn't a pro-gamer or the average players, they don't deserve a good game.I take it you're also against social programs because you believe they take away your money?
Balancing a game at the top means that players of equal skill have an equal chance to win. It's beneficial for everyone.7 -
@Orion said:
@Avariku said:
exactly!!! they should build this game around the top 5% of players. [BAD WORD] anyone who isn't a pro-gamer or the average players, they don't deserve a good game.I take it you're also against social programs because you believe they take away your money?
Balancing a game at the top means that players of equal skill have an equal chance to win. It's beneficial for everyone.Are you at least with me on this, people keep bringing up DCs as kills, but the graph isn't tracking who does and doesn't get killed, it's tracking who is leaving, therefore DC data doesn't even matter.
5 -
LMAO. that's the most moronic assumption I've seen in a long time.Orion said:@Avariku said:
exactly!!! they should build this game around the top 5% of players. [BAD WORD] anyone who isn't a pro-gamer or the average players, they don't deserve a good game.I take it you're also against social programs because you believe they take away your money?
Balancing a game at the top means that players of equal skill have an equal chance to win. It's beneficial for everyone.
you're actually advocating for the top tier players to be coddled while the rest of the players have to "git gud" just to stand a chance, so if anything, it would seem you're the type to forsake the masses in favor of the few. not me. xD9 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@Orion said:
@Avariku said:
exactly!!! they should build this game around the top 5% of players. [BAD WORD] anyone who isn't a pro-gamer or the average players, they don't deserve a good game.I take it you're also against social programs because you believe they take away your money?
Balancing a game at the top means that players of equal skill have an equal chance to win. It's beneficial for everyone.Are you at least with me on this, people keep bringing up DCs as kills, but the graph isn't tracking who does and doesn't get killed, it's tracking who is leaving, therefore DC data doesn't even matter.
I have no idea because I didn't watch the stream, and thus don't know what the devs said about the data.
4 -
@Avariku said:
you're actually advocating for the top tier players to be coddled while the rest of the players have to "git gud" just to stand a chance, so if anything, it would seem you're the type to forsake the masses in favor of the few. not me. xDYou don't know how game balance works. Thanks for letting me know not to waste my time with you.
10 -
then play offline games. Any competitive game is balanced around the top players, not the lower and most of playersAvariku said:
LMAO. that's the most moronic assumption I've seen in a long time.Orion said:@Avariku said:
exactly!!! they should build this game around the top 5% of players. [BAD WORD] anyone who isn't a pro-gamer or the average players, they don't deserve a good game.I take it you're also against social programs because you believe they take away your money?
Balancing a game at the top means that players of equal skill have an equal chance to win. It's beneficial for everyone.
you're actually advocating for the top tier players to be coddled while the rest of the players have to "git gud" just to stand a chance, so if anything, it would seem you're the type to forsake the masses in favor of the few. not me. xD
Take league for example or CS or any fighting game. Isn't balanced around the larger group for many reasons.
If I balanced around the top players then you can improve and see deeper into the game to get better. Improve and learn
If you balance around casuals you won't get better since it just become, who uses the tools to help newbie and abuse them
If you can't understand that and advocate it should be balanced for "the masses' and not around the top players, you shouldn't play online or in any competitive game at all. Stick with offline games, there are good ones too out there6 -
very different games with very different skill sets, so I don't really see the correlation... but okay... I guess everyone who isn't top rank should just quit and find a different game? cause that would pretty much kill funding for this game, but I guess that's okay too? lol6
-
@SenzuDuck said:
@Orion said:
@Avariku said:
exactly!!! they should build this game around the top 5% of players. [BAD WORD] anyone who isn't a pro-gamer or the average players, they don't deserve a good game.I take it you're also against social programs because you believe they take away your money?
Balancing a game at the top means that players of equal skill have an equal chance to win. It's beneficial for everyone.Are you at least with me on this, people keep bringing up DCs as kills, but the graph isn't tracking who does and doesn't get killed, it's tracking who is leaving, therefore DC data doesn't even matter.
Not entirely true. Someone who DCs cant leave and therefore can lower the %. However its true that a lot of the DCs dont affect them for example people who DC once they are cought on their death hook. But for example an entire group DCs cause they hear the killer is nurse. Maybe they would have escaped maybe not but it for sure ensured noone escaped therefore altering the %. Killer DCs can also alter the % unless it just dosent count the match at all. But it could also count as 4 survived. Who knows?
2 -
@SpaceCoconut said:
No data should be "Assumed" when looking at a chart like this. SWF data was not presented separately and clearly, so nothing can be said about it. Of course SWF groups are beatable... The data would show how much higher their survival rates are compared to solo. Further proving the need for stronger tools to use against groups.
This doesnt makes sense to me. If its aparent that SWF was added in the data then it shows even SWF groups have less than 50% escape rate. This means killers shouldnt have more tools against groups it means solo players need buffs.
4 -
Inclusion of any match that contains DCs will skew the result, since having 5 generators to do with only 3 survivors obviously will tilt the game in favor of killers, and even those that may have survived are much more likely have died because of it - further reducing the survival rate. So if 30%-40% of all survivors are able to escape despite the DCs, then the actual rate at which survivors could escape in normal games are probably much higher. Of course, that depends on how much DCs there actual is, or whether DCs are even counted as part of this data. But if they didn't count DCs, then were the DCs discarded individually, decreasing the overall sample size for the escape rate, or were the matches themselves taken out?
So unless we know how they treated the DC variable, for me, it's difficult to swallow the statistical data without questioning it.
6 -
You better stop video games in general cause most games are balanced around the top. Hell DBD is the only exception i know in fact.Avariku said:
LMAO. that's the most moronic assumption I've seen in a long time.Orion said:@Avariku said:
exactly!!! they should build this game around the top 5% of players. [BAD WORD] anyone who isn't a pro-gamer or the average players, they don't deserve a good game.I take it you're also against social programs because you believe they take away your money?
Balancing a game at the top means that players of equal skill have an equal chance to win. It's beneficial for everyone.
you're actually advocating for the top tier players to be coddled while the rest of the players have to "git gud" just to stand a chance, so if anything, it would seem you're the type to forsake the masses in favor of the few. not me. xD4 -
Personally I think the balance of this game is kind of all over the place. It's hard to judge highest level of play because their are multiple areas to think of in my opinion. You got SWF's who are frankly ready to ruin the killers day. Death Squading around. But take those same really good players and just have them play solo with no coms. They may be a bit harder to kill, but I'd still favor the killer to well kill them, at least the majority of the time. And then you got killers who might as well be on SWF levels difficult due to items, and ebony moris.
This game shouldn't imo be looked at as a hardcore tournament level game. It isn't, never will be. It should be balanced around people having a good time. And the majority of the player base dying more often than they are living probably isn't the best for the game in the long run. Regardless of it being randoms, or SWF.
I agree with normal games catering to the higher level players for balance is generally pretty smart when it comes to setting the game straight for decent balance. It usually trickles down into the lower ranks as others get better. But I don't think it works very well in this game. I mean who are even the top level players in Dead by Daylight? I see an occasional tournament or two hosted by a fan, but it's not like it has hard core tournaments with money on the line that I know of.
1 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@Zaram said:
I wonder if DCs by the killer we're counted as "escaped"Killers & Survivors really don't DC that much tbh.
You used to be more creative when trolling, what happened ?
6 -
@Giche said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@Zaram said:
I wonder if DCs by the killer we're counted as "escaped"Killers & Survivors really don't DC that much tbh.
You used to be more creative when trolling, what happened ?
Yea but, they don't lmao.
I complete probably 10x more games as a survivor than games the killers have quit in.as for survivors, yea they also quit, you're 4x more likely to see a survivor quit which is why killers will see more surv quit, obviously, but they still don't quit often enough to skew a statistic that involves thousands of matches.
5 -
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to win
4 -
@yeet said:
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to winDoesn't remove the fact that the main complaint from killers on this forum is how unbeatable and unkillable survivors are, when these statistics directly refute that, regardless of pipping or not pipping.
5 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to winDoesn't remove the fact that the main complaint from killers on this forum is how unbeatable and unkillable survivors are, when these statistics directly refute that, regardless of pipping or not pipping.
survivors are only unkillable when they are willing to be, most of the time they are not
that still doesn't change the fact that the room for abuse is still there7 -
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to winDoesn't remove the fact that the main complaint from killers on this forum is how unbeatable and unkillable survivors are, when these statistics directly refute that, regardless of pipping or not pipping.
survivors are only unkillable when they are willing to be, most of the time they are not
that still doesn't change the fact that the room for abuse is still thereYep, lets balance the game around the 1% of matches that have a 4Man Swat team on them.
Lets also balance the game around the 1% of killers that run noed and face camp.
Because that sounds FUN FOR EVERYONE.
8 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to winDoesn't remove the fact that the main complaint from killers on this forum is how unbeatable and unkillable survivors are, when these statistics directly refute that, regardless of pipping or not pipping.
survivors are only unkillable when they are willing to be, most of the time they are not
that still doesn't change the fact that the room for abuse is still thereYep, lets balance the game around the 1% of matches that have a 4Man Swat team on them.
Lets also balance the game around the 1% of killers that run noed and face camp.
Because that sounds FUN FOR EVERYONE.
that would be fun, i enjoy competitive games.
imagine saying "OMG IT WOULD BE RIDICULOUS TO BALANCE THE GAME PROPERLY" as an argument8 -
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to winDoesn't remove the fact that the main complaint from killers on this forum is how unbeatable and unkillable survivors are, when these statistics directly refute that, regardless of pipping or not pipping.
survivors are only unkillable when they are willing to be, most of the time they are not
that still doesn't change the fact that the room for abuse is still thereYep, lets balance the game around the 1% of matches that have a 4Man Swat team on them.
Lets also balance the game around the 1% of killers that run noed and face camp.
Because that sounds FUN FOR EVERYONE.
that would be fun, i enjoy competitive games.
the most competitive this game gets is tournaments, and I'm sorry to break it to you but... The teams are 4Man com squads, good luck.
7 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to winDoesn't remove the fact that the main complaint from killers on this forum is how unbeatable and unkillable survivors are, when these statistics directly refute that, regardless of pipping or not pipping.
survivors are only unkillable when they are willing to be, most of the time they are not
that still doesn't change the fact that the room for abuse is still thereYep, lets balance the game around the 1% of matches that have a 4Man Swat team on them.
Lets also balance the game around the 1% of killers that run noed and face camp.
Because that sounds FUN FOR EVERYONE.
that would be fun, i enjoy competitive games.
the most competitive this game gets is tournaments, and I'm sorry to break it to you but... The teams are 4Man com squads, good luck.
most online PvP video games balance around the top players, DbD is one of the extremely rare exceptions to this
you basically admitted that you don't want a balanced gamebut we already knew that, didn't we?
8 -
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to winDoesn't remove the fact that the main complaint from killers on this forum is how unbeatable and unkillable survivors are, when these statistics directly refute that, regardless of pipping or not pipping.
survivors are only unkillable when they are willing to be, most of the time they are not
that still doesn't change the fact that the room for abuse is still thereYep, lets balance the game around the 1% of matches that have a 4Man Swat team on them.
Lets also balance the game around the 1% of killers that run noed and face camp.
Because that sounds FUN FOR EVERYONE.
that would be fun, i enjoy competitive games.
the most competitive this game gets is tournaments, and I'm sorry to break it to you but... The teams are 4Man com squads, good luck.
most online PvP video games balance around the top players, DbD is one of the extremely rare exceptions to this
you basically admitted that you don't want a balanced gamebut we already knew that, didn't we?
"A balanced game" Survivor deaths are already more common than surviving, but I guess you want survival rate at 0%, that would suit you, eh?
No game plays like this, most games have a decent ranking system with progression that means something, this is a casual game, the sooner you realise that the sooner you'll move on to something else or start playing this game for fun.
This game has insta kills, insta downs, insta heals, it's a casual game, get used to it.
9 -
@Shadoureon said:
@SpaceCoconut said:
No data should be "Assumed" when looking at a chart like this. SWF data was not presented separately and clearly, so nothing can be said about it. Of course SWF groups are beatable... The data would show how much higher their survival rates are compared to solo. Further proving the need for stronger tools to use against groups.
This doesnt makes sense to me. If its aparent that SWF was added in the data then it shows even SWF groups have less than 50% escape rate. This means killers shouldnt have more tools against groups it means solo players need buffs.
Do you not know what an average is or how it works?
5 -
This game isn't fit for high end gaming balance and I don't know why it keeps getting brought up. There is too much wrong with it, from the bugs to bad maps to wacky hit boxes and all the RNG bullshit in between. It can get balanced to a degree but to fine tune it as if it were a 1v1, 2v2, or 4v4? No ######### way.
5 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@yeet said:
the statistics on escapes vs deaths are irrelevant when you consider that you don't need to escape to winDoesn't remove the fact that the main complaint from killers on this forum is how unbeatable and unkillable survivors are, when these statistics directly refute that, regardless of pipping or not pipping.
survivors are only unkillable when they are willing to be, most of the time they are not
that still doesn't change the fact that the room for abuse is still thereYep, lets balance the game around the 1% of matches that have a 4Man Swat team on them.
Lets also balance the game around the 1% of killers that run noed and face camp.
Because that sounds FUN FOR EVERYONE.
I know it is a hard concept for you to grasp, but guess what? Basically ALL other games do exactly that.
Balance from the top down.
That's how balance work. Every ability has to be balanced around "what can the best player do with that?"
That whole missconception of yours -and the Devs- is what brought the whole DS issue upon us.
"Oh the skillcheck is so hard, only good player can hit it, so let's make the effect very strong."
Yea, great, now the very good player also have a very strong perk as a force multiplier… very smart...not!
Dbd is the only game I know that balance around low rank/average skill player.And now the next "fun" concept that is really dominant in this forum:
-Survivor should get balanced around average player
-Killer should get balanced around top player.
Yay… doublestandards… what a surprise!^^6 -
@Wolf74 said:
Yea but this is the thing, I can agree with people on something, and disagree on others.
I hate dstrike, it's the dumbest ######### perk in the game that can be nerfed into all eternity for all I care.
But when you get people who still want Self Care nerfed after healing in general has been nerfed, what are survivors supposed to do next? Spend 3 minutes self caring once?
6 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@Wolf74 said:
Yea but this is the thing, I can agree with people on something, and disagree on others.
I hate dstrike, it's the dumbest [BAD WORD] perk in the game that can be nerfed into all eternity for all I care.
But when you get people who still want Self Care nerfed after healing in general has been nerfed, what are survivors supposed to do next? Spend 3 minutes self caring once?
And again you show your complete lack of understanding balance.^^
Self Care is still THE most OP perk in the game.But feel free to ignore anything else I said and focus on DS.^^
Anyway, I am not the only one that already told you that games in general get balanced around good/top player, only Dbd isn't doing it, and guess what? Dbd balance is a mess and everyone is complaining about it. Make your own ideas about any connections.11 -
@Wolf74 said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@Wolf74 said:
Yea but this is the thing, I can agree with people on something, and disagree on others.
I hate dstrike, it's the dumbest [BAD WORD] perk in the game that can be nerfed into all eternity for all I care.
But when you get people who still want Self Care nerfed after healing in general has been nerfed, what are survivors supposed to do next? Spend 3 minutes self caring once?
And again you show your complete lack of understanding balance.^^
Self Care is still THE most OP perk in the game.But feel free to ignore anything else I said and focus on DS.^^
Anyway, I am not the only one that already told you that games in general get balanced around good/top player, only Dbd isn't doing it, and guess what? Dbd balance is a mess and everyone is complaining about it. Make your own ideas about any connections.Explain to me how self care is op lmfao.
8 -
@SenzuDuck said:
@Wolf74 said:
@SenzuDuck said:
@Wolf74 said:
Yea but this is the thing, I can agree with people on something, and disagree on others.
I hate dstrike, it's the dumbest [BAD WORD] perk in the game that can be nerfed into all eternity for all I care.
But when you get people who still want Self Care nerfed after healing in general has been nerfed, what are survivors supposed to do next? Spend 3 minutes self caring once?
And again you show your complete lack of understanding balance.^^
Self Care is still THE most OP perk in the game.But feel free to ignore anything else I said and focus on DS.^^
Anyway, I am not the only one that already told you that games in general get balanced around good/top player, only Dbd isn't doing it, and guess what? Dbd balance is a mess and everyone is complaining about it. Make your own ideas about any connections.Explain to me how self care is op lmfao.
Unlimited, self sufficient heals.
Sorry, but your lmfao clearly shows that it is completely pointless to explain anything to you.
All this has been explained a hundred times and in at least 10 of these times, you had been in the same thread talking about it, but you refuse to remember.8 -
@Wolf74 said:
Unlimited, self sufficient heals.Sorry, but your lmfao clearly shows that it is completely pointless to explain anything to you.
All this has been explained a hundred times and in at least 10 of these times, you had been in the same thread talking about it, but you refuse to remember.Yea,
lets forget the amount of time it takes to heal
lets forget the perks that counter self care
lets forget the addons that slow self care even more
lets forget that most survivors heal AFTER LOSING the killer.You have to either be pulled off the hook or EVADE the killer to heal, you literally juked a killer and get to heal, it isn't exactly a free ride lmfao.
7
