What's better

Considering it's possible to escape by doing very little and stumbling across a hatch, I'd strong disagree with that statement. This also is illustrated when looking at endgame scores, and there have been many times where a sacrificed survivor has done far better with BP.

You can strongly argue that a killer kill rate is more based on skill; moreso than from a survivor escape scenario, although even then there are probably some tweaks.

I don't know if they said exactly what the option suggested as I haven't seen it yet, but if they did then I feel that answer isn't fully supported, certainly from the survivor perspective.

That's a good point, thank you for setting that part straight for me. I'm still not sold on escapes being a true proof of skill, but at least that part takes away some of the issue. Take my upvote.

If it is based on gen time, hooks, chase time, hits, etc then it is a farmable mmr, which is just absolutely awful for any game.

Quite clear IMO.

The thing is, both dont indicate Skill. There are so many factors which make it impossible to see if someone is better just based on results.

IMO the Emblem System was not perfect for a Matchmaking, but with a few Tweaks, it could have been solid. It should have been harder to rank up for both sides, you had Killers and Survivors at Rank 1 who did not belong there. Also, Rank Reset should have been bigger.

But, the Devs are stubborn and think an MMR is needed and that their vision of an MMR is the correct one. Those two things will prevent any improvements anytime soon.

I have a couple of points to make about this. If there's any statistic experts out there forgive me as I'm probably thinking of this the wrong way. I just wanted to explain where my brain goes with this.

• There's a decent amount of games I play where all survivors will escape all on last hook. That means I got 8/12 hooks, or 67% of hooks needed to "completely win" the game, or get max points. But I end up getting a complete loss.
• Lets compare that to a match where a killer tunneled and/or camped one survivor out of the game, and it's the only kill + hooks they got. They got 3/12 hooks, or 25% of hooks needed to "completely win" the game or get max points. But they end up getting more MMR points than I do? When ultimately I was 42% above them in hook rate and completion towards hook objective? By standing there and/or getting an easy down?

This doesn't really sit right with me. If I were to look at this gameplay side by side, even if I didn't know how DBD worked. I would say "one guy seems to be doing a lot, and the other is just standing there, or just focusing the easy kill. The guy that's doing a lot seems to know what they're actually doing." While I'm not really against anyone that camps/tunnels as a strategy, I think we can all agree that it's a lot easier to do that (especially with a killer like Bubba or Trickster) rather than actually playing the game without the camping/tunneling.

Secondly, I wish there was a way to change MMR similar to League of Legend's MMR system. I don't know all the ins and outs of how it works as I don't play it as competitively as DBD. From what I understand/think you gain MMR points or lose MMR points completely on YOUR performance.

• Meaning if you perform well, and your end game stats are high, you'll gain more if you win the game, or lose less if you lose the game. Sometimes the game will even completely save you the loss of your MMR points even if you lose if there was a DC, someone purposely losing the game on your side, or you simply did that good and outshined the rest of your team.
• If you perform badly, you'll lose more if you lose the game, and win less if you win the game.

I know most games with a competitive mode aren't like this. Most of them are based on an overall win/lose system. But DBD has a lot more complexities than most games. League of Legends also has really complex gameplay wise as well, which is probably why they implemented their personalized MMR system.

P.S. My first point goes along with survivor sides as well. I disagree that someone that looped a killer for many gens and ultimately dies in the end gets less points than someone who hides in lockers the whole game and ultimately ends up escaping.

Play-Style is extremely important. Judging a book by its pages is better than judging it by its cover - no matter how important the cover is.

An altruistic or unlucky survivor can be deemed 'garbage' by the system and get stuck in ELO hell until they prioritize selfish survival over winning matches and helping allies get to the exit gates.

A Killer that did nothing and managed 4 kills because the opposing team was trolling with an AFK and got cocky to NOED doesn't mean jack about their skill, but now they're going to be elevated to hardcore survivors for no good reason.

Not sure why everyone is just using W's and L's to tally in this tacked-on system when the BP scoreboard at the end is already a pretty good indicator for the score.

While they could easily implement Score Per Minute, SPM to generate an accurate number to display player skill - you could also distribute points in a ranking order.

5 people in a match - tally up their scores and put them in placement.

Place | ELO

1st | +2

2nd | +1

3rd | 0

4th | -1

5th | -2

Not as effective, but hell - at least it binds rank to in-game scoring events that can be tweaked to maintain healthy scoring. All the while it's using pre-generated in game information without relying on tracking kills and escapes to generate an abstract number.